Weatherlawyer
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 4:37 am Post subject: Cloud theory |
 |
|
Forgive the massive snippage. Everything you have written is exactly
what I hav been trying to say. So now we have established which hymn
sheet we are on, let>s start singing.
I have stated (on uk.sci.weather or somewhere) that the weather and
earthquakes -and related events, appear as electrons on an atom and as
satellits in a solar system. One fluid gathers around its field
exactly as any other fluid will gather in its field.
I take umbrage with the use of the term chaos theory though and appeal
to designed creationism as the model for the behaviours of things that
erstwhile seem chaotic.
The analogy of a cloud is a very good one as the definition of a fluid
is a difficult one. Fluids can easily be described in the things they
don>t do. But there are lots of things that all sorts of other things
don>t do too.
My best attempt at the definition of fluids as a generic description,
is that fluids gather about a field and are distributed in that field
according to the forces of attraction and repulsion of the field for
that fluid.
Thus satellites gather around the host planet/star accorfing the the
Bois - Bodes Law, electrons gather about nuclei as laws of Band Theory
et al, and atomns are distributed among molecules in similar manners.
Through them all, they have this similarity of distances and
distributions.
So it is with earthquakes and weather. There are patterns such as the
satellite quakes for the Highs that fall off the USA at Cape Hatteras.
Look at the distances to the recent Chilean and Fox Islands quakes
from the point of confluence of the Gulf Stream just off the
Carolinas.
There are others too. I wrote to the Indian forecaster Shan something
or other, that his methods work for storms and if he inclused
possibilities for typhoons in his predictions he would hardly ever
fail in his warnings. But he is hooked on magma/plate tectonics theory
and wrote me off, as many are wont to do.
Then there is the illness factor.
I bet when the prophet wrote that "god gave gifts in men" he was
alluding to the fact that shamans are prone to ailments that can be
used to forecast events. It>s probably what shamanism and most pagan
religions were built on before any particular culture was subverted by
its politics.
Possibly why most pagan rekligions have the same astronomical
concepts. Perhaps that is why StoneHenge and Totem Poles were built
originally, to gain insight to lunar behaviours, thus to predict
possible weather or consequent geophysical behaviour.
Just because the pagan religions are ignored does not mean our
ancestors were monkeys. Suppose they were intelligent. But I digress.
I had cramps again just now, by my guess about the same time as
California had these:
2.6 08/01 02:34 33.9 -117.7 GREATER LOS ANGELES AREA,
CALIFORNIA
3.5 08/01 02:308 40.4 -125.3 OFFSHORE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
I had a bad event the same time as that 5.4. I couldn>t understand why
there were no tornadoes with them. That almost always happened with
cramps before.
So that explains a lot. I also had some back joints "crick" which I
put down to the work I>d been doing and because I was sitting down
too much after work.
I really need to stay on the ball for things like that but the fact is
these things zap me mentally. It>s like my brain has had its RAM
wiped. The jobs I have lost because of it. Very frustrating.
I am in the middle of writing a long missive about the theory of
everything -some of which I have posted to my blog: >
http://groups.google.com/group/Weather_Clusters/browse_frm/thread/dd5eccb92df93941
I have been sidetracked by losing messages that won>t cross from
Encyclopedia Britannica to Open Office. Not that I can follow the
maths, I am just after the concepts though, so it should be easy. It>s
just that the blanks that appear in the pasted text put me off.
It may explain the behaviour of manic depression. You get a mind
wiping downer that nothing works in then a huge bang when the brain
rushes to catch up. And I start writing this stuff in moments of
translucent clarity which soon silts up as the genius is depleted and
I go for another low point.
I don>t get the thrills with discovery anymore that I used to get a
kick out of. The downers are just as sheer efingelish though. And
expensive.
Anyway manias aside, it>s nice to know I am not the only one working
on the overall problem of Fluids.
There is more from me on tornadoes in the Skywarn Forum -which banned
me a few weeks back so I never quite got around to finishing. If you
know anyone with a penchant for arthitis and leg cramps you might ask
them to consider investigating the concepts I propounded there.
Gots ta go.
Work calleth. |
|
jonathan
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:26 am Post subject: Re: predictions.... |
|
|
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e54df3f9-0277-4aea-a945-4ee0d7f0bd49@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
[quote]On Jul 31, 2:03 am, "jonathan" <H...@write.instead.net> wrote:
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlaw...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7e7c5e63-7e68-4a58-8969-f2a8aa629609@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
[/quote]
[quote]And so it must be for whatever the cause of weather is and thus by
extension, the earthquakes related in some way to the weather. QED,
earthqauakes and weather have the same cause.
I think I need to cover that next. The next spell is a difficult on to
predict and the reason has a lot to do with the fact the planet is a
fluid and goes critical at certain stages of its fluid dynamic.
[/quote]
[quote]How life, geology and everything are related...power law dynamics.
Once self organized and behaving critically that is. The relationships
are only seen on the ....output side...through behavioral properties.
Not in part property relationships. Holism not reductionism.
Power law
A few notable examples of power laws are the Gutenberg-Richter law for
earthquake sizes, Pareto>s law of income distribution, structural
self-similarity of fractals, and scaling laws in biological systems. Research
on
the origins of power-law relations, and efforts to observe and validate them
in
the real world, is an active topic of research in many fields of science,
including physics, computer science, linguistics, geophysics, sociology,
economics and more.
Power-law relations characterize a staggering number of naturally occurring
phenomena, and this is one of the principal reasons why they have attracted
interest. For instance, inverse-square laws, such as gravitation and the
Coulomb
force, are power laws, as are many common mathematical formulae such as the
quadratic law of area of the circle. However it is mainly in the the study of
probability distributions that power laws have attracted recent interest. A
wide
variety of observed probability distributions appear, at least approximately,
to
have tails asymptotically following power-law forms, an observation connected
closely with the study of theory of large deviations (also called extreme
value
theory), which considers the frequency of extremely rare events like stock
market crashes and large natural disasters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_law
[/quote]
[quote]We are about to hit another peak.
[/quote]
[quote]
That>s the first time I have ever come across somebody willing to
consider what I am saying. Fancy that, after all these years. There is
a million dollars waiting in prize money for the people who can crack
the code of fluid dynamics too. You>d think there would be more
interest.
[/quote]
My hobby is the new field called complexity science. It>s was originally
called chaos theory (using a cloud as the 'integral' so to speak).
Then evolved into the science of self organizing systems, when many
were also calling it the 'Fourth' Law of Thermodynamics.
Now it>s all grown into the broader field called complexity science.
But at heart it>s thermodynamics. Only placed in entirely abstract
form so it can be applied across /all/ the disciplines....all of them.
A truly interdiscplinary science.
It applies to any system which is typically considered evolving.
From physical systems to life, if the system is self organized
and it>s componensts are critically interacting, as in a cloud, then
the outward behavior often becomes simple and universal.
SOS faq ( a concise brief intro)
http://www.calresco.org/sos/sosfaq.htm
A much more detailed intro, and in essay form.
http://www.calresco.org/themes.htm
Dynamics of Complex Systems. (the math in detail)
http://necsi.org/publications/dcs/
The more complex, using the new meaning of the term, the
simpler and more universal the behavior. What this means
is that universal laws are best seen in the most complex
the universe has to offer, such as life. Not in the simplest the
universe has to offer as particle physics and most of objective
science has assumed from day one. Universal law is now to be
found from the output of the whole, not the small scale
details of it>s particles.
Funny thing is, once the science began to mature, it became
clear that thermodynamics serves as the source for the
abstract properties of Darwinian evolution. The 'Fourth Law'
of self organization that balances the disordering tendency of
the Second Law.
There is an elegance to the universe that reductionist or objective
methods can>t see. Since they begin with the components first
emergent system behaviors are lost as soon as the system
is stopped long enough to detail. Like a market force vanishing
the minute you decide to quantify every component and
relationship that exists in a market. The self tuning tendencies
only exist when the whole is intact and operating.
This means that proof in the usual sense can>t be found.
Since large complex systems cannot be quantified very
well, only simulated. But when you translate a particular
system into the abstract, suddenly you start seeing the
same patterns emerging everywhere.
The most complex systems that exist display the simplest
most predictable behavior of all.
[quote]
I was trying to recap what I have gathered over the years just before
reading your reply. I wasn>t written with anyone in mind. Just as a
rough guide to the principle that if you tell someone a truth they
can>t admit to they will get irritated:
Any old axiom
You are probably familiar with Jim Birks who has raised the ire of his
peers in California over the idea that earthquakes are tidal. You may
not be so familiar with a fellow from Coimbatore India who was
claiming how he could forecast them from the sundial he had set up in
his garden.
These men may have the wrong explanation for the results they have
found but it unreasonable to expect them to adhere dilligently with
the claims they maintain if they can not see some grain of truth in
their discoveries.
Both men have jobs or had jobs of some responsibility. And seem to be
competent citizens. And they exhibit classic scholarly traits too as
well as being less anxious to go to war with anyone that wants a fight
than I am.
That their discoveries do or do not hold water I can not say. I don>t
try to claim the impossibly narrow windows that the science of
seismology has set itself. I can see that that degree of accuracy is a
design fault ...dreamt up by adherents of a quasi autonomous
religious sect that don>t know what they are talking about. If I am to
be judged by such ideas by you; stop reading now.
I won>t stop writing what I find and you will only get more and more
upset over it.
As it happens, I too claim that the cause of the weather is lunar -if
not tidal in the conventional concept of tides. I might be inveigled
to digress on that subject if someone asks me nicely. I will not be
dropped on by a mob of shayt-hawks who don>t have the insight of lice.
So be warned.
This is what I know. I don>t claim to have done the research and
whatever in the conventional sense. I can>t PROVE anything. And I
won>t be ordred to neither.
There is too much to learn all at once for a man to spend a lifetime
collating tables he will not have the character to consult. I am not
paid for my work and thus excuse myself in doing only the portions of
it that appeal to me.
The recompence I get is in being able to post with the temerity I have
been posting, knowning that in the little I have done I have
accomplished a lot compared to what is at present being done.
The state of the art in geology at the moment seems to consist of:
Which tropical paradise can we afford to destroy at the moment, in the
demand for oil. And:
Which theory is the correct one that will tell us how old the earth
is. As if that particular endeavour will be useful for anything.
[/quote]
Right, predicting the future is what>s important. Only, that ability
is limited by the non-linear character of the real world. Just
like an earthquake, with countless small changes and the
rare big one.A power law distribution of events. The pattern
is easily recognizable, but predicting the big one is impossible.
Chaos with order.
All organized systems are a balance, a partnership, of behavior
that is simple, orderly and easy to predict. And behavior
that is chaotic and impossible to predict. but when this
balance is persistant, the system spontaneously begins organizing
or evolving. A cloud shows this critical relationship that exists
universally. A cloud is when condensation (simplicity) and
evaporation (chaos) are entractably entangled, so that neither
force wins. The whole (a cloud) stands persistantly poised at the
transition between subcritical and supercritical behavior.
When that happens emergent properties appear which require
new definitions. Like thunder and tornadoes and such.
With a society, the subcritical or simple behavior would be
the rule of law, and the supercritical or chaotic behavior would
be freedom. When in balance and interacting in a complex
way, the whole begins self tuning and organizing....evolving.
Same as with Darwinian evolution, when the realm of fixed
rules, genetics, is balanced with the realm that randomizes
such as mutation. Natural selection emerges from this
relationship and the system begins hill climbing and
evolving.
Or a market force! Product vs consumer.
Or light....matter and energy entractably entagled
so that one can>t tell which-is-which at any given
time. Stop it to measure and it becomes...everytime...
one-or-the-other. When in motion it behaves as a
wave and a particle at the same time.
All self organized or critically interacting components
have this same behavioral duality. When in motion
the system can>t be precisely quantified. When broken
apart to measure, the emergent self tuning properties
vanish. And like with a market system, it>s the emergent
self tuning problem solving abilities that define the....future
of the system more than any other variable.
So there>s a catch-22 with reality. Only the least important
aspects of reality can be accurately detailed or proven in
the classical sense. The most important variables can
only be seen in the outward behavior of the most complex
systems. And only in subjective ways.
[quote]
For the life of me I can>t see why I should be abused for my work when
we have the merits of those two to debate.
Be that as it may here is what I "know" to the limits of my endurance.
If you demand proof, you will have to supply it yourself or its
refute. Please yourself -but don>t pester me with either. Thank you
very much in advance.
[/quote]
Proof only exists for that which is unimportant to understanding
reality. Subjective methods are for universal law. Complexity
science has also managed to solve the problem of having
subjective methods agree with different observers.
For instance, a cloud. Just about any rational observer can
tell the difference between a vapor and a puddle ~
It>s when it>s both and neither, a cloud, when the interesting
properties emerge. You can>t see these emergent properties
when it>s a puddle or vapor, only when it>s at criticality.
So the idea becomes to learn how to recognize critical behavior
in the abstract, so you can see it in any system. As that
is when the system at hand shows it>s true character
and simplicity.
[quote]
1.The Moon and its effect.
To be continued.
[/quote]
I don>t care what anyone says, the biggest scientific truths
are yet to be discovered. We still live in the Dark Ages.
Jonathan
s |
|
