Typhoon Tip

yup.... I think it will be a fantastic opportunity to explore the edge of reality, whence the as of yet spontaneity of emergent processes ( i.e., 'chaos') that attempt to alter the future, have not occurred along the linearity of common time experience. That's a wild, wild implication that "precipitates" ( haha) out of quantum computing. We were always taught that model-based weather forecasting had ultimate limitations, utilizing the transistor base computation - but that was based upon being (admittedly) blind to the quantum realm. That was just 20 some years ago ... It's like "humanity won't fly" type stuff ... This QC shit is really even beyond that, tho, if you ask me. It's one thing to be able to "sense" flight because you just need wings. But being able to read the mind of god ( taking a little sci fi poetry license there ) is bit of an upgrade. Heh

Despite the sometimes dazzling display of AI it is important to remember, the technology is primitive. It might be hard to think of it that way when it's mere maiden release might already seem " ... indistinguishable from magic" ( Arthur C. Clarke ), but it's true. It has to be. Purely by convention of time, it's been talked about for over a decade, but it's only been 2 or so years since its arrival, and so, so fast, already being entrusted/incorporated. So I agree with Brian largely here that we'll be giving it a chance whether we choose to or not. In part because it really will become 'magical' - for lack of better word. The obvious, logical evolution will see it wired into this new Quantum Computing technology. That will be like AI the firecracker, vs Hiroshima QC will be truly, truly be transformative. Think of it this way. The present day mode of computation is performed via transistor tech, which ultimately is constrained by executing 1 or 0. On vs Off... True vs False. Every possible solution that may describe a system, thus has to be solved, one at a time. Granted, doing so at dizzying speeds ( of course! ), but we're still sending electrons along prescribed (fixed) circuiting routes, where there is all kinds of limitations related to ohm resistance, to signal degradation, ... interference - talk to IBM. But look out! QC encodes instructions in the momentum of electrons, themselves... There are no such constraints. Suddenly, 1 vs 0 becomes all possible variances that can exist, that can possibly describe an answer for a question/system/problem, in any facet of nature, explored and bottle-necked to the one remaining truth, all happening instantly. There are many problems that present day tech will never ever be able to ultimately solve. Those become rudimentary for QC. One might find it just as academic to assume that whatever that means for the future of everyday experience, no one has yet foreseen it. But, before even getting to that ( not so far off as we may think ...) future whence AI, slaved to QC "brains" ... imposes its will, even in this primitive form, AI is not going away. That ship's left on this thing when so many different applications are showing whopper quantifiable positives. I am sure we are no exceptions to any rule over here... be we are already downloading SW code solutions that are beta-satisfactory virtually out-of-box. SDLC that would quite normally take even rock star engineers the perfunctory 10 days due to collaboration//resource constraints between man and machine to SQA to blah blah blah. The entire life cycle, beta compiled inside of an hour. 10 days 1 hour And, even if only 20 or 30% error tolerance is allowed, we are finding that most if not all of that error was for 'how GPT was engaged' in the first place - perhaps an art emerges there. New job, "GPT configuration engineering" ? The point is, innovation is already [probably] getting a steroid injection to the point where it's cogs are too deeply embedded in the machinery of society. Giving this some relevance to this social media ... guess what this means for weather forecasting? Guess what it means for the entire engagement. There will be no point in waiting for model output and the fun of discussion. Lol... you know, we forget that 98 some odd % of walking talking civility is happy about that.

Almost looks like positioning a synergistic u/a warm event over the actual pole

The impetus here is that you are an outlier mentality, one that most either have, or are, tiring to engage with, because frankly ... you do not seem to resonate with logic nor sound reason. Your point and approach perspectives to data handling and sources, and how it fits the the broader reality, are less than adequate. Look up cherry picking... you come across as a cherry picker, looking to support a narrative more so than researching truth. However, because it's isolating, and doesn't fit objective reality, you're losing/lost your audience. With all do politeness.

No one is really engaging in that thread, however, and so not liking that ... "the person" has wondered back here to resume. LOL

This is a fascinating paraphrase/redraft https://phys.org/news/2024-07-net-effects-nitrogen-attenuate-global.html I find this statement somewhat ominous, "...Without man-made nitrogen input, the climate would have heated up even more..." The world just bore witness to a 'global thermal flash' during the spring of 2023. There were zero antecedent indicators predicting that would occur. Since then, there is a growing consilience that The International Maritime Organization's mandated reduction of 3.5% to .5% from combustion fuel in international logistics, though obviously a well-intended pollution mitigation, may have unexpectedly led to the cause. In NASA/Tianle Yuan's paper it is cited that it may have "...Created an inadvertent geoengineering termination shock with global impact,..." Now, from an involving unrelated research effort ( above), science surfaces that relates a complex adding and subtracting physical machinery where various volatile Nitrogen compounds are also quite capable of similar factorization - ultimately summing/resulting to a cooling effect. As an aside, ... I think it is just as important that humanity considers what it means to attempt abrupt "de" corruption of any system that is either already compensating, or has those as emergent properties in the background - if only plausible yet unknown. Think alcoholic in detox syndrome. It would be ( perhaps science fiction visionary - ) a striking irony if a sudden abeyance of anothropogenic forcing were to trigger some sort of out of control cooling. It can almost be easily visualized as napkin arithmetic. Pretend for a moment that C02 scrubbing gets a huge technological advance when quantum computing core, and AI, come to [ the inevitable btw ] nexus. Then what are we left with? Sulfur and Nitrogen management that was mishandled - just like that sulfur reduction act led to the spike. We didn't ask the Oracle that question, we only asked it how to remove the C02 NOW. Wow, what a cluster. I keep coming back to the statement by "WOPR," moments after that other kind of mankind -induced holocaust was narily averted, "... Strange game. The only winning move is, not to play"

Right on schedule ... does this every year about a month past the solstice ... It's the same thing going the other direction in late April. The front side of summer the model behaves as though spending the two week's worth of frames trying to scrub the added seasonal warmth out of the atmosphere - like ... I dunno, the sun must be an error? About mid way through summer it starts hurrying autumn onto the scene. I noticed it begin doing this about 7 or 8 years ago. Not sure why it does this, but I suspect it is related to why it is always the cooler of the three model systems, GGEM, EPS ...etc. By D4 or 5 it's around 1 to 2 ( almost imperceptibly so ...) cooler with these non-hydrostats below, on the polar side of the ambient jet, and from there it ends up around D12 sometimes 10 colder within the SPVs and general PV well. Euro cluster left, GGEM middle... GEFs mean is on the right. You can see just eye-ball test-wise that we are integrating a cooler PV template at the far end of the model run Summer's not the best season to point this out, but there is slightly more cold in the GEFs there above. - but it begins effecting pattern morphology sooner then 300 hours, particularly so during the winter. If we make this comparison on January 15 it's a bit more noticeable. Winter probably gives some sort of harmonic feed-back between the model's gradient production, on top of the fact that we are in faster velocity soaked state of winters already, anyway, due to the big C-squared. The GFS just has a speed bias man, one which really should be there if there is even modestly too much gradient between 70N and 30N around the globe - creating a surplus cool height on the polar side of the ambient jet seeds that circumstance. No one's seeing it ( maybe?) because we're setting air-land speed records with intercontinental flights and observing 200mph jet cores as it is. Which I wonder if that circumstance is masking matters... Or perhaps even an emergent error quotient because the model tech, despite advances, is up against it when balloons go around the globe at 1/3 the speed of sound in the winter... i.e. fast is error prone

What most know to be true already but yup - https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adp0212

things are on par in the tropics right now. god lol

It’s an unusual behavior actually, relative to 500mb summer climo. That aspect’s under the radar. Its a February ‘hook in latter’ weird

Yeah I was just gonna say ... we've had some other gems this summer ( definitely more than that abysmal summer, last year..) but this is right up there with the very best.

Not sure if this was mentioned but Monday was the new 'hottest Earth day' ever measured/calculated continuing along a string of such days. ( https://phys.org/news/2024-07-monday-warmest-day-earth-scientists.html )

That cut off low looks worse than it really is… I mean it’s only about 582 at nadir and because it’s happening at a very elevated ambient height field. In fact, that may not even represent below the middle levels and even if it does, it’s probably gonna be more east and south of it 18z gfs looked weaker yet

I don’t think we spent any time in the 60s and 70s… We went right from the 50s to the 80s this year Oh… You meant those decades

sorta odd looking. models are attempting a warm if not hot lower troposphere during a pattern whose geometric layout/orientation is somewhat inconsistent at a glance. I guess the 850 mb is just warm regardless

peppeRONI may just overwhelm the meal this year

I dunno tho. ..mmm I think the wider variance of the earlier climate model warnings may just be arriving. See ( op ed) the problem I have with this is that these weird super deep cold snaps that have been happening into middle latitudes around the winter hemisphere, during winters that are on average warm and getting warmer. Or, the synergistic heat waves that appear to launch temperatures higher than any leading/modeled indicators argue they should extend, at any time of year now really - These are perhaps just the coherently obvious impacts of CC, which are like rogue waves in a sea of subtler disturbing waves. (Sorry, I love metaphors ha) Basically, moving the dial a degree in C may in fact be integrating both subtler changes, along with disproportionately larger anomalies than one might expects. You ever get insulted by someone clever enough to make sure you don't realize it until you've left the room? I feel sometimes like the majority of climate change is a silent insult to our expectations, almost so gradually ...we don't realize we're being mocked. ( a little sarcastic license here but still ) It's a bit of philosophy but it really appears more and more to me like CC's rising temperature, as an anticipation, really needs to be redrawn around rising chaos. Remember those early lectures where scientist warned that crossing thresholds can also happen silently? I will tell you, I began posting observations related to the increasing gradient in the H500 mb hgts during winter. - if we really try hard we can see how inconspicuous phenomenon lurk. And that gradient increase, even in 3 to 6dm in the N-S integral, introduces a speed-up in the rest state velocities of the atmosphere ...--> forcing pattern and pattern-contained event morphology.

Lol, okay but just in case ... I was speaking to the general audience. Not sure who said what or in deference to any context

I'm suspicious over whether we will settle back. General op ed: The super Nino of 1998 seemed to " reset " the global temperatures, one that also appeared to be permanent? I'm not abundantly sure on that, but now here we are 25 years later and we are not returning in 1996, so ... Much in the same way, it makes sense to me (intuitively, for reasons below) that this more recent "resetting" event should be both more permanent, and notable. Why? we are also in a D(D(climate)) mode - a notation I'm using to mean accelerating. The antecedent multi-year Nina was suppressing an accelerating curve. That is perhaps analogous to pulling the rubber band extra taut. In other words, ... we needed to correct for more than just an erstwhile linear climate change suppression. It was that plus compounded interest - so to speak. As an aside ... I've come to find that even well-intended people of the general consilience, we don't seem to consider actual acceleration - at least not enough. Not just the amount, but the concept of what acceleration really means. There is a spectrum there, where at one end is direct responses, and at the other is more and more indirect responses - those that are due to synergies and feed-backs giving rise to emergence that by nature can at best only be vaguely anticipated. That unfortunate limitation and reality should really lower a lot of assumption confidences about any existing total response model. More so than I get the sense is really happening. More anticipation for "surges" and corrections need to be assumed if not anticipated. That is a tricky prospect. How does one cogently describe needing to anticipate emergent properties that are not presently knowable, in a crisis where what is already known is thought to be controvertible. Good luck ... Anyway, back to point. It probably makes sense that an accelerating climate change may observe in subtle or gross surges ... at other times, more smoothly. The planetary system is "jagged," with offsetting complex physics. If any one of those processes are transiently scaling a larger effect in the total system - masking the longer terms more persistent climate change - than alleviation of that effect would likely result in an more rapid restoral to the previous dynamic. Sometimes appearing abrupt.

I poked in while on vaca and happen to catch your post in the matter. You said, '... tue and wed ratters'

Yeah everything's "feels" like this or "seems" like that when it comes to people's moods and attitudes about sensible weather ( helping to modulate their climate awareness...) And this provides a delicious plate of items for people to eat arguments over. We've had this disco/debate in the past, but in short ... given enough acclimation time, perceptions will tend to separate more and more from empirical/objective data. It's the +D(meh) effect. LOL However, June was ~ +5. + 5 July appears destined to the same result. Purely constrained by thermodynamics that are natively associated/driven by season, there is a quasi floor to how cold it can get in winter, and likewise a ceiling for how hot it can get in summer. In order to average -5 or +5 respectively ( to mention, for whole month's worth!) is something of an impressive achievement respective of season. Regardless of however tenuous one's perception of objective reality is or not, this is a blow torch summer. But ... I suppose that subjective aspect has to have the near crisis run-in with physical exposure to 107 F before they believe that. This is part and parcel (example) in my non-obligatory, GW plausible deniability theory. Human beings, like all other biologic life on this rock where ( apparently ) is the only place in the cosmos where that actually happens ... are programmed to respond to whatever it is they see, hear, smell, feel, or taste, probably in that order. These are the "USB" ports that connect our "CPUs" to nature. Global warming does not directly appeal to these corporeal senses. Humans are "supposedly" capable of perception not purely constrained by what is arriving through those signal feeds. It just appears GW moves too slowly and frankly, doesn't cause enough inconvenience to really resemble a case for truth. This enables people to land their perception just about anywhere along the spectrum of denial there can be ... which ranges from hard core bloviation, all the way to admitting something is wrong but doing so in a divisive manner where their word choice and/or behavior ultimately achieve the same disregard. In short, too many people have to BE physically injured by it. Morning rant completed -

Nasty heat wave potential D8+ but I'm not sure/confident yet how far N-E it gets across the conus. The flow geometry through the Canadian Maritime is orienting or reorienting into zonal out there in time, while the PNA "should" be sending +PNAP structure across mid latitude continent. The the problem is, the operational versions of the models keep trying to sag the mid and u/a into some sort of heat walling off vestigial trough sag in the western OV. This being beyond D7 is allowing plenty of time for a correction in that matter. But the WPO--> EPO/PNA is a pretty darn hot signal for us. ens tele inferred hgt anomaly NE-E of HA teleconnects to relaxing the semi-permanent ridge over the Rockies...and with said NAO orientation, the correction vector points N with the heights right where these op versions are sagging. Definitely a lot of summer seasonal entropy in the hemisphere. Coherence is at a premium so it's tricky.

Models et al tend to perform pretty well up through 48 hours wrt temperature outlooks. Not trying to sound dismissive of any monitoring efforts there, but is only to say that it doesn't surprise me. What I find interesting - tho am not sure of the/any significance - is that all the ensemble mean distant outlooks wrt 500 mb height anomalies, GGEM, GEFS or EPS, all very persistently end up on a positive ledge. This has been going on for years actually. Seldom do we see these ever negative... ex, 360 EPS mean anomaly from 00 ( or any run... ) looks similar - This products from all three major sources ... I don't recall the last time their mean coming back to neutral way out there in time. Again, I'm not sure if there's much operational value to this observation, but ... I think it is interesting that we seem to be verifying the dailies about the same amount of lower troposphere total positive anomaly, as these distant outlook products ( proportionally ) are positive.

I suspect RONI or RONI-like offsets, in general, will force some of this anyway

It's a good thing we're closing off that low SE so we can hold onto a snow and mix ptypes