Sentences with phrase «much water relative»

Not exact matches

«Any baker, regardless of the time of day or night, can go on their computers and get all the information relative to the performance of that flour such as how much water to add to it to make dough or how to mix it,» he adds.

WPL is an index of how much water a basin needs to dilute incoming phosphorus relative to how much water the basin receives.

Nerves in the pectoral fins of fish detect the fin rays» position and how much they bend as they move through the water, which helps the fish sense speed and the relative position of their fins.

Indohyus is a close relative of whales, and the structure of its bones and chemistry of its teeth indicate that it spent much time in water.

This hotter mantle would have made the crust beneath the oceans hotter and thicker than it is today, buoying it up relative to the continents, and the associated shallower ocean basins would have held less water, leading to the flooding of much of what is now land.

Presently, much of the Atlantic Ocean is well oxygenated (Figure 1) relative to the North Indian and Pacific Oceans, where bottom water O2 concentrations are lower because of the biological removal of O2 as thermohaline circulation moves deep waters across ocean basins from the North and South Atlantic towards the North Pacific, in isolation from the surface ocean.

Some causes are believed to be rapid eating, elevated food bowls, dry foods that contain citric acid as a preservative, dry foods that contain fat among the first four ingredients, insufficient pancreatic enzymes, dilution of gastric juices necessary for complete digestion by drinking too much water before or after eating, eating gas - producing foods, drinking too much water too quickly, heredity - especially having a first degree relative who has bloated, build & physical characteristics and disposition.

In this interview Rauschenberg speaks of his role as a bridge from the Abstract Expressionists to the Pop artists; the relationship of affluence and art; his admiration for de Kooning, Jack Tworkov, and Franz Kline; the support he received from musicians Morton Feldman, John Cage, and Earl Brown; his goal to create work which serves as unbiased documentation of his observations; the irrational juxtaposition that makes up a city, and the importance of that element in his work; the facsimile quality of painting and consequent limitations; the influence of Albers» teaching and his resulting inability to do work focusing on pain, struggle, or torture; the «lifetime» of painting and the problems of time relative symbolism; his feelings on the possibility of truly simulating chance in his work; his use of intervals, and its possible relation to the influence of Cage; his attempt to show as much drama on the edges of a piece as in the dead center; his belief in the importance of being stylistically flexible throughout a career; his involvement with the Stadtlijk Museum; his loss of interest in sculpture; his belief in the mixing of technology and aesthetics; his interest in moving to the country and the prospect of working with water, wind, sun, rain, and flowers; Ad Reinhardt's remarks on his Egan Show; his discontinuation of silk screens; his illustrations for Life Magazine; his role as a non-political artist; his struggles with abstraction; his recent theater work «Map Room Two;» his white paintings; and his disapproval of value hierarchy in art.

I think what Alastair is alluding to is the fact that, say by 2050 when the arctic ocean will conceivably be ice - free in the summer, the atmosphere will have a much higher relative humidity than it has currently because of the open air = water interface, so this will have a magnifying effect beyond just the feedback from increased CO2.

Twice as much ink causes a much stronger color, even though the total amount is still only a trace relative to water.

The surface waters around Antarctica were much fresher because cooler polar regions experience greater precipitation relative to evaporation.

Not only that, but since the 1980s, more land area is above water than below it, indicating that tectonics and subsidence / uplift have much more to do with long - term relative sea level than climate or changes in water temperatures do.

I guess my question now is why CO2 trumps water vapor as the prime greenhouse gas even though there is so much more water vapor in the atmosphere relative to CO2 and other greenhouse gases.

In the absence of such aerosols, the spontaneous conversion of water vapour into liquid water or ice crystals requires conditions with relative humidities much greater than 100 percent, with respect to a flat surface of H2O.

There is a near infinite supply of greenhouse gases available to the atmosphere in the form of water vapor from the ocean to provide the greenhouse effect, but the relative humidity in the atmosphere is much less than one.

So the first step in understanding the climates of Venus, Earth, and Mars, is the relative amounts of Greenhouse gases in their atmospheres: Venus has too much, Mars too little, and Earth just the right amount (in fact, water vapor, which is one percent of our atmosphere, dominates most of our Greenhouse effect — but additional CO2 can dramatically change the amount of Greenhouse effect).

The movement of a parcel of water is only related to how much it heats up relative to the body of water it is resting in.

Given there is much more water vapour in the lower levels of the atmosphere, the study really found that there was a decline in overall global relative humidity when global warming theory suggests it should stay more - or-less stable.

Given there is much more water vapour in the lower levels of the atmosphere, the study really found that there was a decline in overall global relative humidity.

Abstract: An evaluation of analyses sponsored by the predecessor to the U.K. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) of the global impacts of climate change under various mitigation scenarios (including CO2 stabilization at 550 and 750 ppm) coupled with an examination of the relative costs associated with different schemes to either mitigate climate change or reduce vulnerability to various climate - sensitive hazards (namely, malaria, hunger, water shortage, coastal flooding, and losses of global forests and coastal wetlands) indicates that, at least for the next few decades, risks and / or threats associated with these hazards would be lowered much more effectively and economically by reducing current and future vulnerability to those hazards rather than through stabilization.