Sentences with phrase «least of the equilibrium»

Not exact matches

One of his views that always stuck with me on that subject, at least as a starting point for thinking about it, was that it was somewhat nonsensical to talk about what «equilibrium exchange rates» should be in a world of fiat currencies and fractional reserve banking.

Last but not least, one should not forget the unstable equilibrium which has been formed in relations between Chisinau and the strongly philo - Russian Gagauz minority in the south of Moldova.

Rohling: Yeah, so what we see is that for a current level of forcing, so 1.6 watts per meter square net forcing, if we look in the relationship that we now recognize between sea - level change and climate forcing, we're are, more or less, looking at in the equilibrium state, natural equilibriumstate, where the planet would like to be that is similar to where we were 3.5 million years ago and that's where we're looking at sea level, you know, at least 15 meters, maybe 25 meters above the present.

The molecules coming to rest — at least on the macroscopic level — is the result of thermalization, or of reaching equilibrium after they have achieved uniform saturation within the system.

These cells can be isolated based on the expression of an amplified Hex Venus transgene and SSEA - 1 (V+S +) and exist under ES cell conditions in a steady - state equilibrium with at least one other more ICM - like cell state, V − S +.

In the model shown in Figure 9, we suggest that a similar uncommitted and self - renewing state may exist in the direction of ectodermal differentiation and we imagine the ground state could consist of at least three distinct populations in equilibrium.

We show that the fraction of cells present within this state is influenced by factors that both promote and suppress primitive endoderm differentiation, but conditions that support ES cell self - renewal prevent their progression into differentiation and support an equilibrium between this state and at least one other that resembles the Nanog positive inner cell mass of the mammalian blastocysts.

At least, that is, until his boss (Jason Bateman) upsets the delicate equilibrium of his life by informing him that the wheels of capitalism require even more lubrication than CTC currently provides.

The paper presents new empirical evidence that complements existing studies on performance pay, not least because the cross-country design goes some way to capture general - equilibrium effects of teacher sorting that have eluded existing experimental studies.

If you're a sim fan in general, I think you'll enjoy Block» hood; you're still sitting waiting for your city to generate enough money to do the next thing you want to do sometimes, but at the very least there's a challenge here to maintain some kind of ecological equilibrium... and you'll get a little bit of a moral high the next time you recycle.

; you're still sitting waiting for your city to generate enough money to do the next thing you want to do sometimes, but at the very least there's a challenge here to maintain some kind of ecological equilibrium... and you'll get a little bit of a moral high the next time you recycle.

To date, I think that the sensitivity has been overestimated by the equilibrium calculations and the GCMs, and the benefits of increased CO2 over at least the next few decades have been underestimated.

Your attempt to estimate equilibrium climate sensitivity from the 20th C won't work because a) the forcings are not that well known (so the error in your estimate is large), b) the climate is not in equilibrium — you need to account for the uptake of heat in the ocean at least.

OLR increases in the optically thinner bands would lead to atmospheric warming in general, but this has to be accompanied by OLR decreases somewhere, such as in optically thicker bands (and always in the band where optical thickness was added, assuming positive lapse rates everywhere as is the case in a 1 - dimensional equilibrium model with zero solar heating above the tropopause, or at least not too much solar heating in some distributions), which will tend to cause cooling of upper levels.

Given the much more rapid respons time of the stratosphere to radiative forcings, there is (can be) some initial stratospheric cooling (or at least some cooling somewhere in the stratosphere), which consists of a transient component, and a component that remains at full equilibrium.

Adding more optical thickness to the same band reduces OLR in that band, cooling at least some portion of the upper atmosphere up to the TOA level, and increases in OLR outside that band results in some portion of that cooling remaining at full equilibrium (as expained by Andy Lacis).

For a combination of CO2, CH4, and solar brightness that would allow such an unstable equilibrium, there will be at least two stable equilibria — one is a Snowball (very cold), the other being significantly warmer.

In general, so long as there is some solar heating beneath some level, there must be a net LW + convective heat flux upward at that level to balance it in equilibrium; convection tends to require some nonzero temperature decline with height, and a net upward LW flux requires either that the temperature declines with height on the scale of photon paths (from emission to absorption), or else requires at least a partial «veiw» of space, which can be blocked by increasing optical thickness above that level.

There can / will be local and regional, latitudinal, diurnal and seasonal, and internal variability - related deviations to the pattern (in temperature and in optical properties (LW and SW) from components (water vapor, clouds, snow, etc.) that vary with weather and climate), but the global average effect is at least somewhat constrained by the global average vertical distribution of solar heating, which requires the equilibrium net convective + LW fluxes, in the global average, to be sizable and upward at all levels from the surface to TOA, thus tending to limit the extent and magnitude of inversions.)

SO just HOW can we justify that that the outflow in the computer MUST be less than inflow for the 250 years of the computer run, when clearly the daily temperature cycle will reestablish the equilibrium (at least for the atmosphere & ground — not sure about deep ocean equilibrium, BUT I also know that there is MUCH MUCH MORE energy stored in the Land (eg solid iron core of earth) than in the ocean & the GCMs do NOT address this either).

The Clausius - Clapayron relation is an equilibrium result that is never very accurate, and is least accurate during the episodes when the non-radiative transfer of heat to the troposphere from the surface is greatest, such as the build - up to intense thunderstorms.

This will also be true for CO2 — at least as long as we assume that natural emission and uptake of CO2 can into a fairly stable equilibrium (like the family's fixed $ 80,000 per year income and expenses) during the stable climate that existed for the first 8 millennia of the Holocene.

Source: press release for Myers et al., 2015 Sea Levels 2 - 4 m Higher Until ~ 5,000 Years Ago Imply Surface Temps Were At Least 5 °C Warmer According to the accepted (IPCC) formula for calculating the contribution of ocean warming (thermal expansion) to sea level rise upon reaching equilibrium, every additional degrees Celsius of surface warmth yields -LSB-...]

This behavior is characteristic of an unchanging (at least in short terms of centuries) natural equilibrium point for CO2 around 280ppm (interglacial - normal).

At the very least somewhere the onus of proof was upon him to demonstrate that an atmosphere with a DALR is actually in a state of thermodynamic equilibrium, which would have required some actual work and algebra on his part, one would think, since it violates the letter of these laws.

That's not even up to the standards of somebody who copies an answer on an exam — at least in that case one would be likely to recapitulate the algebra and see why or why not the gas in question was in thermal equilibrium and how, exactly, the DALR was arrived at.

You haven't even read his explanation for writing it the way he did as your diabribe against him showed, so I've no reason to think anything you've said in this «Refutation of Stable Thermal Equilibrium Lapse Rates» is in the least bit relevant as a refutation, and so, you may think you're finished, but I think you should begin again, Take II, and stick to his thought experiment and not your strawman silver wire deflection.

So if positive feedback is a figment of warmist dreams, as appears highly probable, precisely what suggests that negative feedback isn't the the most likely factor that has maintained at least some measure of thermal equilibrium over the eons?

But, our results in Papers 1 and 2 suggested that the atmosphere were effectively in complete energy equilibrium — at least over the distances from the bottom of the troposphere to the top of the stratosphere.

However, we have found that the atmosphere behaves as if it were in «Thermodynamic Equilibrium» (TE) over distances of at least 30 - 40 km, whereas the Greenhouse Effect theory assumes that the atmosphere is only in «Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium» (LTE) over these distances.

In our papers, we experimentally show that the atmosphere is actually in complete energy equilibrium — at least over the distances from the bottom of the troposphere to the top of the stratosphere, which the greenhouse effect theory is concerned with.

Our results suggest that the atmosphere is actually in full thermodynamic equilibrium over distances of at least 20 - 30 km.

Growing population and growing per capita CO2 due to development mean at least a doubling of emission rates, and then the equilibrium becomes 760 ppm, and that is just CO2.

Perhaps The Economist should take a look at the best of the best among climate scientists — notably James Hansen who warns that Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity is at least 3 degrees Celsius and that this estimate is probably conservative.

I agree that reduction in snow or ice cover resulting from warming constitutes a likely slow positive feedback, but its magnitude may be quite small, at least for the modest changes in surface temperature that can be expected to arise if sensitivity is in fact fairly low, so the Forster / Gregory 06 results may nevertheless be a close approximation to a measurement of equilibrium climate sensitivity.

I and others have pointed out that the classical thermodynamics assumes equilibrium or «local» thermal equilibrium because they permit the solution of tractable equations, or at least approximate solutions.

If a chair is brough in from the cold into a room at 25C then placed in the centre, at least 5 2 metres from any other object, that chair will reach the equilibrium of the atmosphere, not the radiation from other objects, as those objects are already thermalised with theh atmosphere and aren't giving off much radiation.

At least Kinetic Theory can be used to explain the gravitationally induced temperature gradient, and the passage of heat up that gradient when thermodynamic equilibrium is disturbed with extra absorption above.

Taken together, the average of the warmest times during the middle Pliocene presents a view of the equilibrium state of a globally warmer world, in which atmospheric CO2 concentrations (estimated to be between 360 to 400 ppm) were likely higher than pre-industrial values (Raymo and Rau, 1992; Raymo et al., 1996), and in which geologic evidence and isotopes agree that sea level was at least 15 to 25 m above modern levels (Dowsett and Cronin, 1990; Shackleton et al., 1995), with correspondingly reduced ice sheets and lower continental aridity (Guo et al., 2004).

For a slow feedback climate sensitivity of 6 C for doubled CO2, the equilibrium temperature response would be expected to take much longer (at least several millennia), since this response has been shown to be a strong function of climate sensitivity (Hansen et al., 1985).

We have no direct observations of equilibrium climate sensitivity so we have to rely on some form of theory or indirect observations from paleo, at least in part.

But, at least to first - order, why can we usefully adopt a top - of - atmosphere (TOA) perspective to determine surface temperature, even though the surface energy budget must also close in equilibrium (and which includes many different non-radiative terms)?

If you think of the system as being in steady - state, at least approximately, instead of equilibrium; and if you think of the effect of CO2 increase to be a change from one steady - state to another, it would not necessarily be the case that the temperature increase of the surface, middle troposphere, and upper troposphere to be the same.

The calculations by Kuang 2010 in which a dynamic model of radiative - convective equilibrium is perturbed systematically with different heat (and moisture) sources suggests that this is the path of least resistance for a convecting atmosphere, but that there are other possibilities as well — I need to understand this paper better.

It's important to get at least five minutes of relaxation a day in order to achieve psychological equilibrium.»