Re: [asa] A simple example

From: Bill Powers <wjp@swcp.com>
Date: Fri Dec 18 2009 - 09:53:16 EST

Bill:

Of perhaps greater significance is the character of chaotic events that
I mentioned a while ago. Detailed turbulent simulations have shown that
small scales (think turbulent and unmodeled in any detailed sense) can
work there way up to large scales (where we can measure it and call it
weather, even global weather).

I'm not sure, however, what your point is. Such a view would surely
support the possibility of a man induced climate change, and, for that
matter the influence of other unnoticed influences. What does your
point intend to get at?

thanks,

bill

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, William Hamilton wrote:

> Thanks, Rich.
>
> I will respond at greater length later -- you've touched on an issue that is
> discussed in Scafetta and West's papers, but I haven't looked at that for a
> while. I need to find the reference and reread it. The short answer is that
> the earth-sun system is a high order, nonlinear, chaotic system. Such
> systems demonstrate sensitive dependence on initial conditions, as well as
> superposition of oscillations at many different frequencies. See
>
> http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Stochastic_resonance
>
> C. Nicolis, Solar variability and stochastic effects on climate, Sol. Phys.
> 74, 473-478 (1981).
>
> C. Nicolis, Stochastic aspects of climatic transitions-response to a
> periodic forcing, Tellus 34, 1-9 (1982).
>
> It would also probably be useful if you haven't viewed it already, to view
> the video of Scafetta's talk at EPA last February. There's a link to it in
> my original message.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Even though resonance is theoretically possible before you go there you
>> need to answer the question of why wasn't there resonance for thousands of
>> years and suddenly in the mid-20th Century things just changed? Be10 proxy
>> studies have shown that solar irradiance AND the climate have responded in
>> sync with sunspots. The problem is that AGW has swamped this effect.
>> Prior to the mid-20th Century knowing the solar irradiance from Be10 and
>> when there were volcanic eruptions the proxy record can be explained by
>> mostly these two effects using computer model hindcasts. Furthermore, the
>> forcing was not resonant. It's was direct with a relatively short delay. In
>> short, you didn't need to model any resonance to explain the climate prior
>> to the Industrial Era. After the mid-20th Century there was a large
>> divergence, though, and the climate could not be explained by these natural
>> forces alone.
>>
>> The last few years the Sun has given us an excellent controlled experiment.
>> We have been stuck for several years with almost no sunspots and as late as
>> this year it looked like we might have a repeat Maunder Minimum. Thus, there
>> was good reason to believe that this would have a relative cooling effect on
>> the climate. So we have AGW and the Sun running against each other and we
>> can then see without the need of relying on computer models which is the
>> larger effect. The results of this "experiment"? The current decade is on
>> average 0.18 degrees C warmer than the 90s.
>>
>> Rich Blinne
>> Member ASA
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 8:38 AM, William Hamilton <
>> willeugenehamilton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have browsed through references supplied by Rich and Randy, and I will
>>> read them in more detail in the next few days. However, let me state a
>>> suspicion I have had for some time: I'm not convinced anyone (in the
>>> conventional climate change community) is considering the potential of
>>> resonance to cause temperature swings to grow with time -- even with very
>>> small excitation. I have put together a simple example using Mathematica,
>>> and the results are posted on my blog: bricolagia.blogspot.com. It's
>>> probably the simplest possible example, and I claim no resemblance to the
>>> earth/sun dynamics. However, it does demonstrate that with an excitation
>>> varying by 0.1 percent of the base value, there is no limit to the size of
>>> the response that can be realized. Although it's very crude (the efforts of
>>> a novice at Mathematica) I will gladly email my Mathematica file to anyone
>>> who asks.
>>>
>>> Let me take this opportunity to add my voice to Glenn's: We need a forum
>>> in which we can post charts and graphs.
>>>
>>> --
>>> William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
>>> Member American Scientific Affiliation
>>> Austin, TX
>>> 248 821 8156
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
> Member American Scientific Affiliation
> Austin, TX
> 248 821 8156
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Dec 18 09:53:49 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Dec 18 2009 - 09:53:49 EST