This press release is brought to you by our friends at the National Science Foundation, it is not a joke. However, it is too odd not to spoof a bit.
Here are some preliminary results, there’s more at the end of this article.
Broken Glass Yields Clues to Climate Change
Ordinary drinking glasses and atmospheric dust particles break apart in similar patterns
The comparative sizes of dust particles in the atmosphere, from a dust storm satellite photo. |
December 27, 2010
Clues to future climate may be found in the way an ordinary drinking glass shatters.
Results of a study published this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences find that microscopic particles of dust can break apart in patterns that are similar to the fragment patterns of broken glass and other brittle objects.
The research, by National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Jasper Kok, suggests there are several times more dust particles pumped into the atmosphere than previously believed, since shattered dust appears to produce an unexpectedly high number of large fragments.
The finding has implications for understanding future climate change because dust plays a significant role in controlling the amount of solar energy in the atmosphere.
Depending on their size and other characteristics, some dust particles reflect solar energy and cool the planet, while others trap energy as heat.
“As small as they are, conglomerates of dust particles in soils behave the same way on impact as a glass dropped on a kitchen floor,” Kok says. “Knowing this pattern can help us put together a clearer picture of what our future climate will look like.”
The study may also improve the accuracy of weather forecasting, especially in dust-prone regions. Dust particles affect clouds and precipitation, as well as temperature.
“This research provides valuable new information on the nature and distribution of dust aerosols in the atmosphere,” says Sarah Ruth, program director in the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, which funds NCAR.
“The results may lead to improvements in our ability to model and predict both weather and climate.”
Kok’s research focused on a type of airborne particle known as mineral dust.
These particles are usually emitted when grains of sand are blown into soil, shattering dirt and sending fragments into the air.
The fragments can be as large as about 50 microns in diameter, or about the thickness of a fine strand of human hair.
The smallest particles, which are classified as clay and are as tiny as 2 microns in diameter, remain in the atmosphere for about a week, circling much of the globe and exerting a cooling influence by reflecting heat from the Sun back into space.
Larger particles, classified as silt, fall out of the atmosphere after a few days. The larger the particle, the more it will tend to have a heating effect on the atmosphere.
Kok’s research indicates that the ratio of silt particles to clay particles is two to eight times greater than represented in climate models.
Since climate scientists carefully calibrate the models to simulate the actual number of clay particles in the atmosphere, the paper suggests that models most likely err when it comes to silt particles.
Most of these larger particles swirl in the atmosphere within about 1,000 miles of desert regions, so adjusting their quantity in computer models should generate better projections of future climate in desert regions, such as the southwestern United States and northern Africa.
Additional research will be needed to determine whether future temperatures in those regions will increase as much or more than currently indicated by computer models.
The study results also suggest that marine ecosystems, which draw down carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, may receive substantially more iron from airborne particles than previously estimated.
The iron enhances biological activity, benefiting ocean food webs, including plants that take up carbon during photosynthesis.
In addition to influencing the amount of solar heat in the atmosphere, dust particles also are deposited on mountain snowpacks, where they absorb heat and accelerate snowmelt.
Physicists have long known that certain brittle objects, such as glass, rocks, or even atomic nuclei, fracture in predictable patterns. The resulting fragments follow a certain range of sizes, with a predictable distribution of small, medium, and large pieces.
Scientists refer to this type of pattern as scale invariance or self-similarity.
Physicists have devised mathematical formulas for the process by which cracks propagate in predictable ways as a brittle object breaks.
Kok theorized that it would be possible to use these formulas to estimate the range of dust particle sizes. By applying the formulas for fracture patterns of brittle objects to soil measurements, Kok determined the size distribution of emitted dust particles.
To his surprise, the formulas described measurements of dust particle sizes almost exactly.
“The idea that all these objects shatter in the same way is a beautiful thing, actually,” Kok says. “It’s nature’s way of creating order in chaos.”
-NSF-
==============================================================
Here are other ways to use broken glass to forecast and interpret your local climate issues:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“To his surprise, the formulas described measurements of dust particle sizes almost exactly.”
We use these formulae to predict breakage from grinding, crushing, blasting, and just about everything else, but this guy was “surprised”.
I don’t believe I’d have told that.
Yet another use for fractal geometry
“In addition to influencing the amount of solar heat in the atmosphere, dust particles also are deposited on mountain snowpacks, where they absorb heat and accelerate snowmelt.”
Dust, not AGW, is causing the glaciers to melt.
Interesting. But this seems to confirm a calculation rather than discover anything about the airborne particles.
Direct measurement of the particles was possible and had already been done. Which leads to the question of why the climate models didn’t use the size distributions from the measurements.
It is almost as if the models had faults.
So SiO2 is the new CO2? Beware the great silicon dioxide monster! Silicosis will abound and its caused by carbon dioxide generating drought and coriolis storms circling the waterless globe… nah that’s from reading too much of Frank Heberts good works.
“…the paper suggests that models most likely err …” WOW! They got something right!!
Yep, this’ll fix the climate models, for sure.
Nothing must be going on, when they start recycling again.
The Caribbean gets it’s iron from Africa…..African dust storms are very important to the Caribbean…..
yes, we have no bananas
“The results may lead to improvements in our ability to model and predict both weather and climate.”
But I thought there was a consensus, the issues were settled and the models were perfect!
I’m shattered at this news.
I’m at a loess for words.
Talking about broken glasses:
Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.”
What on earth will they think of next?!
P.S. Anthony, some of your captions seem to have escaped their natural place in the code!
The story says:
“Additional research will be needed to determine whether future temperatures in those regions will increase as much or more than currently indicated by computer models.”
Note that they have already decided this future “research” will not show cooling.
Although an irresistible target for lampooning, this actually appears to be a useful study.
The idea that coarser dust particles act as heating elements, whereas finer ones act more as sun shades, is at least worthy of empirical test and may in fact be a material factor in determining the temperature of the atmosphere. The cooling effect of volcanic clouds from SO2/sulfuric acid haze is at least a prima facie evidence in favor of the theory.
How to predict weather with a cup of coffee:
http://www.instructables.com/id/Predict-weather-with-a-cup-of-coffee/
Here is the money angle:
Okay, my only question about this relates to the mineralogy of the fragmenting materials and the distribution of that mineralogy. Given the difference in crystal system and chemistry I would think one needs to know carbonate or silicate and so on. most of the examples shown were silicates. We know large amounts of sand and silts sized particles are carbonate. Also not all silicates and minerals in general have the same crystal structure. Glass for example is amorphous but quarts tens to be Trigonal (low quarts that is). Many clay sized particles ten to from Monoclinic crystal forms.
The research, by National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Jasper Kok, suggests there are several times more dust particles pumped into the atmosphere than previously believed, since shattered dust appears to produce an unexpectedly high number of large fragments.
—————————————————————————–
Sounds like a lot of Kok and Bull. Next they will be studying the Jason Pollock effect.
Douglas
So, I guess the subtext here is get ready for the models to show even more warming? Another subtext here is that the CO2 thing isn’t working as well as they would like so they are expanding the list of usual suspects? Just as the the EPA begins regulating GHGs in a few days too. I am confused about something though – is there actually more airborne particulates now that this study is complete? (I assume not, just the normal amount) If not, and the re-modeling shows even more heat that isn’t observed, won’t this work against the veracity of their models? Not a scientist, just an inquiring mind,…
Wakka wakka!
I’m so glad you warned us that a spoof was on its way after the actual not-a-joke — and quite interesting — article from the NSF. Also, that you categorized this post as both “Humor” and “satire” (as well as “Uncategorized”?). Otherwise, I totally would have missed the awesome jokes headed my way. They totally “cracked” me up!
Here’s another one:
[Photo of a broken glass] caption: The climate science glass is half-full… of lies!
I would have thought it would be easier to measure the particle sizes in the atmosphere. But I guess empirical science is so old fashioned.
What Sam said. Yup, the future is already a known, we must just calibrate the models to reflect that reality.
FWIW department:
The experimenters may have known, but not did not say, that the fracture pattern depends very much on the type of glass. The broken table-top photo leading the article, and the photo of the broken car side window, are perfect examples of the shatter patterns of tempered glass. When shattered, it breaks into small pieces, about the size of corn kernels, with edges that are not particularly sharp. A broken drinking glass, a broken window pane, or a broken light bulb, exhibit a “classic” broken-glass pattern of shards of indeterminate length that often have very sharp edges. (By interesting coincidence, the glass top of the patio table that we had stored in a little-used room, and on which we had stacked several boxes, suddenly shattered a few weeks ago. We have several pounds of little kernel-size pieces of glass, so we are quite expert on them. We are still cleaning them up.)
In some countries, like Australia, car windshields are made of tempered glass. In others, like Canada/USA, they are made of laminated glass. They break very differently.
I wonder what type of glass the experimenters were writing about.
IanM
The finding has implications for understanding future climate change because dust plays a significant role in controlling the amount of solar energy in the atmosphere.
————————————————————————
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
PS – Anthony, step away from the computer – just one step at a time (you know all the cliches) and have a great New Year with your family.
The belief that CO2 is some how bad, is a form of mass lunacy. There is no reasoning with those Al Gore man-made global warming types. Did you know they are freezing CO2 and pumping it deep into the ground for safe keeping? CO2 is plant food! CO2 has virtually nothing to do with the climate of the planet. I’m Just saying.
It seems the only way to deal with the man-made global warming fanatics is to freeze them to death with the the brutally cold winters we are now having due to the extended solar minimum. Our current solar minimum came just in time to protect us from the man-made global warming lunatics. The death toll from the 2010-2011 season looks like it will be one for the record books. We can only hope some of them global warming freaks freeze to death this winter so that their lunacy, at least, is stopped being spread by those individuals.