Sentences with phrase «simple physics models»

«Simple physics models are elegant and can explain a lot,» says study coauthor Dan Zitterbart, a physicist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts.

So you fall back on a very simple physics model and say, it explains it all.

Not exact matches

We have leaned that the physics and the models that he put forward are flawed, but it doesn; t change Gravity's existence... and it doesn't change the fact that his simple mathematical models for it still work pretty well.

Mathematicians have developed many mathematical models with very simple rules (analogous to laws of physics).

Simple «spin models» used to explain magnetism can precisely reproduce any possible phenomenon in classical, non-quantum physics, according to scientists at the MPQ and UCL.

«Our paper demonstrates that a very small energy scale can at least be naturally generated within the context of a very simple extension of the standard model of particle physics.»

«Economics made simple with physics models: Snapshot of the study of economic phenomena using the tools of physics.»

The strength of classical physics was that calculations were simple and could be used to model really large molecules.

After years of watching engineers model traffic flow with advanced physics to alleviate jams, a team of urban planners called Shared Space have adopted a simple solution based on a zoological concept known as the risk compensation effect.

This simple statistical physics model is believed to describe many contact processes in nature such as the spreading of forest fires or of an epidemic in a population.

Following the reductionist approach of physics, his plan was to construct simple computer models of the brain that employed a variety of learning algorithms and «see which ones work,» said Hinton, who splits his time between the University of Toronto, where he is a professor of computer science, and Google.

Using historical data from horizontal wells in the Barnett Shale formation in North Texas, Tad Patzek, professor and chair in the Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering in the Cockrell School of Engineering; Michael Marder, professor of physics in the College of Natural Sciences; and Frank Male, a graduate student in physics, used a simple physics theory to model the rate at which production from the wells declines over time, known as the «decline curve.»

As a whole, now the conceptual transition occurs from proving the inflationary paradigm in general and testing some of its simplest models to applying it for investigation of particle physics at super-high energies and of the actual history of the Universe in the remote past using observational data.

The goal of physics should be, we are told, to make a model as simple as it can be and no simpler.

For example, Kevin Rosso and Paul Meakin produced an article in the Journal of Chemical Physics on simple kinetic Monte Carlo models for dissolution pitting induced by crystal defences.

«Simple physics (effect of [sea - level rise] on storm surge) and simple thermodynamics (i.e. Clausius - Clapeyron) are valid whether or not we can trust the models to get the specifics dynamical linkages between climate change and extreme weather events right (and I'm deeply skeptical the models are up to this task at present).&Simple physics (effect of [sea - level rise] on storm surge) and simple thermodynamics (i.e. Clausius - Clapeyron) are valid whether or not we can trust the models to get the specifics dynamical linkages between climate change and extreme weather events right (and I'm deeply skeptical the models are up to this task at present).&simple thermodynamics (i.e. Clausius - Clapeyron) are valid whether or not we can trust the models to get the specifics dynamical linkages between climate change and extreme weather events right (and I'm deeply skeptical the models are up to this task at present).»

-LSB-...] capitalization - to - gross national product, and the equity q ratio, all three examined together in The Physics Of Investing In Expensive Markets: How to Apply Simple Statistical Models).

For more on market value - to - GNP see my earlier posts Warren Buffett Talks... Total Market Value - To - Gross National Product, Warren Buffett and John Hussman On The Stock Market, FRED on Buffett's favored market measure: Total Market Value - to - GNP, The Physics Of Investing In Expensive Markets: How to Apply Simple Statistical Models.

The best explanation I have seen for wariness at various points in the market is Butler Philbrick Gordillo's in The Physics Of Investing In Expensive Markets: How to Apply Simple Statistical Models:

Developers are constantly pushing the limits of current - gen hardware to achieve photo - realistic graphics, complex physics engines and painstakingly detailed car models, but I've been longing to see the return of simple driving games that aren't so concerned with realism and instead focus on fun gameplay.

Damage models, physics and controls are made simple.

It's the code that takes care of the seemingly simple stuff that's universal to most games, like interpreting controller inputs, pulling up the appropriate graphics and sound, and modeling the physics.

3) Simpler models can be designed to fit many aspects of the global temperature time series, or the most straightforward aspects of the atmospheric dynamics (Q - G models with dry physics for instance)(See Held, 2005 in BAMS for more examples).

The basic physics is illustrated very nicely in a simple «toy model» developed by Thomas Stocker and Sigfus Johnsen.

Gavin says in # 463: [Response: You confuse statistical forecasting which knows nothing about the underlying physics (and in your case is simple linear extrapolation) with physical modelling based on first principles.

While the Berkeley Earth team values the simplicity of the model (indeed, in physics the simple model is generally considered the best), Curry is not convinced and thinks it is overly simplistic.

[Response: You confuse statistical forecasting which knows nothing about the underlying physics (and in your case is simple linear extrapolation) with physical modelling based on first principles.

The weakening of the Walker circulation arises in these models from processes that are fundamentally different from those of El Nià ± o — and is present in both mixed - layer and full - ocean coupled models, so is not dependent on the models» ability to represent Kelvin waves (by the way, most of the IPCC - AR4 models have sufficient oceanic resolution to represent Kelvin waves and the physics behind them is quite simple — so of all the model deficiencies to focus on this one seems a little odd).

In many cases this is true, but some results (like lapse rate) derive from simple physics built into the models (this doesn't mean it's correct, but means the implications are greater if it is wrong).

That model is, after all, ultimately derived from fairly simple physics and directly measured data.

This is based on simple math and what we know about the physics of the climate — no fancy models needed.

The physics behind the main mechanisms in these models is pretty simple (something like high school or college physics).

I directed you to the RealClimate post because it was a simple explanation of the basic physics of why rising atmospheric CO2 is a problem — physics that don't rely upon computer models.

Anyway, do you agree that there is a major difference between the «simple physics» versions («CO2 acts like a giant blanket») and the more sophisticated radiative physics - based models used in the global climate models (for instance)?

Originally posted on... and Then There's Physics: Okay, I finally succumbed and actually waded through some of the new paper by Monckton, Soon, Legates & Briggs called Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model.

«rather we need to bring additional physics and theory (e.g. entropy and the 2nd law) into the simple models....»

IMO, the standard 1D energy balance model of the Earth's climate system will provide little in the way of further insights; rather we need to bring additional physics and theory (e.g. entropy and the 2nd law) into the simple models, and explore the complexity of coupled nonlinear climate system characterized by spatiotemporal chaos.

There IS a heat source and a physical reality, that requires no forcing to give it super powers as with puny CO2 the palnts gobble up as much as they can get of, in fact.And explains the stable ice age and the Milankovitch linked interglacials, and how that sawtooth between repeated and predicatble limits can be driven using known energy sources, specific heats and masses, plus simple deterministic physics, no statistical models or Piltdown Mann data set approaches.

This «simple physics» model becomes a bit more complex when we factor - in the «positive feedbacks» — changes in reflectivity as snow and ice melt; as vegetation shifts; etc..

Anyway, I very much appreciate your approach of using simple models to illustrate the pure physics that most people can accept.

Even the models used to describe how phytoplankton production is sustained were driven by relatively simple concepts relying on mechanistic relationships between the algae, water chemistry and physics, and the light environment...

The simplest use of models I have seen is for a controlled experiment with a small change to the model (e.g. a potential improvement to how it implements some piece of the physics), against a control run (typically the previous run without the latest change), and against the observational data.

A useful way of demonstrating that simplicity is to use a stripped down mathematical model that is complex enough to include some interesting physics, but simple enough so that you can just write down the answer.