Sentences with phrase «more about equilibria»

Not exact matches

The discussion might have been partly about Herbert Spencer's conception of evolution, but is more likely — Whitehead's discussion especially — to have been about the speculative application of the second law of thermodynamics to the physical universe as a whole, with its prospect of a final state of perfect equilibrium.

Instead of talking about cures and remission, doctors are now talking about cancer as being more of a controlled equilibrium with a tumor, in which it does not grow or cause issues.

The more you feel stressed, the more you feel overwhelm about things since your hormones are not in its equilibrium state.

For more information about the 11 techniques please see module 13 of the Hair Equilibrium program where each technique is demonstrated live in short HD videos.

You can learn more about this method in my course Hair Equilibrium where this is one of the chapters.

I talk about this more in Hair Equilibrium.

Read more about estrogen and testosterone in men Also, exercising more is another method to boost your testosterone levels and maintaining a standard estrogen / T equilibrium.

If you'd like to read more of the adventures of Rex and Sasha (and learn more about the secrets of the Sp» ossels, Schufnaasik Six and the Chaotic Equilibrium), please enter your email address in the form below.

· Partial equilibrium intuitions about choice http://t.co/215kIrmS @interfluidity more difficult to solve general equilibrium Qs than partial Mar 19, 2012

Economists like to talk about equilibrium, because that allows them to publish their complex math papers, but economies are big on variation, things are far more volatile than theory can admit.

Learn more about the triggers for these behaviors, maximize mental stimulation, and balance the internal equilibrium with homeopathy.

It suggests another way to look at this artist's protracted project: less about design and industrial methods, more about materiality and equilibrium.

captdallas2 @ 130 — To become more impressed by the estimate of about 3 K for Charney equilibrium climate sensitivity, read papers by Annan & Hargreaves.

It might help Peter Huybers and his collegues if we understood more about the temperature response of the albedo of the calcite belt, and other bioogically variable components of radiative equilibrium that impact SST in both the southern ocean and the arctic seas

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).

Such states may have prevailed in the distant past, but there is nothing about the current Holocene climate to suggest that more than a single equilibrium is within range — we are not close to a new glaciation nor a new «hothouse climate» (although the latter might become possible if continued greenhouse gas emissions were to remain unmitigated for a prolonged interval).

Sure, given that nearly any introductory physics textbook — I'm not talking about thermodynamics text, just things like Tipler and Mosca, or Halliday, Resnick and Walker — teach enough thermodynamics for one to be able to see that the spontaneous appearance of a stable thermal gradient in any system is impossible, because it is a direct violation of the second law, and indirectly the first, which more or less says that equilibrium is isothermal (in order to permit the definition of thermometry in the first place).

I did it this way because it avoids arguing about the details of straightforward (but far more difficult) textbook calculations that directly show that the equilibrium is the isothermal state I describe above, or the much more difficult calculation in stat mech that directly shows that the equilibrium is the isothermal state that I describe above.

I have also started to worry more and more about the significance of the fact that the Earth system is not in equilibrium and that we are looking at changes in the development of a system in transition rather than impacts on equlibribmium states.

It is about time that we started taking more account of the satellite record for this reason and for the fact that SST is not in thermal equilibrium with the atmosphere.

Under equilibrium Slide 24/30: < blockquote This means that there will be about 50 times more CO2 dissolved in water than contained in the free air above.

The equilibrium is such that there 1000 times more CO2 in pure water as carbonic acid (so about 0.3 ppm if it weren't neutralised straight away).

Therein you will find a lot of discussion about discount rates, «leakage», using a U.S. SCC v. a global SCC, average ton of CO2 v. marginal ton, «equilibrium climate sensitivity», and more.

If net forcing is 2.4 watts / M ^ 2, then equilibrium sensitivity looks more like 0.41 C per watt, or about 1.54 C per doubling.

You said between the lines in # 270: «as you equilibrate», «by the time you get there», all sounds like now you are talking about a transient process, while in # 269 you said «that equilibrium state... happens to absorb more LW than you started with» (which I read as an absorption process related to the state of equilibrium).