From this Georgia Tech article:
In 1657, Christiaan Huygens revolutionized the measurement of time by creating the first working pendulum clock. In early 1665, Huygens discovered “..an odd kind of sympathy perceived by him in these watches [two pendulum clocks] suspended by the side of each other.” The pendulum clocks swung with exactly the same frequency and 180 degrees out of phase; when the pendulums were disturbed, the antiphase state was restored within a half-hour and persisted indefinitely. Huygens deduced that the crucial interaction for this effect came from “imperceptible movements” of the common frame supporting the two clocks.
I can’t tell just yet if this is a new paper, or if the news story is a re-hash of the 2007 paper by these authors. Either way, it is interesting. See the authors pre press paper here – Anthony
MILWAUKEE — The bitter cold and record snowfalls from two wicked winters are causing people to ask if the global climate is truly changing.
The climate is known to be variable and, in recent years, more scientific thought and research has been focused on the global temperature and how humanity might be influencing it.However, a new study by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee could turn the climate change world upside down.
Scientists at the university used a math application known as synchronized chaos and applied it to climate data taken over the past 100 years.”Imagine that you have four synchronized swimmers and they are not holding hands and they do their program and everything is fine; now, if they begin to hold hands and hold hands tightly, most likely a slight error will destroy the synchronization. Well, we applied the same analogy to climate,” researcher Dr. Anastasios Tsonis said.
Scientists said that the air and ocean systems of the earth are now showing signs of synchronizing with each other.
Eventually, the systems begin to couple and the synchronous state is destroyed, leading to a climate shift.”In climate, when this happens, the climate state changes. You go from a cooling regime to a warming regime or a warming regime to a cooling regime. This way we were able to explain all the fluctuations in the global temperature trend in the past century,” Tsonis said. “The research team has found the warming trend of the past 30 years has stopped and in fact global temperatures have leveled off since 2001.”The most recent climate shift probably occurred at about the year 2000.
Now the question is how has warming slowed and how much influence does human activity have?”But if we don’t understand what is natural, I don’t think we can say much about what the humans are doing. So our interest is to understand — first the natural variability of climate — and then take it from there. So we were very excited when we realized a lot of changes in the past century from warmer to cooler and then back to warmer were all natural,” Tsonis said.Tsonis said he thinks the current trend of steady or even cooling earth temps may last a couple of decades or until the next climate shift occurs.
“Anybody know of up-time stats for US-based wind-farms?
I would GUESS that we should do better than that on the eastern slopes of the Rockies, but I wonder what the real numbers are”
Multi-thousands of windmills across the eastern slopes of the Rockies is really,
really just about the stupidist idea I ever heard of. I mean has anyone ever really thought about that?
“Let’s take the family to the Rockies this summer, John, so we can see the windmills.”
“Okay, fine. Just as long as we don’t have to look at those damn mountains.”
Is Boone Pickens crazy? By the way, all those things are made oveseas, not in this country.
If you look at the universe it appears as a molecule. Everything in the gravitational paths resonates at particular frequencies. Some create tight bonds others create loose bonds but in any case each single component ALWAYS affects the other. (neutrons, protons, etc)
The Galaxy’s over all harmonics/gravity may cause the our Sun to act in a specific way. Those vibrations, amplified by the SUN, could cause our solar system to act in a specific way as well. the planets vibrations/gravity can affect internal systems as well.
Energy (gravity, visible and invisible spectrum) Appears to be this loose link between all of the systems……
Gravity……. its not just a simple theory….
Steven Wilde said:
“They are clearly on the right track in my opinion but the answer lies in appreciating the net effect from the varying inputs of ALL the oscillations though admittedly PDO and NAO would be the main players.”
You meant AMO and not NAO, correct??
The former is the younger cousin to the PDO, not the NAO.
The AMO, as a large multi-decadal OCEANIC player, resounds with a much longer period than the ATMOSPHERIC and relatively monthly cycles of the NAO.
Chris
Norfolk, VA
Well, what I think is the most significant result in terms of our current climate is that Tsonis seems to have found another phase change in (what was it?) 2002. And if that’s the case, these past few years were not a fluke, not a blip, not a pause, but the first years of at least three decades of cooling.
It’s confirmation.
I have not looked for the article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel but about 10 days ago Milwaukee had one of the weirdest storms I can remembes.
This only happens when the wind comes out of the NE which is rare in the midwest.
Mithcell Airport is about 8 1/2 miles south of downtown.
The airport where official snowfall is reported, had 10 inches of snow in less than 12 hours.
If you went 2 miles north, 2 miles south or 1 mile west, THERE WAS NO SNOW!
And this snowfall amount at the airport will be the “OFFICIAL SNOWFALL” for Milwaukee for that day.
A serious distortion of reality.
A friend sent me this from 2000….
http://www.giurfa.com/charvatova.pdf
This link showing galactic positioning is rather interesting… and equates the positioning to certain events.. could this be the resonating driver for cyclic natures in our system?
I see a few people are interested in wind data. Here is a cross-post of mine from another site.
The Bonneville Power Administration operates 1800MW of wind and has a couple years of data and graphs at this link. http://www.transmission.bpa.go…..fault.aspx
First two links are real-time(5 min.) graphs. The rest are .xls files of data and graphs.
They had a period in January of 11-12 days when they continuously generated less than 3% of rated capacity. Last year the overall production was about 24% of wind capacity.
Even when they produce a lot of power the fossil fuel plants have to keep running at lower efficiency. I think those inefficiency costs should really be included as wind generation costs.
My link above didn’t copy/paste correctly. I’ll try again.
http://www.transmission.bpa.gov/business/operations/Wind/default.aspx
anna v (09:10:58) wrote: “This may be of interest…”
Fascinating, anna v! Thank you.
theBuckWheat (09:20:43) :
Ocean acidification.
Well, in this experiment with windup metronomes,
http://www.popsci.com/category/tags/metronomes
we do get phase lock. It would be interesting to have them tuned to drastically different frequencies and see what happens. Maybe the fellow who made the video is a WATTSUP reader :).
In any case this is a first attempt to model the chaos as it is, instead of taking linear approximations of putative solutions of possible equations. It point the way to go.
Ideally one would have, as in analogue computers, each differential equation entering the problem in one of the connections.
Windmills may be a bit off topic, but I found the information in Bob Koss (20:21:10) post and associated link to be very interesting.
http://www.transmission.bpa.gov/business/operations/Wind/default.aspx
We’re getting a lot of windmills going up in Wisconsin. I knew the typical generating capacity of windmills was low but had no idea that it was this low:
“The installed wind capacity during this time was ~ 1500 MW, so the 50 MW threshold represents ~ 3% of capacity.
The full 56-week average was ~ 23 %, that is, nearly a quarter of the time the total wind gen was less than 3% of total wind capacity. “
http://www.transmission.bpa.gov/business/operations/Wind/WindGen_VeryLow_Jan08Jan09x.xls
hareynolds (09:44:04) :
Anybody know of up-time stats for US-based wind-farms?
I would GUESS that we should do better than that on the eastern slopes of the Rockies, but I wonder what the real numbers are.
Suggest you Google DOE. I do not have US numbers but here is an excellent report from Germany.
E.On Netz Wind Power Report 2005, Germany
http://www.eon-netz.com/Ressources/downloads/EON_Netz_Windreport2005_eng.pdf
Capacity Factor was ~20% (“the average feed-in over the year was 1,295MW, around one fifth of the average installed wind power capacity over the year”).
Perhaps more important than Capacity Factor is Substitution Factor, now ~8% and dropping to 4% by 2020 (“an objective measure of the extent to which wind farms are able to replace traditional power stations”).
Simplifying for our politicians (in the absence of a “superbattery”): Because wind does not blow all the time, you need almost 100% conventional power station backup for installed wind power.
For mainstreet: “Wind power: it doesn’t just blow, it sucks!”
________________________________________
EXCERPTS
FIGURE 5 shows the annual curve of wind
power feed-in in the E.ON control area for 2004,
from which it is possible to derive the wind power
feed-in during the past year:
1. The highest wind power feed-in in the E.ON grid
was just above 6,000MW for a brief period, or
put another way the feed-in was around 85% of
the installed wind power capacity at the time.
2. The average feed-in over the year was 1,295MW,
around one fifth of the average installed wind
power capacity over the year.
3. Over half of the year, the wind power feed-in
was less than 14% of the average installed wind
power capacity over the year.
The feed-in capacity can change frequently
within a few hours. This is shown in FIGURE 6,
which reproduces the course of wind power feedin
during the Christmas week from 20 to 26
December 2004.
Whilst wind power feed-in at 9.15am on
Christmas Eve reached its maximum for the year
at 6,024MW, it fell to below 2,000MW within only
10 hours, a difference of over 4,000MW. This corresponds
to the capacity of 8 x 500MW coal fired
power station blocks. On Boxing Day, wind power
feed-in in the E.ON grid fell to below 40MW.
Handling such significant differences in feed-in
levels poses a major challenge to grid operators.
__________
In order to also guarantee reliable electricity
supplies when wind farms produce little or no
power, e.g. during periods of calm or storm-related
shutdowns, traditional power station capacities
must be available as a reserve. This means that
wind farms can only replace traditional power
station capacities to a limited degree.
An objective measure of the extent to which
wind farms are able to replace traditional power
stations, is the contribution towards guaranteed
capacity which they make within an existing
power station portfolio. Approximately this capacity
may be dispensed within a traditional power
station portfolio, without thereby prejudicing the
level of supply reliability.
In 2004 two major German studies investigated
the size of contribution that wind farms make
towards guaranteed capacity. Both studies
separately came to virtually identical conclusions,
that wind energy currently contributes to the
secure production capacity of the system, by
providing 8% of its installed capacity.
As wind power capacity rises, the lower availability
of the wind farms determines the reliability
of the system as a whole to an ever increasing
extent. Consequently the greater reliability of
traditional power stations becomes increasingly
eclipsed.
As a result, the relative contribution of wind
power to the guaranteed capacity of our supply
system up to the year 2020 will fall continuously
to around 4% (FIGURE 7).
In concrete terms, this means that in 2020,
with a forecast wind power capacity of over
48,000MW (Source: dena grid study), 2,000MW of
traditional power production can be replaced by
these wind farms.
Can the earths climate system be described as part of a Mandelbrot Set, with a fractal dimention, the technique has been used on markets with some success, has it been tried on climate systems.
Mandelbrot claimed that short term weather fluctuations were mathmatically the same as long term ones, ie there is a fractal dimention
Climate Audit had a discussion on chaos and climate in 2005 worth a read
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=396
Glad to see Tsonis getting some attention. I have been citing his paper for over a year.
Anna v: the metronomes locking into step was absolutely fascinating. Ah , I posted it elsewhere but it can bear reposting here: A Little Book of Coincidences is one of the most amazing books of all time (to me) showing the deep mathematical relationships whereby the planets of the solar system are bound to each other by pi and phi and beautiful geometries, to high orders of probability. The metronomes getting in synch shows me very visibly how it might be with the planets.
forgot to mention, Giurfa’s ref to Charvatova’s paper about the sun describing “trefoils” is fascinating too, the geometry… ah, St Patrick’s day, splashed all over Google.
Here is an example of how bad British reporters are these days. Complete failure of journalistic standards
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7946072.stm
Watch the video in the middle of the article.
The reporter is told that the beach has been artificially expanded because the homes were being inundated by the sea. The BBC reporter blindly believes that claim. Well, frankly it is absurd because it is so obvious to any logical thinking person that the level of the sea is 3-4 metres lower than those homes and around 15-20 metres away.
You can also tell from the coast line that the claim of it being an expanded artificial beach is nonsense. This is a propaganda video to get donations sent to the Maldives.
Let’s try Prof. Morner instead. He has been studying sea level change for a long long time and investigated claims about the Maldives being under threat
“The reporter is told that the beach has been artificially expanded because the homes were being inundated by the sea.”
What? You mean those poor people were not evacuated??? Wouldn’t it make more sense if the whole world quits using fossil fuel??? Those artificial beaches are awful pricey… the humanity…
Re: Lindsay H (02:47:27) :
“Can the earths climate system be described as part of a Mandelbrot Set”
What you are really asking is “does the Climate exhibit scale-invariance”? That is are the statistical properties of the Climate at the very small spatial (short temporal) scales similar to the statistical properties at the very large spatial (long temporal scales).
At the temporal level – I think the answer is yes. Compare the deep time temperature anomaly series from an ice core record (e.g. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1995/95GL01522.shtml) , to that of a daily temperature anomaly time series over a couple of months. Remove the time-scale and you will see statistical similarities between the 2 (without the scale its hard to ascertain what the scale is). Of course there are things like Milankovitch cycles and seasonal cycles which are clearly not scale-invariant here, but the variability on top of those cycles is.
At the spatial level – in some cases yes. For example, it has been widely shown that atmospheric turbulence, clouds and rain exhibit fractal or scale-invariant properties (e.g. see http://www.physics.mcgill.ca/~gang/eprints/eprintLovejoy/neweprint/WRR.GSI.good.1985.pdf). However, the finite dimensions of the atmosphere and ocean provide some hard boundary conditions. A Hurricane for example (which normally occupies most of the atmosphere from the sea surface to the tropopause – i.e. it is bounded) is NOT scale-invariant (it has a characteristic length scale). Look at a Satellite Image of a Hurricane (without any scale) and you can generally approximate the scale.
Didn’t anybody else read this link earlier from cogito, or was it just me? (The experiment by Wood using an NaCl window on his greenhouse was utterly intriguing..) The maths defeated me, but the paper itself completely distracted me. Any comments mathematicians and physicists?
cogito (10:50:22) :
Interesting reading:
Falsification of the atmospheric CO 2 greenhouse effects within the frame of physics
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0707.1161
for a contrasting opinion..
http://madrad2002.wordpress.com/2009/03/12/mit-do-you-want-to-gamble-here/
Re: Larry Kirk (05:55:10) :
“Didn’t anybody else read this link earlier from cogito, or was it just me?”
I have read it (the math does get tougher, the deeper you go). From what I see though, very thorough mathematical/physical treatment of the Greenhouse Effect or should that be the ficticious Greenhouse Effect. From what I can determine (my math is not THAT strong) it makes good physics sense.
I have heard the basic principals quoted elsewhere (will try to re-locate sources – perhaps they were also referring to this paper). But, based on this, the Greenhouse effect is pure fiction. This does not surprise me in the least.
What is clear is that the IPCC process (and most AGW Alarmist “science”) is based on a “consensus” across Climatological research, where the “scientists” in those studies don’t understand the basic physics of the system they are studying.
Re: realitycheck (06:56:48) :
“where the “scientists” in those studies don’t understand the basic physics of the system they are studying.
”
That should probably read:
“where the “scientists” in those studies don’t understand OR CHOSE TO IGNORE the basic physics of the system they are studying.”
Windmills against the wind: A most serious cycle The Kondratieff waves:
http://www.kwaves.com/kond_overview.htm
Is it possible to flatten it, as some pretend to?