Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Archimid

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 46
1
Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: October 17, 2019, 06:13:20 PM »
I found this nice study on the thickness and transmittance of solar energy on sea ice.
 
Quote
But the present study suggests that the transmittance through bare, melting ice is also significant, and our calculations suggest that as much as 3% of the incident radiation may penetrate 3 m thick ice while 15% may penetrate 1 m thick ice.

Transmission and absorption of solar radiation by Arctic sea ice during the melt season

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006JC003977

2
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: October 17, 2019, 10:23:43 AM »
Indeed. In Aluminium's awesome animation that is evident.

3
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: October 17, 2019, 09:38:21 AM »
Ice begets ice. Even above 80N there is no ice creation except relatively close to the ice edge. What happens when there is no ice to begin with?

4
Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: October 15, 2019, 12:35:42 AM »
Sometimes it is important to focus on the most relevant numbers, rather than those which best exemplify ones own viewpoint.

But that is exactly what you are doing. You focus on the one metric that supports your conclusion and ignore everything else.

 You remind me of John Christy. The cowardly sop is laser focused in mid-troposphere temperature ignoring surface warming, sea warming, ice losses, and atmospheric changes. Even then, the warming is catching up to him. His own dataset confirms warming is real but he can't see it. And this is an actual scientist, even if a dishonest one.

5
Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: October 14, 2019, 03:28:51 PM »
When we talk ice KkK focuses on area/extent, a lower-dimensional measure than volume that produces a very long term prediction. That way he can avoid the truth that the volume numbers reveal.

When we talk Hurricanes KkK focuses like a laser, on ACE, which only includes wind speed and duration. He must ignore the floods, the rapid intensification, the slower paths, and the increased destructiveness.

He must pretend that average = normal AND that ACE is the only average that matters. Lucky him for being able to do that. I guess I'm just jealous of his bliss.

6
Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: October 13, 2019, 08:51:49 PM »
For a second I thought about using bold, but I didn't. The problem is that there is too much to be bolded and it loses effectiveness. I'll try again.

Quote
The 2018 North Atlantic hurricane season had 15 named storms, 8 hurricanes, and two major hurricanes. This is above the 1981-2010 average of 12.1 named storms, 6.4 hurricanes, and 2.7 major hurricanes. The number of named storms ranked as a tie for the tenth most on record. Both of the major hurricanes — Florence and Michael — impacted the U.S. mainland causing approximately 49 billion in damages between them and contributed to one of the costliest years in terms of weather and climate disasters for the nation. Although Florence weakened significantly before making landfall as a Category 1 storm, she brought unprecedented amounts of rainfall and subsequent flooding to parts of North and South Carolina. During the 2018 North Atlantic hurricane season, Tropical Storms Alberto and Gordon as well as Hurricanes Florence and Michael made landfall in the U.S.

The Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) index of tropical cyclone activity also indicated an above-average season in the North Atlantic. The ACE index is used to calculate the intensity of the hurricane season and is a function of the wind speed and duration of each tropical cyclone. The 2018 Atlantic hurricane season had an approximate ACE of about 129 (x104 knots2) which is greater than the 1981-2010 average value of 104 (x104 knots2).



7
Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: October 13, 2019, 04:57:22 PM »
Except that the new "normal" is not all that different from the old "normal." 

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/tropical-cyclones/201813

I'm sorry but what are you pointing at in this link? This is the final report for 2018, 2019 is not over. Yet you use this link as proof this season is "normal".

But even then when I look within your link what I read is :

Quote
The 2018 North Atlantic hurricane season had 15 named storms, 8 hurricanes, and two major hurricanes. This is above the 1981-2010 average of 12.1 named storms, 6.4 hurricanes, and 2.7 major hurricanes. The number of named storms ranked as a tie for the tenth most on record. Both of the major hurricanes — Florence and Michael — impacted the U.S. mainland causing approximately 49 billion in damages between them and contributed to one of the costliest years in terms of weather and climate disasters for the nation. Although Florence weakened significantly before making landfall as a Category 1 storm, she brought unprecedented amounts of rainfall and subsequent flooding to parts of North and South Carolina. During the 2018 North Atlantic hurricane season, Tropical Storms Alberto and Gordon as well as Hurricanes Florence and Michael made landfall in the U.S.

The Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) index of tropical cyclone activity also indicated an above-average season in the North Atlantic. The ACE index is used to calculate the intensity of the hurricane season and is a function of the wind speed and duration of each tropical cyclone. The 2018 Atlantic hurricane season had an approximate ACE of about 129 (x104 knots2) which is greater than the 1981-2010 average value of 104 (x104 knots2).


I'm not sure what is so "normal" about that.

8
The rest / Re: Systemic Isolation
« on: October 12, 2019, 12:18:25 PM »
Brain tunes itself to criticality, maximizing information processing

https://source.wustl.edu/2019/10/brain-tunes-itself-to-criticality-maximizing-information-processing/

Quote
Taking advantage of their ability to continuously track the activity of neurons for more than a week, the researchers first confirmed that network dynamics in the visual cortex are robustly tuned to criticality, even across light and dark cycles.

Next, by blocking vision in one eye, the researchers revealed that criticality was severely disrupted, more than a day before the manipulation affected the firing rates of individual neurons.

Twenty-four hours later, criticality re-emerged in the recordings — at which point individual neurons were suppressed by the visual deprivation.

9
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 12, 2019, 12:07:32 PM »
If Tesla is not demand constrained then why is production increasing? Because they are creating demand with every car they sell. The more people see and ride on Teslas the more they sell. Thus to further increase demand in the long term, Tesla must sell more cars in the short term. A lower price achieves just that.

GSY I have no clue who you are but I 100% believe you when you way you are/were a corporate guy. It shows.

10
Policy and solutions / Re: Batteries: Today's Energy Solution
« on: October 12, 2019, 11:45:39 AM »
They created a rechargeable world

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/

Quote
The 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry are awarded to John Goodenough, M. Stanley Whittingham and Akira Yoshino “for the development of lithium-ion batteries”. Through their work, they have created the right conditions for a wireless and fossil fuel-free society, and so brought the greatest benefit to humankind..




11
Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: October 11, 2019, 11:52:47 AM »
There was nothing normal about the 2 cat 5s in the Atlantic, although if the world keeps warming it will be normal.
1932, 1933, 1961, 2005, 2007, 2017, 2019. It was not extremely rare.


We are entering a new "normal". It doesn't matter how hard people deny it, the new normal won't last long. It will get worse.

12
Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: October 11, 2019, 05:07:55 AM »
As we near the end of the 2019 season, global cylconic activity has been near normal.  Higher Atlantic and Indian ocean storms have been counter by lower Pacific (both eastern and western) activity.

Global cyclonic activity has not been "normal". Ask anyone in the Bahamas.

 If you mean the sum of the cyclonic winds or some other cherry, then the word you are looking for is average, not normal.

There was nothing normal about the 2 cat 5s in the Atlantic, although if the world keeps warming it will be normal.

13
Policy and solutions / Re: Batteries: Today's Energy Solution
« on: October 11, 2019, 04:53:56 AM »
The Powerwall 2 has 14 kWh batteries with 13.5 kWh usable*. I'll assume .25 kWh is the top reserve and .25 kWh the bottom reserve. This means that when the Powerwall 2 app says it is charged to 100%, in reality, it is charged to 98%. When the app says 99% charged the actual charge is 97%.

Please see the following chart for a generic li+ battery:



If the batteries are not charged to their maximum capacity they last much longer. From the image it can be inferred that if the max voltage is limited to lower voltages, the line straightens asymptotically to the horizontal but for fewer gains than the initial voltage limits. This analysis excludes all other failure modes.

Tesla already took the big savings away by limiting the usable max voltage, but there may be significant cycles to gain by using a lower maximum charge.

However, the behavior of the batteries at lower charge must also be accounted for before overriding installation settings.  Although I'm sure that, in general, a lower max charge is better, these batteries are highly customized for their task. The additives for these batteries, the BMS and the hardware surrounding the batteries have been highly optimized.

*Powerwall 2 spec sheet: https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/powerwall/Powerwall%202_AC_Datasheet_en_northamerica.pdf

14
Policy and solutions / Re: Batteries: Today's Energy Solution
« on: October 10, 2019, 03:50:57 AM »
Each battery chemistry has its own sweet spot for battery degradation, typically around the middle of the SOC at a cell level. As I understand it, close to 100% SOC is usually harmful to the battery. But then again Bruce is charging to 99%, not 100%. That may be the difference of hundreds of cycles,

Also as Sigmetnow points out, the battery chemistry in Powerwalls might be completely different from automotive batteries. It makes all the sense in the world. The specific chemistry of these batteries was chosen with Powerwall use in mind, not driving. It may be that the sweet spot of Bruce's batteries is right at 99%.

15
Policy and solutions / Re: Batteries: Today's Energy Solution
« on: October 09, 2019, 06:44:15 PM »
The powerwall charges up to 99% most days then discharges at night down to about 65%. If there isn’t a full daylight charge because of clouds the powerwall will drop to 50% and then stop downloading during nighttime use. The grid takes over.

That’s what I wanted to know. It’s kind of weird that your batteries are programmed for 99% maximum charge daily. For car batteries the best practice is to charge to 80% in a daily basis to get a few extra cycles. In your case that would mean charging to 80% and using down to 45%.  In case of inclement weather or scheduled outage you charge to 99%, just in case. If this applies to powerwalls as it does to batteries you might get a few extra years of batteries.

16
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 09, 2019, 09:52:54 AM »
Quote
Driving a mile in a Model 3 uses 240Wh, or ~100 grams of CO2/mile with current US grid. Biking a mile uses 53kcal. Fruit or dairy emits ~5g of CO2/kcal (beef is 3 times that), so 150g of CO2/mile. So driving in a single-occupancy Tesla is lower emission than a fruitarian biking.


Quote
Addendum: e-bikes are way lower emissions per mile than conventional bikes. Among vegan diets, rule is the less healthy, the lower the emissions. Fresh fruits & veggies have logistical challenges & low yield/acre. Oils, carbs, & especially sugar are the lowest emitters per Cal!

https://twitter.com/Robotbeat/status/1102249291568029696

17
Policy and solutions / Re: Batteries: Today's Energy Solution
« on: October 09, 2019, 09:17:39 AM »
Bruce Steele, it brings me great happiness every time I hear someone achieved a high level of energy independence. May your system serve you well and last you a long time.

If I may ask some questions, what is your typical state of charge during the daily cycle? Do you charge them to 100%? How low do you usually discharge them? I ask to try to glimpse into the life expectancy of your batteries. Do you have a life expectancy for them? Maybe a plan to maximize that life expectancy?

18
Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: October 08, 2019, 02:07:27 PM »
Amazing. Thanks for that time-lapse.

19
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 07, 2019, 02:46:03 PM »
Quote
Instilling an ethos of "no need to sacrifice, going green can be sexy and shiny and faster!" is the worst thing I can imagine for the "environmental movement".

I'll give you irrefutable proof that you are wrong.


20
Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (October 2019)
« on: October 06, 2019, 10:20:00 PM »
I like using both the maximum and the minimum to glimpse into the future of the ice. Attached is an animation using the intersection of the trendlines of maximum volume and volume loss from 2007 to 2019.  Date of intersection estimated by sight, but it shouldn't be off by more than 1 year.

2032 has indeed been remarkably stable.

21
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 06, 2019, 05:39:45 AM »
I imagine this is how some of the bears in here will react the first time they see Smart Summon.


22
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 05, 2019, 08:12:32 PM »
More than half a million uses. a few days ago. A million is probably very near.  I have seen a video of only 2 actual accidents. I've seen a few "fails", many "acceptables" and a few big "wins". I am pleasantly surprised. I was expecting more restrictions on the capabilities of SS and more accidents by now.

Accidents will keep happening while people are in control of vehicles and walking on the road, SS will have more accidents and eventually a human will be hit. Unavoidable.

The trick is that SS must have a lot less accidents than the average of the population.

The current version of SS was trained on thousands of parking lots and it may be at the level of safety of the average human. The next iteration will be trained on perhaps millions of parking lots.

23
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 05, 2019, 02:38:45 PM »
As a Tesla shareholder I'm very grateful for the concerns for my financial well being, Tesla profits and Tesla bankwuptcy. I'm sure they are 100% genuine, not a hair of self-interest in them.  But thanks, but no thanks. I'm buying as much as I can safely buy. Please keep voicing your concerns while I buy some more. I can't help it if my eyes see the following technology as an amazing achievement.


24
Consequences / Re: Worst consequence of AGW
« on: October 03, 2019, 05:24:20 AM »

Odd, as your loast post in when will the arctic be ice-free thread stated that an ice-free condition will occur around 2031 - definitely not next decade.  The evidence that this state will be catastrophic is severly lacking.

Your fear plays tricks on you. I said it was likely to happen next decade, and I said it because to the best of my understanding the most likely date is somewhere around 2031 plus or minus some years. A BOE could happen any year now, given a low enough max volume like  2016-2017 and a strong melt season like 2012, 2016 and 2019. Thus the event of an ice-free Arctic next decade is very possible.


On the destructiveness of an ice-free arctic on the NH climate, I'm so sorry that you don't get it. It is difficult to explain the obvious to someone who doesn't want to understand the obvious.

A very dry, cold, old, central and large part of the world is undergoing an extraordinarily fast change. That change propagates to the rest of the NH. Climate Change like this happened before in the history of the earth, but never as fast (except the dinosaurs) and always followed by extinction.

A change this large, this fast, has certainly not happened in the history of human civilization, much less to a modern world with 7 billion people.
 

Quote
Fearmongering will not help the situation. 

 I am not fearmongering, because the threat is as real as it gets. I'm warning whoever would listen about the threat as best as I understand it, and I have made a considerable effort in understanding the threat.

On the other hand, you are telling people to ignore the danger. Pffft. I almost feel sorry for you when you finally realize your error.

25
Consequences / Re: Worst consequence of AGW
« on: October 02, 2019, 04:58:34 AM »
Hope without fear blunts the reaction.
Fear without hope induces panic.
DON'T PANIC.

There is green left. There is life left. Amazing people have been working to solve this for years, each one with their small part of the big puzzle. Solutions are emerging. Humans can do this.

We do need to hurry. It is already too late for some.

26
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 01, 2019, 03:25:36 AM »
What about this use case of Smart Summon:

Tesla Smart Summon V10 Parking Lot


27
Consequences / Re: Worst consequence of AGW
« on: September 30, 2019, 05:19:36 PM »
Quote
Archimid has a separate agenda - that of exaggerated the effects in order to promote action.

Wrong. My "agenda" is to portray the risk to the best of my understanding to promote action. It is not an exaggeration to say that we may be ice free in the North Pole in September next decade. It is downright likely. The consequences of this event ( or continuum of events that already started) will be catastrophic for the North Hemisphere and the world at large. We are just at the beginning of it and insurance is already failing.

The threat is as real as it gets. Fear is 100% warranted and expected. If you do not feel fear about this, then you do not understand the danger.

As Donald Trump clearly shows fear is one of the most powerful motivators of humans at a society level. Trump exploits xenophobia to make some Americans scared shitless of brown children to such an extent that they exert cruel and unusual punishment and violate their human rights to keep them away. They love it because it appeases fear, however fake the fear is, and Trump takes full advantage of it.

Fear of climate change is completely warranted. That fear will cause action, if properly channeled that fear will produce the correct action against the real threat. Denying the danger blunts the actual fear that we should have, blunting action.

Fear of real danger is very good and a necesary response to activate human defenses.

28
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: September 30, 2019, 12:11:51 AM »
Remember when AP first came out how it barely kept lines but now you can travel hours without disengagement, Smart summon will likely improve faster than lane keeping.

29
Consequences / Re: Worst consequence of AGW
« on: September 29, 2019, 04:18:23 PM »
You are all wasting your time. KkK has shown sufficient  intellectual capacity to understand the threat we all face, thus he does not have the benefit of ignorance that we can give others. He has obviously panicked about climate change and is trying to bring other down to the pits of panic with him. Like all other deniers, he has lost contact with reality due to fear. It is really not his fault at all. It is just a function of human psychology and the magnitude and scope of climate change.

This is on topic because panicky people like KkK and Trump actively hinder logical responses to climate change making the worst consequences of climate change worse.

30
The rest / Re: SpaceX
« on: September 28, 2019, 04:21:29 PM »
Ah. I see. The shininess is a characteristic of the high quality stainless steel used, light and scale. I was thinking of more common stainless steel. Stupid me.

31
The rest / Re: SpaceX
« on: September 28, 2019, 03:03:03 PM »
Thanks for the informative post. The use of a stainless steel body is very interesting, but I don't understand why it has to be polished and shined. Does the smooth surface provide any significant advantage?

32
The rest / Re: SpaceX
« on: September 28, 2019, 01:06:30 PM »
GSY is right. This thing looks quick and cheap, no matter how shiny. If they manage to fly this thing for any period of time, let alone return it to the ground this marks another step closer to cheap accessible space.


And that got me thinking... why the shine? It sure costs more, but does it offer advantages?

33
The rest / Re: Systemic Isolation
« on: September 26, 2019, 11:18:51 AM »
Heres a famous simple chaotic deterministic system describing a layer of fluid heated from below.


Over at the sacred "extent/area data" thread mitch posted this very excellent link about the topic at hand:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3270390/

From that link:

Quote
In a later, but highly prescient paper, Lorenz [1] also considered the interplay of various scales of motion in determining the predictability of a system. The results showed that errors at the cumulus scale can invade the errors at the synoptic scale in two days and infect the very largest scales in two weeks. Thirty years later, the relevance of this study has been realized in the development of stochastic approaches to represent cumulus convection and its upscale energy transports, and in the emerging efforts to resolve these multi-scale processes in atmospheric simulations at the cloud system-resolving scale


In other words, very small local change can create very large future systemic change. That's chaos.

If an observer of the large scale change don't know about the local change, then large scale changes may appear random to such observer. In that case, by observing the frequency of the event he can develop probabilistic approaches that could help the observer make relatively accurate predictions. Once a distribution is found, the magic of probability and math takes it away. No physical reality needed to obtain useful information.


Quote
Chaotic systems behave pseudo-randomly, i.e. it is not practicable in any realistic sense to predict their state 100% since any such prediction would require significantly more computing power and more information than is present in the chaotic system itself.

A chaotic system is any system for which we haven't found an efficient algorithm. If we find an efficient way to compute a very complex system it is not longer chaotic.


Quote
But then comes the spanner in the works - quantum mechanics and the inherent fundamental unpredictability of events such as radioactive decay. If we accept quantum effects as real, the question then becomes whether they could in some way affect the outcome of chaotic macro systems such as weather. In my opinion the answer is that such an effect would be far too small to be ever detected but that cumulatively over time they could affect the outcome in noticeable ways.

What ever happens at the subatomic level is simultaneously happening at all scales, but it is beyond human perception and for most analysis, completely irrelevant.

 Quantum effects are "real" in that weird stuff is happening that we don't really understand but can predict using probabilities. Quantum effects are not real in terms of quantum theory being based on probability distributions, which only describe frequency of events.

One last try. The probability that an electron is at point A at time B is a very amazing and useful tool. But that probability does not tell me how the electron got to point A at time B.

34
The rest / Re: Systemic Isolation
« on: September 26, 2019, 09:58:56 AM »
I think the disturbing thing about QM is Bell's theorem. Crudely put, it requires giving up one of the three postulates of locality, causality or free will.

sidd

My bet? Causality is the problem. Time is a limit of human perception like sight limits us to the visible spectrum. QM scratches the surface of that unseen universe but it says nothing about that universe.


Archimid, the EPR paradox has effectively been disproved (your article pointed to a rather weird paper on Bayesian statistics that didn't seem pertinent, except for the discussion of the Einstein - Podolsky - Rosen (EPR) paradox).

The way I understand it is that the EPR paradox has been proved. Einstein meant it as an exercise that proved QM was wrong, hence the paradox part. QM caused "Spooky action at a distance" that shouldn't be possible. But then "spooky action at a distance" was verified. And many more quirks of QM have verified. Since then QM has become a cornerstone of advance sciences and more important, engineering.  QM gets verified time and again.

Einstein was wrong about QM being "wrong". QM is correct, within probability theory. But probability theory is not proof that the world ( or radioactive decay) is random.

The paper I linked could be very helpful to understand why the existence of QM doesn't prove that the universe is random, or that true randomness exists. It is perfectly on topic and it explains why you are wrong about probability distribution being real physical phenomenon.


35
The rest / Re: Systemic Isolation
« on: September 25, 2019, 12:47:45 PM »
That our best tool to describe the very small is a probability distribution does not mean that the world is inherently random.

Read this paper so you understand my perspective on this.

https://bayes.wustl.edu/etj/articles/cmystery.pdf

A snippet:

Quote
In our system, a probability is a theoretical construct, on the epistemological level, which we
assign in order to represent a state of knowledge, or that we calculate from other probabilities
according to the rules of probability theory. A frequency is a property of the real world, on the
ontological level, that we measure or estimate. So for us, probability theory is not an Oracle telling
how the world must be; it is a mathematical tool for organizing, and ensuring the consistency of,
our own reasoning. But it is from this organized reasoning that we learn whether our state of
knowledge is adequate to describe the real world.

This point comes across much more strongly in our next example, where belief that probabilities
are real physical properties produces a major quandary for quantum theory, in the EPR paradox.
It is so bad that some have concluded, with the usual consistency of quantum theory, that (1) there is no real world, after all, and (2) physical influences travel faster than light.

36
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: September 24, 2019, 08:17:13 PM »
philopek

Jeff Dahn, the lead scientist behind this paper is partner with Tesla and Tesla already patented a version of this technology.

Quote
Just days after the publication of the benchmarking paper, Tesla and Dahn were awarded a patent that described a single-crystal lithium-ion battery almost identical to the batteries described in the paper. The patented battery includes an electrolyte additive called ODTO that the patent claims can “enhance performance and lifetime of Li-ion batteries, while reducing costs.”

https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-may-soon-have-a-battery-that-can-last-a-million-miles/

Quote
There is no Tesla invented and developed battery technology and nothing like that is in the process, Tesla is currently the largest single customer but not long anymore.

You go ahead and invest based on that. I'll believe the patents and common sense.


A million mile EV taxi can replace 4 ICE taxis for a fraction of the operating cost. If such vehicle was used 24/7, the impact on emissions would be significant. Even without self driving a million mile EV taxi could significantly reduce CO2 emissions. With self driving, ICE fleets would be retired even with mileage left because the savings would be too large to overcome.

And we haven't even started talking about what a 5000 cycle battery could do for grid, business and home storage.

37
The rest / Re: Systemic Isolation
« on: September 24, 2019, 09:07:32 AM »
Frequency is how humans perceive the world through the arrow of time. A probability distribution is a human invention that can provide the probability of an event over many events.

That is QM. An amazing probability distribution. A tool so amazing that it can within uncertainties predict phenomenon outside the known realm of physics, like spooky action at a distance.  Very much like the Ptolemaic model, QM is a set of rules based on observations that gives us very powerful predictive power. It does not tell us anything else about the "nature of the world".

 Every action has an equal and opposite reaction tells us something about the universe.

 Energy is neither created nor destroyed tells us something about the universe.

 P(X) is a number from 0 to 1 that we call the probability of an event. It tells us nothing about the event itself except the probability. That is something important and useful, but it tells us nothing about the universe except a probability. 

"God does not play dice" has nothing to do with gods or dice, but with Einstein's belief on the deterministic nature of the cosmos and I agree with him. There is a huge slice of the universe we are missing. QM let's us hack that lack of knowledge in useful ways, but in no way explains it.

38
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: September 24, 2019, 12:48:02 AM »
Million mile batteries will replace more than just the yellow part.

39
The rest / Re: Systemic Isolation
« on: September 24, 2019, 12:44:33 AM »
Quote
Radioactive atoms decay randomly.

I'm with Einstein on this.  God does not play dice. The Copenhagen interpretation is a limit of knowledge. There must be an event or series of event that cause the tipping point of radioactive decay in every atom. It is just beyond human understanding for now. 

41
The rest / Re: Systemic Isolation
« on: September 23, 2019, 04:44:32 PM »
Everything can be perfectly predicted given enough data and processing power.

Nope. Given quantum uncertainty and the butterfly effect, predictions are doomed to fail sooner or later.

My speculation is that quantum mechanics are today's equivalent to the Ptolemaic model. The geocentric Ptolemaic model could accurate predict and describe the sky above, which was the observable universe at the time. Within its own sets of rules it was correct and extremely useful.

 Quantum mechanics are a very elaborate mathematical model that is extremely useful at making accurate predictions that are not fully understood but correct.

Our understanding of the universe is limited to our senses like sight and our perception of time. There may be a whole universe that we are missing in the same way Ptolemy couldn't see the universe we see today.

If such universe is ordered like all other physics, then QM weirdness disappears and order is restored. With it the butterfly effect disappears.

What you say is right, in theory. Real randomness occurs within our current mathematical framework. However, for the practical purposes of trying to find patterns on daily data vs monthly data there is much "noise" that is worth looking at before we get to QM, for the following reasons:

 1. The data points are limited to a few years.
 2. We don't have the time to get enough data points to make proper statistical analysis.
 3. We have a lot of well documented and well digested data for all kinds of variables that can be compared and establish patterns.

42
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: September 23, 2019, 02:22:08 PM »
To me, there is no such thing as random noise. Everything can be perfectly predicted given enough data and processing power. The reality is that enough data and processing power are very often not available.

So maybe, just maybe, by keeping the "noise" of the daily data, and being aware of other variables at different time scales insight can be gained that turns noise into useful knowledge.

I like using the most granular possible element for my volume charts for this reason. The data is noisier, but the noise may reveal patterns that averaged data may hide.

However, averaged data has many important uses. The other day I was comparing ENSO and PIOMAS. Averaged data over 2 months was very useful. Daily data would have been unnecessarily noisy.

43
Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: September 22, 2019, 03:17:42 PM »
It seems PIOMAS reached a minimum. Here is the updates maximum vs  loses graph. The ice free prediction moves closer to 2031. Average loss updated for 2019.

44
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 21, 2019, 11:30:44 AM »

It looks like maybe we will experience blocking year round in the Northern Hemisphere.  That might mean to watch for Arctic Sea Ice to spend a lot of time at the lowest ice extent to date in the coming weeks.  High pressure will bring clear skies and promote cooling, but if the pace of the tropical incursions into the Arctic is quick enough, it could provide the heat.  I dunno

Very slow ice growth and probably a lot of storms everywhere.

I think thickness will be more affected than extent by WAA during winter. The water will cool and thin ice will form (yay extent) but the temperature above the ice will be warm and the ice will thicken slower than in it did in the past. 

45
Policy and solutions / Re: Robots and AI: Our Immortality or Extinction
« on: September 21, 2019, 12:25:48 AM »
Interesting posts as usual Tom.

Quote
Computers are stupid: babies know what a face is within the first few months of being alive. For a computer to know what a face is, it must learn by looking at millions of pictures of faces.

Babies are born with a brain that evolved over 500 million years. Babies come loaded with face recognition software and highly specialized hardware to process faces.  The thing about computers is that you can re use code. So once one software stack learns how to recognize faces, potentially all future AIs could be built on top of that software.

Quote
This is a demanding process. It takes place inside the data centers we call the cloud, and much of the electricity that powers the cloud is generated by burning fossil fuels

That is not necesarilly true. Energy is certainly a huge consideration when processing huge data but if they are powered by renewables, who cares?

Look at what google is doing:

https://cloud.google.com/sustainability/


As an aside, an interesting video I saw the other day:

Multi-Agent Hide and Seek

Quote
We’ve observed agents discovering progressively more complex tool use while playing a simple game of hide-and-seek. Through training in our new simulated hide-and-seek environment, agents build a series of six distinct strategies and counterstrategies, some of which we did not know our environment supported. The self-supervised emergent complexity in this simple environment further suggests that multi-agent co-adaptation may one day produce extremely complex and intelligent behavior.





46
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 20, 2019, 04:37:25 PM »
if atmospheric talk of current changes with quick looks of the past and the future is off topic, might as well close the thread. 

While sark words are a bit cryptic they reflect exactly what we are seeing. Terra incognita. The unknown, the new. He follows it with actual data and animations. If it sounds scary, then you are understanding correctly. As a Daily null school checker for the last few years, his historic gifs are extremely useful for context.

Still, complaining and meta posts like this are the main pollutants of this thread this year. Real posts like killians daily predictions, freegrass and AN animations and now sark’s atmospheric posts are all on topic and real contributions.

47
Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: September 19, 2019, 03:59:04 AM »

George Cornish, 51, Abaco’s chief councillor, said evacuating entire islands before a storm is preferable to changing the building code.
#
“From my point of view, we’ve never seen a hurricane like this in our life,” he said from the United States where he went after the storm. “I went through Hurricane Floyd that damaged docks and buildings and stuff and the damage wasn’t this. This was Category Five, maybe even a six. I don’t think the building codes needs to change. I think we have a proper building code that has stood the test of time of other hurricanes. I think they are strong but it’s just this hurricane is something we’ve never seen in our lives before. If you change the code, poor people and those in the middle class wouldn’t be able to afford to build.”

The thing is that this types of hurricane will happen more frequently, because of warmer waters an changing atmospheric patterns. This person, Mr. Cornish, who I assume to be a professional in charge of safe guarding the lives of their people is painfully unaware of it. Sadly, we are seeing these types of events more frequently and the rate and severity will keep increasing while the world warms and Earth systems change

.
Quote
Instead, Mr Cornish said massive hurricane shelters should be built in communities on all inhabited islands. Some designated shelters, like the Central Abaco Primary School, initially housed hundreds of residents before the storm but became so severely compromised that people scrambled to leave in the midst of Dorian’s passage.


Not a bad idea. For the population and size of Bahamas a "super refuge" sounds like a good idea. A properly built and well stocked building can preserve life and property. It should be built on a high place with an extremely good foundation, reinforced walls and windows and roof.

Ideally such facility should serve a purpose during the time is not used a shelter.

Also like all real security measures, the people need to be properly trained on the procedures for before, during and after the event.


48
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: September 17, 2019, 11:01:59 AM »
This is the video that precipitated the events. Vernon Unsworth, insulting Elon Musk efforts on the rescue attempt. Elon should have taken the high road, but Vernon Unsworth is most certainly creepy.

https://money.cnn.com/video/technology/2018/07/15/vernon-unsworth.cnnmoney/index.html

"He can stick his submarine where it hurts" (creepy smile)

And this submarine is what Elon Musk and his people did after several weeks of brainstorming and hard work to rescue the children.

49
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: September 15, 2019, 10:10:26 AM »
The average electricity rate in the US is 13.19 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh).

https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/

50
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 14, 2019, 09:49:26 PM »
I check nullchool every day, several times a day. I find these nullschool posts very insightful and  often generate insightful discussion. Aleph Null's hindcast/forecast animations are specially nice for me because I often only look at nullschool's forecast. Having the hindcast in a very quick animation right on time and often generating comments is very useful to me.

And it is right on topic. Animations of models of the current status of the melting season couldn't be more on topic.

There are advantages to linking videos instead of uploading, for example, having a broader audience, but it is more work.

This off topic. Complaints have been a common recurrence on this thread this season. Perhaps we need a "Complaints" thread where forum users can voice their dislikes and find acceptable solutions without polluting this thread?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 46