Pragma...I'm happy to continue the discussion here.
I understand the distinction between a swell (wave) and a surge. Nevertheless, I persist. Why is that?
In the event of a surge, how would the software which is informing of us a "swell" differentiate a surge from a swell? To assume that there is sufficient intelligence to make that differentiation would be a bad assumption on my part.
Why would it make any difference if it is a surge and not a swell? Surges are very common and do not in any way imply lateral movement of water. Surges are created by pressure differences, when pressure goes down, the ocean surface goes up, but there is no lateral movement of water!
At this point in time, I'm going to assume that characterization of swell is accurate. My gut understanding is that the volume of water coming through the Strait SO FAR is insufficient to sustain a surge all the way to the ice front.
There is no volume of water coming through the Bering Strait connected to any surge. Surges are not lateral movements of water, but pressure-induced vertical movements of water.
But this is not a one day phenomena and there are many factors to consider in making a judgement as to the potential for a genuine surge.
1) The long "fetch" of the tail winds in the Pacific.
2) The duration , consistency and strength of the wind field.
3) The wind field within the Arctic which is concentrating any buildup of water on the Asian side of the Arctic. It's blowing from the Beaufort toward the ESS.
4) The uncertainty of what happens at the ocean / ice interface.
There is no uncertainty here. Surges and waves are an everyday occurrence at the ice edge, and never does the water flow over the ice. Never. The ice stays on top and moves with the waves and surges and what have you.
The conventional wisdom of the forum is that a surge is impossible. I'm trying to explore the constraints of that assumption.
The conventional wisdom is that surges are common and mostly harmless.
"Trying to explore the constraints of that assumption" ... please!
If you want to debunk the possibility of a surge, there should be some math which suggests the volume of water required to produce one in a given location and demonstrating that the current environment doesn't have the possibility of producing it
5 people on ASIF saying that they don't consider it possible is hardly scientific, no?
What volume of water? Who is denying the possibility of surges? Your claims are:
1) A possible storm surge coming in from the Pacific would be 1 m high entering the Bering strait and somehow come out on the other side twice as tall.
2) That his surge will maintain the 2 meters for the next 400 kilometers until it meets the ice.
3) That this surge will then inundate the ice for a considerable distance.
4) Underlying is an unstated assumption that a surge involves the lateral movement of water. It does not.
All of this is wrong - point 1 because this is not a lateral movement of water, point 2 because even if it did gain an extra 1 m it would lose that very quickly, 3 is wrong because that is not what happens when waves meet ice, and 4 is wrong because that is simply not how things work!