Typhoon Tip

That's going to go bye-bye over the weekend. Pretty good early cold in mid/N Ontario scooting into the Maritime of Canada, and the big polar high associated goes over-top our latitude Sunday. Coolest look we've seen since spring Thickness are below 560 much more convincingly for a couple days early next week. We'll bounce back, but at the continental scale this appears to be a kind of first step in seasonality, although it looks more pattern specific. Still, it is nearing the Equinox so some sort of 'step down' isn't outlandish. Doesn't mean we wont get a warm humid but the 570s ambience might be done until next spring.

AAM is an abbreviation for Atmospheric Angular Momentum try searing on the full text instead of AAM -

It's not an either or? We do not 'replace' the perils of Climate Change with an overarching risk of AI evolving without restraint - these two are in tandem, mutually exclusive aspects. Heh, if we want to be quantitatively on point it is more sufficed to say the combination of that tandem just increases the odds of calamity. There's this idea of the "Doomsday Clock". The idea is 'how close' is humanity to inducing global catastrophe, originated out of 'The Bulletin of Atomic Physicists'. It's not replacing in their assessment, either. The threat catastrophe can be a cocktail of causalities. Climate Change and AI are among them. So it may have just been clumsy word choice there but you'd be surprised how many people will actually drop one in lieu of the other and base their energy there as the proper response to scaling urgency. When the truth is ... we could be fucked for both reasons independently. The other thing... I'm speaking in terms of perils and risks... 'Extinction'? Mm, that's a bit heavy - again, it may just be word choice in the moment; I assume you know that extinction is absolute. I would lean more so on population correction. Whether we choose to be in control of that reduction or not it is likely to occur. And not just among our species, but global biology - this latter aspect is already underway. We could philosophically argue that it is beginning in humanity, with the crashing birthing rates among developed worlds. The crime in it all is that the other species we share this world with never had a say in the matter. Snarky digression: Ancient scriptures seem to lean like humanity has some intrinsic rights over this world bestowed upon them that places them as having both import and entitlement above all others. That smacks like a means to explain away this iniquity. Meanwhile, the logic cracks with the god idea when objectively, such an infinitely powerful - all good - agency cannot simultaneously exist, while also allowing the crime iniquity to happen ... That means they, or it, are or is, either not infinitely powerful, or, not infinity good. Pick. Which then means, they or it cannot be a "god". Heh...I just walk away from the dogma. Yes, an all-out extinction is a non-zero probability; however, it is still a low probability. Firstly, it would be hard to completely extinguish 8.5 billion - that number is so large as to increase the probability that small enclaves and/or regions well-managed for resources would survive; perhaps circumstance exclusionary for geographic isolation disconnected from the Industrial reliance. An acceptance and perhaps of better definition, adaptive, probably persist in a worse case scenario. As an aside, the semantics is bothersome with me regarding AI. All walks and dimensions of society, from social media to television, movies and literature, to the chit chat before board meetings get under way, to the water coolers, the bus stops outside the office and back, everyone everywhere keeps referring to AI as being a threat. AI is not a threat. The human beings that are engineering it are the threat. There's something of an oddity when AI execs extol "warnings” of singularity this, and self-determination conscious emergence in the creation of these systems ( which I personally believe they are full of shit on the consciousness aspect - extremely complex discussion content that even ponders the spiritual ), when it is they that are responsible for that same creation. If that's true then stop doing it, assholes! Yet they do not desist. Struggling with that frustration of claiming a destination of doom, yet persisting ( ), the diabolical answer, could it be a campaign to divert attention away from the fact? By distracting an easy Idiocracy with the dystopian specter of it all, said target's too nonplussed to reproach. OR, here's an Occam-ian simplified reason: they are full of shit. In this rendition ...they don't really believe in the "Skynet" outcome, but are propagandizing its power. That would give the allusion of who owns the reign, to position themselves capitalistically. Yeah, philosophically ... money ended the world. I don't know, but there's a fairly obvious suspicious odor to the whole, "Look out! what I AM doing will kill you all" warning. While I also don't downplay the usefulness of the technology. It is a powerful tool. Proven so. I've personally worked with "Claude" and found it to be a synergistic experience as it assists in creative problem solving...etc. This also echoes what's emanating from the ambit of Mathematics and advancing Physical circles, et al.. So it is real. But at the end of the day, if AI does become that threat, then the people that currently advertise its omnipotent plausible agency as being unconstrained by the inconvenience of morality, yet won't stop working to evolving it? that state doesn't require a VIN diagram to explain their dark culpability. But having written a SciFi novel, "Dominion", which required a ton of neurophysiological research among also quantum mechanics ... ( which is (interesting) the premise of the novel parallels Roger Penrose et al, completely independent of that formal physical approach) I strongly believe there's no way that the inner products of linear algebraic solutions sifted through a probability matrix will engender a free floating motivation --> will. It's a neat trick, perhaps elegantly in the overdue arrival of simulacra. But all it really achieves beyond that is finally ... we've used the mathematics we were forced to learn.

Joke ( or not ) aside ... something like 'weather modification' may be down the road of Quantum Computing. If and when the QC cores start actually understanding all the quantum states of a system simultaneously - largely purported to be how they 'quantum compute' - it doesn't intuitively seem like sending spin instructions/communicating to the matrix ( so to speak ) is a very big leap beyond that. We had a course work in 'chaos' in nature vs weather modeling in FAST II back in the headier university days up at UML. ...Jesus the dinosaurs were big back then... The principle idea was that weather modeling would one day hit a limit ... the speculation back then in the 1990s was that it would probably be between 5 and 7... beyond that, the permutation horizon was not readable, because it was based up emergence' that were yet to occur. That may still be true, yet ... won't matter. Because we don't have to know the future any longer. Philosophically, there's no need for the preparation if were programming the winds. In other words, conventional model become a thing of the past. What a weird state that would be. For those that are born in such an era, not so much. But if one remembers a time when "pita-flops" were required to multi-modal processing of navier-stokes at grid points... and the trillions in tech and satellite that went into it all ... paper weights.

It's a torch in the other deep layer synoptic metrics ... just not at the surface. It's unusual to have 590 dm non-hydrostats and keep it less than 80 in an offshore flow. I've actually seem this sort of oddity with increasing frequency in recent years. Not sure if it's a Gretta or not but ... it's when non-hydrostats and even the hydrostatic heights (thickness) are elevated enough for very warm (relative to season...) yet the surface is some significantly blunted below the potential. The lower troposphere is oddly lagging behind the mid/upper air sounding. interesting

Mm we may have difference source but these on this CDC site beginning late 1970s thru recency ... there's a clear bias for between Xmas and mid January. https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/

You know ...this reminds me ... I have noted recurring tendency during late autumns and early/mid winters of the last decade. It takes place spanning the N arc of the Pacific latitudes ... It appears the lower rim of the strata vortex in that area is being "bulged" skyward from below. Among other consequences...this has given faux impressions of SSWs. It's hard to blame anyone for assuming so when it is collocated in timing with SSW climo anyway. And so, this was perfect for social media moguls out there to pounce and sound brilliantly insightful for their adoring social media followers. But they were/are wrong. That's not what's taken place. This is evidenced by the fact that post those there were not very clear downward propagation of thermal masses noted ( tho admittedly looking quite similar to an SSW thermal intrusion). However the wave breaks were weak. The reversal were not sustained ... as it were, the situations mimicked ( "tricked" may be more apropos) many into the SSW circle jerk. And the AO's didn't go through the correlated negative phase..etc. Last year there was a weak SSW later in the year, but aspects noted above were also more evidenced - all taking place after the earlier season bulging thing. So what was it then? It's speculative ... but certainly plausible. What I believe what's been taking place is that the troposphere all over the planet is beginning to "swell" for lack of better word. And yes ... it may chap ass but too bad. Stop eating denial tacos and that'll go away ... it's CC that's doing it. For the newbs ... Warmth = increasing volume. That's nature 101. And it's also why there is any weather on the planet. If one doesn't get that or understand it...strongly recommend two recourses: Learn it, or, don't engage in this hobby. PV=NrT Pressure * Volume = #mol * gas constant for free mixed air * Temperature. Because mass is never lost or destroyed, "#mol" can be set to 1. The gas constant is also a persistent factor in all volumes/homogeneity so.. toss that. That leaves a rather simplified variant of PV= T in the ongoing "machinery" When CC is empirically measured in both the air, the ocean, and most importantly, the couple atmospheric ocean holistic system, that means that the other side of this equation, the P and/or V necessarily has to also rise. There are a lot of refereed and adjudicated material/papers out there related to "The troposphere is expanding due to anthropogenic climate change" ( https://bulletin.cmos.ca/the-troposphere-is-expanding-due-to-anthropogenic-climate-change/) just to mention one in a large compendium I suggest the N. Pac bulging tropopausal anomaly of the late autumns and early winters is perhaps a new seasonal behavior associated with the expanded troposphere, but to be mistaken as an Sudden Stratospheric Warm intrusion. As an after thought ...it's perhaps a geometric identity - creating usage. The SSW come into the sidewall of the stratospheric vortex cylinder. The bulging stuff is elevating from beneath, but since the measuring is fixed to the altitude, the warmth may be falsely associated.

The planetary wave dispersion (terminating warm advection as it washes out into higher latitudes...) I suspect is going to deliver positive flux over the grander time scale of the whole season. This positive anomaly/amount, because of the a super-position of the whopper +ENSO over top CC. ..sneaky hinted of that: the negative anomalies over the western Pacific oceanic basin are not creating a 0 when subtracting those anomalies from the positives associate with the El Nino. This means there is a surplus of thermodynamic sourcing in the Pacific/atmosphere holistic coupling. It's not hurting that the Atlantic "El Nino" is likely ongoing - currently the MDR is in 3rd historically... But all that is servicing blocking. Post cyclone deaths at 65 N/Ferrel latitudes ... positive heights nodes may materialize and decay, probably along shorter life spans than the "real" intraseasonal blocking events. Blocking can materialize from a different geophysical pathways. But as stronger cyclones curl into their death from mid --> higher latitudes, that warmth/latent transport gets dump into the mid and higher altitudes, and that flux - endemic to this year - may present a positive anomaly response into those regions. hat would transiently look like blocking but won't last long enough for the teleconnector correlation to realize. Probably a great year for NAO migraine modeling ...think 'popping off' while in wait of real wave# related variants. If the latter never takes place, I could see this as being faux applied for 'taking credit' for outlooks related to blocking. "right for the wrong reason". 'Sides, I may have this backward at the moment but isn't +AO correlated with the descending solar after a spring--> summer bombardment by active disk? Supposition/conjecture: It would be harder - also - to parse out how much is because of CC/ENSO superposition, vs how much is truly evolved out of the "winter time rendition of the inter -annual circumglobal teleconnector" - it's a summer correlation but I think that's bullshit. It applies, though modulated in why some years have more Asian blocking vs NE Pac vs Greenland ...etc, or not at all... And it has a strong correlation - I believe - with the AAM tendencies.

mm ...not intending to be involved in any back and forth. I'm not sure that's exactly impossible just hearing the immediate binary exchange there. Heh. Given the empirical setting of Earth ..., we have to objectively be open to a notion that extreme results may be preferentially warm. That almost seems passively comedic put that way... I mean, just because of the nature of having something like a "warmest ever ENSO" taking place over top a CC canvas. Perhaps trampoline is apropos. I was just mentioning to Chris over in the ENSO thread ..the synergistic product cannot really be ascertained. *However*, the probability for that sort of thing, and on which side of the mean that is more likely, can certainly be intuitive. You and I have set up some pathways to getting a snow this year. Those are still valid. I like the hangover N. Pac idea - although the recent PDO tells me the patttern biases may be changing - 'nother headache. Regardless, that's among the less likely outcomes. Given the leading and in situ circumstances the warmer one are weighted. Tough call - don't want to evacuate the probability either because patterns tend to "try" to slip or regress as a real observed phenomenon. You don't just escape and dust off hands. Doesn't work that way. So yeah... that's why I don't mind the pathway.. I could also see this year with something like a STJ that aligns farther N of canonical due to the fact that as has been papered by multiple sources...the westerly bands/jets have been moving N with the CC over recent decades. That immediately assumes a warmer southern tier.. and flooding and rains... with the band of winter shenanigans shifted

Yeah Chris ...I agree ...I added that exact aspect to that post

stating the obvious... any "blend" technique is always going to miss the extreme, unless every member contributing to the mean are unilaterally nailing the result/coincidentally. Since this is never going to be the case, the interquartile members that are middle road and less so, are always offsetting - basic stats. Hence, blend missing the extremes in the west. But part of that is also not really attainable anyway? I don't believe so. Because the heat in the W was very synergistic in nature. It's basically combing a handful of inputs that are going to likely gestalt some gain that cannot really be preascertained. That's how synergistic emergence is... it can't be mathematically predicted in excessively complex systems - at least not yet. Maybe QC will have a say in that some day. But we have the perennial N/A western bulge in the westerlies, on top of a retrograde IA CGT hemisphere, on top of a terrain that promotes heat and then a subsequent bi-product of that is that the heat in turn bulges heights... on top of then even a kind of non-Markovian feedback when the quantum state of the whole system acts like it "wants" to be hot due to memory from aggregate occurrences... Those are some of the parts that are creating an outcome > then just their sum. I guess what I'm asking is, taking out the more extreme/warmest members contributing to any blend, I suspect even those were shy of the scalar ?

Just op-ed'ing about the use of 'climate'-based tools in general. No idea what and/or who is performing. Like I said, if the model's adaptive than the criticism's less necessary there. But that's something that seldom - in fact never as far as I'm aware ? - goes on in this 'enthusiast's sophistication', which is reporting about the construct of tools. Comparing it's components ( unit test) against empirically what is actually taking place, whereby confidences have foundations... etc. yeah right...

Meanwhile the 3.4 sector is at historic levels relative to September +ENSO typology. And I mean somewhere between gaspingly and laughably so ... Kind of hard to think CANSIPs is onto much of anything other than introducing error when 3.4 is the opposite direction of eastern orientation. huh It is what it is I suppose but frankly - and I realize I've excoriated over this in the past... - anything with the letter "C" in the acronym of a model's title rolls my eyes. Unless the C does not stand for Climatology, the given model's machinery has to have some sort of a updated "RONI" analog methodology or it's less useful to me. Obviously ... because we'd be comparing a present day moving goal post on a fixed game field - the two have to change geometry together to be valid... No offense to CANSIPs. LOL if the model's adaptive than fine. But even if so ... the orientation as of the Sep 9 update at CPC just looks like a massive pan-dimension heat bomb from eastern 4 clear to the masses of fish adorning the Peruvian shores. Not sure any sector out there is really crucially 'bigger' in the holistic comparison when the entire thing is nuked like that

"Supreme Court rejects Trump's plan to limit mail-in voting in midterms" -CNN Gee, maybe there's hope for the sovereign identity of the U.S.A.

You didn’t ask me, but it was most likely related to the IA circum-global teleconnector