|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 10, 2023 15:26:22 GMT
Yes. Maths is based on deductive logic and can be PROVED to be true - or not. Science is based on seeking relationships between various observed data and postulating a theory as to why it is so. It can never be proved to be true. You would have to explain what you mean by proved and true. I can use F= ma where v<<c and get true results as far as my purposes would need truth. You can create some philosophical argument whilst I achieve the job in hand. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jan 10, 2023 16:08:33 GMT
We can exactly calculate the quantum effects of this scattering. You should be glad, it was a big achievement. We can eradicate one uncertainty by understanding the mechanism. If the subject of our interest were merely the scattering of light or its immediate effects, then you would have a point. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 10, 2023 17:37:24 GMT
We can exactly calculate the quantum effects of this scattering. You should be glad, it was a big achievement. We can eradicate one uncertainty by understanding the mechanism. If the subject of our interest were merely the scattering of light or its immediate effects, then you would have a point. I have a point anyway. My point is to take the constructive approach. Solve one problem at a time. Don't give up before you have started. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jan 10, 2023 18:01:04 GMT
I think the issue of the atmospheric optics is 'linear' as in if you have some water vapour which will scatter some photons and then you have the CO2 in the gaps between which will scatter some more. You can get a theoretical prediction of the scattering.
Do you like maths? Well if you do, here is a 101 guide on how to do it.
This is nothing to do with mathematics, BvL. This is science. No one knows if CO2 has a net warming effect on the Earth or not - except in areas with no vegetation like deserts or polar ice caps. I've already touched on deserts in respect of the Sahara which underwent change over a long period, from tropical forest to what it is now. In some 15,000 years time it will return to forest and all to do with the change in the world's axis. When I put this forward, the answer was that the scientist were taking it into account; who belives they are, who believes they can and who believes they actually want to? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jan 10, 2023 18:24:41 GMT
This is nothing to do with mathematics, BvL. This is science. No one knows if CO2 has a net warming effect on the Earth or not - except in areas with no vegetation like deserts or polar ice caps. I've already touched on deserts in respect of the Sahara which underwent change over a long period, from tropical forest to what it is now. In some 15,000 years time it will return to forest and all to do with the change in the world's axis. When I put this forward, the answer was that the scientist were taking it into account; who belives they are, who believes they can and who believes they actually want to? If they do not build every known variable into their models then the models are effectively worthless. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jan 10, 2023 19:23:12 GMT
This is nothing to do with mathematics, BvL. This is science. No one knows if CO2 has a net warming effect on the Earth or not - except in areas with no vegetation like deserts or polar ice caps. I've already touched on deserts in respect of the Sahara which underwent change over a long period, from tropical forest to what it is now. In some 15,000 years time it will return to forest and all to do with the change in the world's axis. When I put this forward, the answer was that the scientist were taking it into account; who belives they are, who believes they can and who believes they actually want to? The answer is 15,000 years. See if you can work it out. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jan 10, 2023 19:28:52 GMT
I've already touched on deserts in respect of the Sahara which underwent change over a long period, from tropical forest to what it is now. In some 15,000 years time it will return to forest and all to do with the change in the world's axis. When I put this forward, the answer was that the scientist were taking it into account; who belives they are, who believes they can and who believes they actually want to? If they do not build every known variable into their models then the models are effectively worthless. I disagree, when calculating the likelihood of an asteroid striking the Earth scientists did not need to include the earths wobble even though this wobble could mean an asteroid might hit or miss the earth. That's because the odds of such a wobble making a difference is infinitesimally small. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jan 10, 2023 21:20:47 GMT
If they do not build every known variable into their models then the models are effectively worthless. I disagree, when calculating the likelihood of an asteroid striking the Earth scientists did not need to include the earths wobble even though this wobble could mean an asteroid might hit or miss the earth. That's because the odds of such a wobble making a difference is infinitesimally small. However we are dealing with unknown effects and supposed effects and if any are missed out the model cannot assess its effect even if it transpires it is vanishingly small. Obviously they have not successfully created an accurate model as observations do not tally with predictions. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jan 10, 2023 21:27:29 GMT
I disagree, when calculating the likelihood of an asteroid striking the Earth scientists did not need to include the earths wobble even though this wobble could mean an asteroid might hit or miss the earth. That's because the odds of such a wobble making a difference is infinitesimally small. However we are dealing with unknown effects and supposed effects and if any are missed out the model cannot assess its effect even if it transpires it is vanishingly small. Obviously they have not successfully created an accurate model as observations do not tally with predictions. If we were to consider the wing flap of each butterfly cooling the air we should never finish the calculations. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jan 10, 2023 21:38:55 GMT
However we are dealing with unknown effects and supposed effects and if any are missed out the model cannot assess its effect even if it transpires it is vanishingly small. Obviously they have not successfully created an accurate model as observations do not tally with predictions. If we were to consider the wing flap of each butterfly cooling the air we should never finish the calculations. Well perhaps that is the answer. If the Butterfly effect is of such an unknown agent in the prediction of weather, it seems reasonable to assume it could be the same for climate change most especially as the dissipation of heat to space may well depend on where the heat ends up on the planet. However they have generally stated they have finished the calculations on several occasions and published them with quite a fanfare and they have been shown to be wrong so there are variables they have not accounted for that are having an effect. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2023 22:06:04 GMT
However we are dealing with unknown effects and supposed effects and if any are missed out the model cannot assess its effect even if it transpires it is vanishingly small. Obviously they have not successfully created an accurate model as observations do not tally with predictions. If we were to consider the wing flap of each butterfly cooling the air we should never finish the calculations. Oh no, you're one of these people that leaves a fan on in a room to keep it cool, aren't you Zany?  |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jan 10, 2023 22:16:53 GMT
However we are dealing with unknown effects and supposed effects and if any are missed out the model cannot assess its effect even if it transpires it is vanishingly small. Obviously they have not successfully created an accurate model as observations do not tally with predictions. If we were to consider the wing flap of each butterfly cooling the air we should never finish the calculations. The idea of the butterfly effect has been dismissed as far as weather is concerned but scientists are still interested in what starts a tornado. A few years ago there was request for people to come forward with eye-witness accounts of the start of tornadoes. I didn't respond but back in the fifties I was fishing in the canal when I suddenly heard a swishing sound. I looked up to see a swirling mass of spiralling water rising from the canal on the opposite bank. It moved very rapidly in my direction and though I tried to get out of the way it came straight at me, hitting the bank immediately in front of me, drenching me with water as it fizzled out. Within a few seconds another one started, again on the opposite bank but probably five feet away from the original. That too fizzled out when it hit the bank having run a more erratic course than the first. A quite frightening experience. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jan 10, 2023 22:33:42 GMT
If we were to consider the wing flap of each butterfly cooling the air we should never finish the calculations. The idea of the butterfly effect has been dismissed as far as weather is concerned but scientists are still interested in what starts a tornado. A few years ago there was request for people to come forward with eye-witness accounts of the start of tornadoes. I didn't respond but back in the fifties I was fishing in the canal when I suddenly heard a swishing sound. I looked up to see a swirling mass of spiralling water rising from the canal on the opposite bank. It moved very rapidly in my direction and though I tried to get out of the way it came straight at me, hitting the bank immediately in front of me, drenching me with water as it fizzled out. Within a few seconds another one started, again on the opposite bank but probably five feet away from the original. That too fizzled out when it hit the bank having run a more erratic course than the first. A quite frightening experience. I'm not sure why you think you can talk down to me 90% of the time and then think I would be interested in your stories. You are a very strange person. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2023 5:14:15 GMT
Red's on the money here. Did you know one reason train drivers want to strike is that their £50k+ job of pushing a handle in a nice warm cabin is too much now because they are being asked to close the doors as well as push the handle. Yep, for £50 grand a year it is not enough to close the doors. Easy solution to the drivers problem - just introduce driverless trains, then nobody is upset and the problem solved. That would be a disaster waiting to happen. When the computer goes wrong and there is no annual override on board? |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jan 11, 2023 6:42:38 GMT
The idea of the butterfly effect has been dismissed as far as weather is concerned but scientists are still interested in what starts a tornado. A few years ago there was request for people to come forward with eye-witness accounts of the start of tornadoes. I didn't respond but back in the fifties I was fishing in the canal when I suddenly heard a swishing sound. I looked up to see a swirling mass of spiralling water rising from the canal on the opposite bank. It moved very rapidly in my direction and though I tried to get out of the way it came straight at me, hitting the bank immediately in front of me, drenching me with water as it fizzled out. Within a few seconds another one started, again on the opposite bank but probably five feet away from the original. That too fizzled out when it hit the bank having run a more erratic course than the first. A quite frightening experience. I'm not sure why you think you can talk down to me 90% of the time and then think I would be interested in your stories. You are a very strange person. I wanted to confirm that the butterfly effect has been denounced but thought my experience might raise questions as to what causes tornadoes. As to your comment, you think I'm the only one who talks down to you; now that is strange. There are very few, if any, who take note of your wild ramblings other than those trying to correct you; stop listening to the voices of your workforce and clientele, along with those in your head. |
|
