Sentences with phrase «by difference in temperature»

Ah, but you see, heat engines and conductive thermal transport are driven by differences in temperature, not energy.

Not exact matches

Oven temperatures are frequently off by as little as 25 degrees and it can make a big difference in something as finicky as a yeast bread.

The graph by temperature is interesting although it's still a small sample size of games for a relatively small difference in winning percentage.

The Tibetan Plateau in China experiences the strongest monsoon system on Earth, with powerful winds — and accompanying intense rains in the summer months — caused by a complex system of global air circulation patterns and differences in surface temperatures between land and oceans.

By measuring the remaining difference — the 20,000 - year old ice deep in the West Antarctic ice sheet is about 1 degree Celsius cooler than the surface — the scientists were able to estimate the original temperature based on how fast pure ice warms up.

Leading U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin signed a contract on Wednesday to design the biggest power station fueled by differences in ocean temperatures, a 10 - megawatt plant that would provide electricity for a new Asian resort.

Several weeks before Mount Tambora erupted, Raffles became the first European to ascend a nearby mountain known as Gunong Gede; by using thermometers to measure the difference in temperature between the base and the peak, Raffles and his companions determined that they had climbed at least seven thousand feet.

«What we found was that when the difference of the monthly average temperature in the current month compared with the previous one month increased by 1 degree, there was a 3 per cent increase in suicide in Brisbane and Sydney,» Dr Qi said.

A number of media outlets tried to link this recent cold outbreak with a wavier jet stream that is possibly caused by the reduction in temperature difference between a much warmer Arctic, which is heating up rapidly due to global warming, and the lower parts of the world.

(The term «Seebeck effect» refers to a thermoelectric phenomenon by which temperature differences between two dissimilar materials in a circuit generates a voltage.

The summer weather in the UK and northwest Europe is influenced by the position and strength of the Atlantic jet stream — a ribbon of very strong winds which are caused by the temperature difference between tropical and polar air masses.

Around 7.71 % of all deaths were caused by non-optimal temperatures, with substantial differences between countries, ranging from around 3 % in Thailand, Brazil, and Sweden to about 11 % in China, Italy, and Japan.

The movement of water in the ocean is determined by many factors including tides; winds; surface waves; internal waves, those that propagate within the layers of the ocean; and differences in temperature, salinity or sea level height.

The thermoelectric effect, in which charges are created by temperature differences, provides a way of transferring this heat into electricity — but only some of it.

Regional differences in temperature are more strongly affected by weather dynamics than the global mean.

By using simulations that were created by running the same model multiple times, with only tiny differences in the initial starting conditions, the scientists could examine the range of summertime temperatures we might expect in the future for the «business - as - usual» and reduced - emissions scenarioBy using simulations that were created by running the same model multiple times, with only tiny differences in the initial starting conditions, the scientists could examine the range of summertime temperatures we might expect in the future for the «business - as - usual» and reduced - emissions scenarioby running the same model multiple times, with only tiny differences in the initial starting conditions, the scientists could examine the range of summertime temperatures we might expect in the future for the «business - as - usual» and reduced - emissions scenarios.

In this work, we utilized differences in temperature to generate spin currents,» explained Gyung - Min Choi, lead author of the paper, «Spin current generated by thermally - driven ultrafast demagnetization,» published in Nature CommunicationIn this work, we utilized differences in temperature to generate spin currents,» explained Gyung - Min Choi, lead author of the paper, «Spin current generated by thermally - driven ultrafast demagnetization,» published in Nature Communicationin temperature to generate spin currents,» explained Gyung - Min Choi, lead author of the paper, «Spin current generated by thermally - driven ultrafast demagnetization,» published in Nature Communicationin Nature Communications.

A team led by Gary Meyers of the Hobart - based Division of Oceanography of CSIRO, Australia's national research organisation, has found that this through - flow lessens during an El Niño event, decreasing the temperature difference between the dipole's two bands of water and causing dry conditions in central and southern Australia.

The temperature difference between the day and night sides is indicative of energy flows in the planet's atmosphere, as transmitted by «weather.»

The plot shows models of the difference in temperature (x axis) against the offset of the «hot spot» caused by heat flow (y axis).

By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 C is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified

Examination at the time of diagnosis of Lyme disease revealed no significant differences by RFLP type in regard to size or duration of the primary erythema migrans lesion, oral temperature, or presence of lym phadenopathy (table 2).

density differences in water masses caused by temperature and salinity variations....

Nevertheless, the large dip during 2016 in both difference series is clearly down to rapid Arctic warming, as the following chart showing temperature anomaly by latitude makes very clear.

Pitman, A.J., B.J. McAvaney, N. Bagnoud, and B. Cheminat, 2004: Are inter-model differences in AMIP - II near surface air temperature means and extremes explained by land surface energy balance complexity?

As long as the temporal pattern of variation in aerosol forcing is approximately correct, the need to achieve a reasonable fit to the temporal variation in global mean temperature and the difference between Northern and Southern Hemisphere temperatures can provide a useful constraint on the net aerosol radiative forcing (as demonstrated, e.g., by Harvey and Kaufmann, 2002; Stott et al., 2006c).

The difference is that while BMR only measures basic processes of breathing, blood circulation, and temperature regulation in a completely resting state, RMR also includes energy expended by digestion and non-exercise daily movements, like getting dressed and lifting your fork to your mouth.

Just dropping by because I tried this recipe this weekend (without the protein powder, using pb instead of hazelnut butter) and I noticed a HUGE difference in taste when they were at room temperature vs. refrigerated vs. frozen.

With 755 horsepower the 2019 Chevrolet Corvette zr1 is the most powerful Corvette ever it's also the most technologically advanced behind me are the rolling s's at Road Atlanta and we're here to see if we can reach to the supercar levels of performance afforded by this thing's massive power big tires and the tall wing on the back after that we'll take to the streets to see if a car this powerful can behave itself in public this is a monster of a car I've had some brief track opportunities moving this morning to get used to the pace of this machine which is phenomenal we're gonna warm up as we get out to the road Atlanta and sort of build up to the pace that this car can operate at now initially when you hop in this car you have this shrine to the engine right above you you see the line of the hood it kind of dominates the center of the view you can see over it it doesn't affect visibility but it's immediately obvious and that kind of speaks to what makes this car special it's a monster of an engine listen to that [Music] that is tremendous tremendous acceleration and incredible power but what I finding so far my brief time here at the Atlanta is that everything else in the car is rut has risen to match hurt me while I lay into it on the back straight look you know 150 mile - an - hour indicated we're going to ease up a little bit on it because I need to focus on talking rather than driving but like I was saying the attributes of the rest of the car the steering the braking capability the grip every system of this car is riding to the same level of the power and I think that's what makes it really impressive initially this is undoubtedly a mega mega fast car but it's one that doesn't terrify you with its performance potential there's a level of electronic sophistication that is unparalleled at this price point but it's hard not to get you know totally slipped away by the power of this engine so that's why I keep coming back to it this car has an electronically controlled limited slip differential it has shocks filled with magnetically responsive fluid that can react faster to inputs and everything this car has a super sophisticated stability control system that teaches you how to drive it quick but also makes you go faster we haven't even gotten into exploring it yet because the limits of this car are so high that frankly it takes a while to grow into it but [Music] I think what's impressive about this car is despite how fast it is it is approachable you can buy this car to track dates with it and grow with it as a driver and as an owner I think that's a really special [Music] because you will never be more talented than this car is fast ever unless you are a racing driver casually grazing under 50 miles an hour on this straight okay I'm just going to enjoy driving this now [Music][Applause][Music] this particular Corvette zr1 comes with the cars track performance package a lot of those changes happen underneath the sheet metal but one of the big differences that is immediately obvious is this giant carbon fiber wing now the way this thing is mounted is actually into the structure of the vehicle and it makes you know loading the rear hatch a bit more difficult but we're assuming that's okay if you're looking for the track performance this thing delivers also giving you that performance are these Michelin Pilot Sport cup tires which are basically track oriented tires that you can drive on the street but as we wake our way to the front of the thing what really matters is what's under the hood that's right there's actually a hole in the hood of this thing and that's because this engine is so tall it's tall because it has a larger supercharger and a bunch of added cooling on it to help it you know keep at the right temperature the supercharger is way larger than the one on the zo six and it has a more cooling capacity and the downside is it's taller so it pops literally through the hood the cool thing is from the top you can actually see this shake when you're looking at it from you know a camera from the top of the vehicle this all makes for 755 horsepower making this the most powerful Corvette ever now what's important about that is this not just the power but likewise everything in the car has to be built to accommodate and be able to drive to the level of speed this thing can develop that's why you had the massive cooling so I had the aerodynamics and that's why I had the electronic sophistication inside [Applause] we had a lot of time to take this car on the track yesterday and I've had the night to think about things Matt today two crews on the road and see how this extreme performance machine deals with the sort of more civil minded stuff of street driving the track impressions remain this thing is unquestionably one of the most capable cars you can get from a dealer these days a lot of that's besides the point now because we're on the street we have speed limits they have the ever - present threat of law enforcement around every corner so the question is what does this car feel like in public when you slow this car down it feels like a more powerful Corvette you don't get much tram lining from these big wheels though we as the front end doesn't want to follow grooves in the pavement it is louder it is a little firmer but it's certainly livable on a day to day basis that's surprising for a vehicle of this capability normally these track oriented cars are so hardcore that you wouldn't want to drive them to the racetrack but let's face it you spend more time driving to the track than you do on the track and the fact that this thing works well in both disciplines is really impressive I can also dial everything back and cruise and not feel like I'm getting punished for driving a hardcore track machine that's a that's a really nice accomplishment that's something that you won't find in cars that are this fast and costs maybe double this much the engine in this car dominates the entire experience you can't miss the engine and the whole friend this car is sort of a shrine to it the way it pops out of the hood the way it's covered with coolers around the sides it is the experience of this car and that does make driving this thing special and also the fact that it doesn't look half bad either in fact I think it has some of the coolest looking wheels currently available on a new car this car as we mentioned this car has the track package the track package on this car gives you what they call competition bucket seats which are a little wide for my tastes but I'm you know not the widest person in the world this automatic transmission works well I mean there's so much torque again out of this engine that it can be very smooth and almost imperceptible its clunky on occasion I think I'd might opt for the manual although Chevy tells me about 80 % of its customers will go for the automatic I don't think they're gonna be disappointed and that's gonna be the faster transmission drag strip on the street - and on the racetrack man it was a little bit more satisfying to my taste though we've talked about the exhaust I have it set in the track setting let's quiet it down a little bit so you can hear the difference now I've set that separately from everything else so let's put it stealth what happened to the engine sound that's pretty that's pretty amazing man stealth is really stealth and then go back to track Wow actually a really big difference that's that's pretty great the Corvette has always been a strong value proposition and nowhere is that more evident than this zr1 giving you a nearly unbeatable track performance per dollar now the nice thing is on the road this doesn't feel like a ragged edge track machine either you could genuinely drive it every day the compromises are few and that's what makes this car so special if you like what you see keep it tuned right here and be sure to visit Edmunds.com [Music]

So to me the graphic is correct i.e. Corrections applied by GISS have increased the difference between the January 1910 and January 2000 temperature from 0.43 C in 2008 to 0.71 C in 2016.

But wouldn't a closer model be the first order ODE, where the difference between absorbed solar power and lost black body power has to equal the change in temperature with respect to time multiplied by the terrestrial and atmospheric combined heat capacity:

By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 C is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified

Neglecting the significance of the large regional differences in past temperature changes is another classic pitfall in the arguments put forward by many climate change contrarians (see Myth # 2 here).

The significant difference between the observed decrease of the CO2 sink estimated by the inversion (0.03 PgC / y per decade) and the expected increase due solely to rising atmospheric CO2 -LRB--0.05 PgC / y per decade) indicates that there has been a relative weakening of the Southern Ocean CO2 sink (0.08 PgC / y per decade) due to changes in other atmospheric forcing (winds, surface air temperature, and water fluxes).

Given this, it is quite clear that any reduction in the efficiency of upward radiation (by, say, reflecting it right back down again), will have to be compensated for by increasing the air / sea (skin) temperature difference, hence having a warmer subsurface temperature.

The argument isn't actually as firm a constraint as generally believed, since the infrared radiative cooling of the atmosphere is affected by the temperature difference between air and the underlying surface, which can adjust to accommodate any amount of evaporation Nature wants to dump into the atmosphere (as shown in Pierrehumbert 1999 («Subtropical water vapor...» available here)-RRB-.

But in the data gaps, it consists of satellite data that have been converted to near - surface temperatures, where the difference between the two is determined by a kriging interpolation from the edges.

Before allowing the temperature to respond, we can consider the forcing at the tropopause (TRPP) and at TOA, both reductions in net upward fluxes (though at TOA, the net upward LW flux is simply the OLR); my point is that even without direct solar heating above the tropopause, the forcing at TOA can be less than the forcing at TRPP (as explained in detail for CO2 in my 348, but in general, it is possible to bring the net upward flux at TRPP toward zero but even with saturation at TOA, the nonzero skin temperature requires some nonzero net upward flux to remain — now it just depends on what the net fluxes were before we made the changes, and whether the proportionality of forcings at TRPP and TOA is similar if the effect has not approached saturation at TRPP); the forcing at TRPP is the forcing on the surface + troposphere, which they must warm up to balance, while the forcing difference between TOA and TRPP is the forcing on the stratosphere; if the forcing at TRPP is larger than at TOA, the stratosphere must cool, reducing outward fluxes from the stratosphere by the same total amount as the difference in forcings between TRPP and TOA.

But SST by itself is not the main factor in the existing theory for the upper bound on tropical cyclone intensity, known as the potential intensity; instead, the potential intensity depends more nearly in the difference between SST and a measure of the bulk temperature of the troposphere as well as the temperature of the tropopause.

My attention was drawn in August to a draft version of a paper by Phil Klotzbach and colleagues that discussed the differences between global temperature products.

If a doubling of CO2 resulted in a temperature increase of approximately 1 K before any non-Planck feedbacks (before water vapor, etc.), then assuming the same climate sensitivity to the total GHE, removing the whole GHE would result in about a (setting the TOA / tropopause distinction aside, as it is relatively small relative to the 155 W / m2 value) 155/3.7 * 1 K ~ = 42 K. Which is a bit more than 32 or 33 K, though I'm not surprised by the difference.

This head difference may be caused by density, temperature, wind and / or coriollis effects, but never the less every element is moved by the relative position of the immediately adjacent elements in the stream.

During a period in which surface warming is stifled by internal variability the rate of energy accumulation would be influenced only by the forcing — there would be no difference between a high - sensitivity model and a zero - feedback model (assuming zero - dimensional models; the reality, with regionally varying temperatures and feedbacks, would be more complex).

(given by the Planck function or spectral blackbody flux / area, respectively, for T = BT, except when BT is the difference between upward and downward brightness temperatures, in which case the differences between Planck functions or blackbody fluxes must be used)

As we only have one instrumental temperature trend, the difference between the two estimates for solar sensitivities means that a larger influence must be compensated by a smaller influence of the GHG / aerosol tandem, to fit the temperature trend in the past century...

One way we now know and what cavemen did not know, is how you can use energy to alter temperatures, so by using temperature differences we also can create energy and this in turn can be used to spilt water into hydrogen and oxygen.

The main post here uses the Box data under the assumption that temperature differences determined by the same method are likely to be correct in terms of relative position, but when compared to records determined by other methods there may be biases (possibly unknown) which distort the result.

Instead, dynamics is driven by gradients and differences, in temperatures and other variables.

By your calculation, if we are able to reduce today's emission rate of by 50 % in the next 40 years (by 2050) to result in 450 ppm, then maintain that emission rate for the next 50 years (by 2100) to 500 ppm, the resulting difference in temperature would potentially be 2.2 deg By your calculation, if we are able to reduce today's emission rate of by 50 % in the next 40 years (by 2050) to result in 450 ppm, then maintain that emission rate for the next 50 years (by 2100) to 500 ppm, the resulting difference in temperature would potentially be 2.2 deg by 50 % in the next 40 years (by 2050) to result in 450 ppm, then maintain that emission rate for the next 50 years (by 2100) to 500 ppm, the resulting difference in temperature would potentially be 2.2 deg by 2050) to result in 450 ppm, then maintain that emission rate for the next 50 years (by 2100) to 500 ppm, the resulting difference in temperature would potentially be 2.2 deg by 2100) to 500 ppm, the resulting difference in temperature would potentially be 2.2 deg C?

Raw climate model results for a business - as - usual scenario indicate that we can expect global temperatures to increase anywhere in the range of 5.8 and 10.6 degrees Fahrenheit (3.2 to 5.9 degrees Celsius) over preindustrial levels by the end of the century — a difference of about a factor of two between the most - and least - severe projections.