Sentences with phrase «into equilibrium so»

Get your gut back into equilibrium so your waistline will follow.

Not exact matches

Hunt: It hasn't necessarily been resolved in so much as just come into an equilibrium.

So when the Flood and the magnetic field is taken into account, it is reasonable to believe that the Assumption of equilibrium is a false one.

It is by avoiding the rapid decay into an inert system of equilibrium that a thunderstorm appears so extraordinary.

Stan is merely biding his time until the club settles into a state of equilibrium so he can start raking in the chips.

English: Congestion Pricing Equilibrium (Photo credit: Wikipedia) Things move so fast for writers who have taken publishing into their own hands.

So while I'm confident of a step - up here, based on the revenue / earnings drivers I've fully confirmed already (vs. those still to be confirmed), I'm also conscious that changes in fee rates / AUME, sterling, possible new business investment, etc. could eat into this earnings step - up, and / or a new revenue & earnings equilibrium might simply re-emerge (albeit, at higher levels).

So isn't rapidly extracting and burning all that concentrated form of carbon and turning it into dispersed carbon dioxide increasing the planet's entropy very quickly, thus taking us very quickly closer to thermodynamic equilibrium and ultimately the planet's death?

The standard assumption has been that, while heat is transferred rapidly into a relatively thin, well - mixed surface layer of the ocean (averaging about 70 m in depth), the transfer into the deeper waters is so slow that the atmospheric temperature reaches effective equilibrium with the mixed layer in a decade or so.

Since the energy emitted goes like T ^ 4 power, the earth thus emits less energy back into space, which is why it has to warm (until it reaches a temperature when the earth is again emitting as much energy back out into space as it receives from the sun and so is back in equilibrium).

In equilibrium, all fluxes into the surface will be balanced by fluxes out of the surface (including momentum, etc, as well as energy), so whatever lies beneath the surface gives the surface an effective heat capacity and also (in the oceans) some ability for local / regional imbalances to be balanced globally, with all of that responding to forcings and PR+CR and other feedbacks at the surface.

For example, if the Earth got cold enough, the encroachment of snow and ice toward low latitudes (where they have more sunlight to reflect per unit area), depending on the meridional temperature gradient, could become a runaway feedback — any little forcing that causes some cooling will cause an expansion of snow and ice toward lower latitudes sufficient to cause so much cooling that the process never reaches a new equilibrium — until the snow and ice reach the equator from both sides, at which point there is no more area for snow and ice to expand into.

Rock doesn't move during the short time scales needed for the surface to come into equilibrium, so the only vertical heat transport is by diffusion.

The first rate seems to be far slower because there are no winds in the stratosphere so that equilibrium can only be reached by diffusion of heat which is really slow; on the other hand we are pumpimg around 1.5 ppm of CO2 into the troposphere every year, over a base value of around 380 ppm.

So, if you instantaneously put a lot of GHGs into an atmosphere that starts in equilibrium, radiative outflow < inflow and temperature starts rising.

Over very long time periods such that the carbon cycle is in equilibrium with the climate, one gets a sensitivity to global temperature of about 20 ppm CO2 / deg C, or 75 ppb CH4 / deg C. On shorter timescales, the sensitivity for CO2 must be less (since there is no time for the deep ocean to come into balance), and variations over the last 1000 years or so (which are less than 10 ppm), indicate that even if Moberg is correct, the maximum sensitivity is around 15 ppm CO2 / deg C. CH4 reacts faster, but even for short term excursions (such as the 8.2 kyr event) has a similar sensitivity.

Some of the accumulated heat will be released into the air above, the equilibrium has been disrupted, cooler surface, followed by more heat absorbing from the source above, and so on, result surface temperature oscillation (the AMO).

These same parcels are large enough to be macroscopically in hydrostatic equilibrium, supported by the well - defined pressure of their neighboring parcels of fluid and at rest, locked in place by the dynamic viscosity so that to move them one has to do work or otherwise input external energy into a parcel to destabilize them, overcoming «friction».

The fact that the estimates based on the instrumental period tend to peak low has probably more to do with the fact that the climate has not been in equilibrium during that entire instrumental period and so therefore converting the sensitivity computed into an equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS), which is what is being discussed, requires some guesswork (and, dare I say it — modelling).

No: that is the beauty of using top of atmosphere radiative balance data — it automatically reflects the flow of heat into the ocean, so thermal inertia of the oceans is irrelevant to the estimate of equilibrium climate sensitivity that it provides, unlike with virtally all other instrumental methods.

At the risk of oversimplifying, I'll condense to the problem into a single reservoir, the upper ocean, in [quasi] equilibrium with the atmosphere, so that the partial pressure of CO2, pCO2, is equal in each compartment.

Forcing more CO2 into the atmosphere does very little to raise ocean temperature so the equilibrium point doesn't really change.

The only net exchange going on is within the bounds of the 2nd Law; for example, when pouring hot water into a cup already half filled with cold water the first amount of hotter will have its heat taken by the colder so reducing its own and it then becomes the colder to the hot water coming after it, even while it is still hotter than the colder first in the cup still taking its heat — and so the net exchange in this to equilibrium.

The difference with S&B's equation is that it introduces a term for the stochastic properties of clouds, N and breaks F into - ^ T and f; f is ACO2 and - ^ T is a total feedback term which must be negative so that an infinite equilibrium is impossible.

In the atmosphere, you do not have a closed system, so such thermal equilibrium can hardly be present, given that all manner of things, are driving radiant energy into any volume of atmosphere, as well as conductive, and mass transport (convective) energy transfers are taking place.

«We were almost at equilibrium at the peak, so we were in a good position going into a downturn, unlike the 1990s,» Korpacz said.

Before I spiraled myself into a full - blown panic attack, we decided to make the trip back down to a level that didn't mess with my equilibrium so much.

Acclimation Because wood expands and contracts depending on the level of moisture in the air, wood and some laminate flooring should sit in your house for two to three days before installation so it has a chance to come into equilibrium with your home's moisture content.