Typhoon Tip

Need to apply a lag tho. -EPO peak is positively correlated with the PNA through max … Then, as it collapses the ridge signal merges into the mid latitude as a +PNA, leaving a neutral mode in the EPO. Usually about a 3 to 5 day evolution -EPOs load cold into the west first as an “inside slider” pattern but yeah … that sets the table for the above relay into +PNA—>+PNAP which delivers it east. None of these correlations are one to one though. During ultra amplified scenarios, so called “cross polar“ flow types, the EPO and the PNA have merged into one very large negatively correlated mass field. Other times the -EPO is too transient, and/or some other mode countermands the typical relay or intervenes somehow and you may end up with split flow that remains quasi-stable and persists - they can orient a boundary spanning east with epic temperature gradients on either side … events hosting multi faceted impact types.

I'm looking forward to the warmth it may cast eastward of 100W

It might be an indirect indicator for how well this ENSO phase couples with the mid latitudes…

Looks like we'll dodge the outre October snow this autumn. The mass field/indicators are neutralizing and or reversing sign as we head through the next two weeks. It would be comical if that's when we get the cold pop tart snow shot across the bow, but cross that bridge. I'm not buying the cold wave in a week - or it may happen in a diminished capacity compared to what we are seeing in these operational runs. I don't believe the wholesale amplitude survives model magnification correction as it nears. Some, sure.. but with the telecon trajectory already underway ... In other words, I'm siding with the ensemble mean eof derivatives.

It did that (bold) in a +2.5 SD PNA/-2 SD NAO, too That's an interesting result given these indices have been evolving for 10 days.

Sounds like the last 5 years

It’s probably a great sign that the general pantheon of modeling tech keeps painting +16+ over the Beaufort Sea ?

The summer patterns don’t echo during ensuing winters. The transformation from a quasi entropic summer hemisphere into one with increased(ing) gradient obliterates the ‘fuzzy’ state in lieu of materializing R-waves

Yeah, it's quite reasonable to argue some other phenomenon at work

Yeah, I didn't notice the title until after I posted... haha. Too lazy - Anyway, the issue with aerosols is interesting for me, because the aerosols collapse "might" be related to the industrial lapse that took place over an ~ 18 mo of pandemic arrest. I don't know - supposition there. I'm also wondering what kind of geophysics they employed in the climate models. You'd think they'd have thought to run 'perturbed' variants - kind of like climate model 'ensemble members' - same philosophy. You tweak initial conditions around hypothetical/plausible states to see the possible different outcomes. These are PHD's with visionary talents. W T F on that one. Reduced aerosol model run seems like a no brainer? I'm like c'mon. This particular Sept spike looks like about a 3 standard deviation event. The average distance from the red curve that precedes it, appears close to 1/3 the total distance up that wild ride. I think you get into order of magnitude crisis, though. The amount of force it takes to move a whole planetary atmosphere by 3 SD is something terrifyingly large. Think of it this way... and flea can jump something like 50Xs it's height, because it doesn't weight anything. What the world just did is got an elephant to do the same thing. One of those physical acts has a much more noticeable impact when it returns to earth. The energy budget and restoring capacity might be overwhelmed? It's a struggle to visualize what in god's kinematics would be capable of moving that whole system, that quickly, but that much. I also point out that much of that rise took place prior to the onset of El Nino. In fact, when all oceanic regions in every direction warmed along with the atmosphere, before there was any warm ENSO mechanics were observed. I want that noted and explained. That has always struck me as "whip lash" ...perhaps even elasticity. Almost like conductance suppression was suddenly released, and there was a huge eV release.

It's because we're really a kind of "boundary climate" here in New England. One side is Eastern/Maritime Canada, the other is where we tend to be included by practice ... which is more like a Chicago/Ohio Valley. The latter is dubious though, because there are times when we'll be dominated by either, and that distinctly separate us from whatever shenanigans may have bee persisting in the former. Either can lock in for 90 day pattern foots. And sometimes too, both will be enveloped in same. Also folks need to be sort of polymathic when considering these products; when there is a warm anomaly in New England latitudes that are similar to ORD ( for example), particularly in the summer, that may be more elaborately colorized in New England, because summers are warmer out there. This is naturally vice versa in winters.

Several observations about this graph... 1 it's too bad the x-axis ticks stop at 20 year intervals. I'd like see which months these individual points correspond to. I'm wondering (say) if the spikes are more common in the autumns. Or perhaps spikes in general are more common during transition seasons. 2 there is a "similar" magnitude lurch upwards in global temperature that took place just prior 1880 in terms of total d(T). There are also rather impressive dips that some 80 or even 90% of this Septembers scalar delta that took place 1900, 1960 ... 1995 (Pinatubo?) ... Anyway, 80% of 1::10000 chance of occurrence seems too steep considering what's taken place several times in the last 150 years. It depends though ... The 'odds of occurrence' may fall in some sort of log(x) decay ... Such that the top 20 or 10%s compared to the bottom 80, the odds get very long. 3 regardless, the trend is alarming. There were two accelerations: a modest one around the 1930s; the one since 1980 is fascinating in that the low points along the accelerated rise, are usually about the same as the previous high point - hence the 45 deg slope. But, what that means is there is never a step back. wow

That pattern now is completely meaningless to later Novie onward Zip indicator

Chilly though... Swap rain for 52 clouds and NE neck caressing "balm" ... Just enough to keep hands cold. Seems the pattern is manifesting a cool eastern continent ... without really any obvious feeds of lower tropospheric cold sources. Yeah there are those pretty blue hydrostats showing up on the sfc modeled synopsis' mid Ontario, but they stay N. The sfc mass-fields trek E while staying N of us (the season isn't matured enough to send them SW of us just yet). But with the sun feeble now, getting these muck morning cloud types with still air (when not E w), the atmosphere isn't recovering, so it sheds therms slowly. We just end up raw... I'd like a dry series of days in the upper 60s or 70, for 7 to 10 days before this antic claims this month as below normal by fake means. Lol. I mean there's no such thing as fake ... I just mean it's coolness that's manufactured very locally by idiosyncrasy rather than a very obvious large scale continentally involved CAA regime. It's not too much to ask in a world that carries on over the top of a CC hot plate?

A pattern tendency conformed to warm ENSO climatology should also then be modulated warmer in the temperature predictions. These Global oceanic thermal sources will overwhelm atmosphere thermal sink/sourcing. Cold will attempt to pour into the continental geography given +PNA in such a regime but I suspect these to cede to very handsome return flow recoveries, do to the background imbalance above. Larger transitions also aided along by +geostrophic wind velocity anomalies. Predicated on the risky assumption of a coupled base to atmospheric observation, one extending into and modulating the R-wave distribution would be preferred. I’m not sure this NINO will be that instructive tho. It could get lost in the maelstrom at times - one week it looks like it’s the lever and the other week it all looks like something else.

‘Cept we haven’t had that many (if any really) real coastal developments. There’s been a lot of modeled coastals in the extended … we’ll see how it plays out. At least the models see that as possible - does have some value.

that’s a moderate coastal at worst

I think Bill Belichick’s been overly exposed and I don’t know why it’s taking the Krafts so long to realize this and move on

I thought last week was rock-bottom for this patriots team, but… Man, it’s like they expanded the event horizon of the cosmos of suckirude in order to suck even worse

63/47 full sun in something like 354 billion mile visibility purified air mass. in fact… the absence of impurities in the atmosphere smells unique today.

It’s not a death knell anyway… Even though the preferred state for negative EPO is to have a negative AO as well, but those two share domain space - there’s a partial disconnect. There’s been plenty of times in history whence a negative EPO set the temperature anomaly table across North America downstream, all of which took place with an AO that was closer to the neutral, or even positive.

Based upon the Antarctic study ... it's taken time to penetrate. This isn't wildly speculating. It rational enough, but as I said, it is also in a science now - I was careful to point that out. You know, for you seasonal hobbyists .. .it is a game of 'what can go wrong' - from out here in the spectator bleachers, it certainly seems that way. Lol. Anyway, it'd be nice to once in a while have a clue where impediments may come from. I think the ENSO and arrival and the +AO; that seems like a potential systemic variance and a pretty good place to look. The problem with statistically based approaches to interpretation, it really comes down to calibration vs discrimination. The former more analytic, the latter is how we subjectively consider the ranking. We can and sometimes do falsely rank, usually because we're motivated to prove the correctness of our hypothesis, more so than the fallibility of them. This gets us dangerously close to cherry picking... Wtf am I babbling about or, the discrimination aspect is in trouble this year - I would suggest - if the ranking ( subjective or not) isn't considering what took place in the Antarctic, and that it is presumably so to be the case in the PV on this side of the winter globe. or not... but it's worth consideration.

For general audience ... a cooler PV domain would result (geo-physically) from a WV contamination, and that quite obviously and directive, results in a +AO. The MJO/warm ENSO correlation is a -AO. So that would imply a statistical break-down wrt these large scaled mass field projections on the winter. That may also infer a negative interference in the intra-seasonal pattern modulation-behavior. ... Something's going on in these PV - see Antarctic. Recent analysis of the "Ozone Hole," after decades of recovery since CFC's were reduced, there is a surge in the size of that behavior, most likely (in science right now) attributed to the Hunga Tunga event. So there's some plausibility as yet to be substantiated, but the reasoning in how it may effect a PV circulation mode during the winter would preliminarily (though increased confidence), suggest +AO base state. Just fwiw -

Noticed three aspects about the rain this next weekend over the last day(s) of modeling. ... tendency to delay ...tendency to suppress ...tendency to weaken All of which can be a part of what I have phrased "model magnification" in the past - more specifically, as the 'de'-magnificaiton correction than ensues in future runs, the above list of morphology tends to occur. So to spell out the metaphor, when events first emerge out at the outer temporal boundary of 'practical' distance ( beyond which the randomization is too large and overwhelms confidence ), the specter of what the model result is at that point in time, tends to be more amplified than what will actually occur. All guidance do this. GGEM ... EURO ... UKMET ... GFS ... JMA... Kevin's imagination, I have not seen any one of these sources free from blame. The reason they do this, they "see" future events as a result of present input interacting in the processing of the physics, but cannot see all the permutations that have yet to emerge in time. Some of which directly negatively interfere, but some actually require wave energy of their own; sapping off the domain ... effectively robbing the original specter of what it needs to maintain - this may just be another way of describing negative interference.. Either way, the result is the reduction over time. It think it is a natural artifact of the technology. One that perhaps cannot be avoided, too. Maybe in the future ...all the doubters of 'flying models' will eat crow but until models can see the catalogue of events that are going to happen (will of god type stuff), those "permutations" are yet to occur as part of an uncertain future. When a given guidance sees a big D9 event, it's just not seeing all the other hindrances that will manifest in time that either cancel or rob, cannot be predetermined. If we further that thinking ... we may be nearing an end of what these models can really do for us in terms of "really" predicting the future. I wonder if there is a way to calculate the "uncertainty of emergent future properties" as a function of time - so it grows... Then, at D11 (say..), we might benefit from knowing that the very best the models will ever be able to do, given the atmospheric domain in question is 57% accuracy ... This type of imagined analytic approach would not rule out or suggest the blind dart scenario, either. It only says that no matter how well a guidance or a person visualizes D10, once applying the 'uncertainty coefficients' they or technology could not have had more than that 57% certitude. D5 improves to say 77%. D3, 97. Daught, hilariously sounding like 'doubt' now-cast is 99.99999999... because there is always some subjective error that is too finite to be seen. The whole model would eerily agree with one of the baser tenets of Quantum Mechanics, that states that an object cannot be simultaneously measured for it's velocity, or position, in space to exactitude. This was going to be a small post ... I've gone and f'ed that up. I guess if you've read this far, bravo. But the original intent was to say that those three aspects above are trying to save Saturday.

Call in the family ...