Sentences with phrase «of tmax»

Besides the fact surface station measurements (not the models of surface temps made from the measurements) don't show any warming of Tmax.

2 — As I understand, unless the time of observation is particularly close to the time of Tmax or Tmin (where «double counting» would be a frequent occurrence),, the double counting will only occur for days where there is a marked jump in temperature (so, in the case of morning readings, where the second night is appreciably warmer than the first and so Tmin occurs at the start of the 24 hours).

This however caught my attention: first is when I find large fluctuation in the average of Tmax and I go look at the number of samples for that year, it's just a few days, and I just manually remove that year from the output.

I have two lines of evidence, first is when I find large fluctuation in the average of Tmax and I go look at the number of samples for that year, it's just a few days, and I just manually remove that year from the output.

I noticed that NONE of the Tmax values recorded during the month were duplicated from one day to the next.

Christy's colleague Roy Spencer produced a chart of TMax using the same weather stations as NOAA.

Rather than measure TMIN TREND in two conditions (windy / calm) Let'd just look at the distribution of TMAX - TMIN under wind velocity conditions.

Temp being linear with the 4th root of the energy flux, a simply average of Tmax and Tmin doesn't yield the same number as averaging the 4th root.

Only one site went with the trend of Tmax «$» Tmin increasing with average wind velocity that would be suggested by Parker's assumptions and that was for the Alert, NU Canada site.

-- For measurements of Tmax, why would the air from above be warmer?

Might be interesting to look at how the varaince of Tmax compares to Tmin.

We would anticipate that Tmin trend line should have slightly greater slope than that of Tmax since the air at Tmin is denser than that at Tmax if CO2 has any effect on warming the air for comparable air pressure.

(I simply insert a blank Cell at the top of the Tmax column to offset the data by one day and extract the difference between Tmax and Tmin to demonstrate the radiant cooling range.)

In terms of duration of high - intensity intervals, 50 to 60 % of Tmax is sufficient if your goal is losing fat and improving metabolic health.

Not exact matches

This is the first time I've seen % of time at Tmax used to dictate how LONG each high intensity interval should last.

Results: Maximum plasma concentrations (median, range) of buprenorphine in dogs receiving ERB was 5 (4.3 - 11.0) ng / mL, which occurred at 8 (4 - 36) hours (Tmax).

So, that was a line of thought I had... Plus the idea of using a narrwing diurnal range (TMIN rising faster than TMAX) as being a proxy of sorts for impairment.

Looking at TMAX (NOT TMEAN) will give you a cleaner signal of this potential contamination.

The effect of a putative CO2 / water photonic IR recycling system is going to depend on local Tmax / Tmin, the IR albedo and the amount of water vapor in the air.

There has certainly been none at Oxford, with mean annual Tmax on a down trend of -0.07 oC p.a. since 1958, while Heathrow, only about 40 miles away does show a rising trend of 0.034 oC p.a. which obviously could not possibly have anything to do with the explosive growth of air traffic there since 1958.

When I plot them on the same graph, it is clear that the annual mean Raw Tmax is greater than the adjusted Tmax throughout nearly the entire time - period of overlap period but what appears to be a constant offset of 1.31 to 1.32 degrees F.

Kevin Cowtan appears to have discovered that «modeled» «surface» temperature isn't comparable to the «observed» «surface» temperature since the «observed» is a combination of land based (Tmax + Tmin) / 2 and SST measured somewhere between the surface and a few meters below the surface.

My sense is that UHI has a much bigger effect on Tmin than Tmax — such that my son and I found a 10 degree F UHI in Phoenix in the evening, but I am not sure if we could find one, or as large of one, at the daily maximum.

Since 1950, it has been found that the global diurnal temperature range (DTR), the difference between the minimum temperature (Tmin) and the maximum temperature (Tmax) of daily surface air temperature, has been temporally decreasing in several places all over the world.

That fluctuation is amplified by land surface temperatures in the same latitude band of about the same area, because the land surface temperatures are at a higher average altitude with a lower average specific heat capacity and the (Tmax + Tmin) / 2 method of determining «average» amplifies the variance.

But since TMax isn't increasing elsewhere in the world, then there is no increase in heatwaves because of AGW.

3) The number of days over the top 10 % of highest TMax as an anomaly using 19 stations with records back before 1920.

I have analyzed the temperature data of Sept 21 from the weather station at Quatsino, BC for the 1895 -2009 interval and have obtained a value of + / - 1.5 K of weather noise for both Tmax and T min.

In fact, Table 1 shows that for the last month of available parallel measurements the electronic probe (Tmax - Probe) often recorded considerably warmer than the mercury thermometer (Tmax - LIG).

TMax and TMin are converging, and must at some point diverge regardless of CO2 emissions, which means this is part of a normal cycle.

The point is that Tmax (j, n) is the actual «real» temperature of an ideal weather - station that was not being afflicted by asphalt highways, burning cans of rubbish, etc..

A = maximum temperature measurement, at Airport B = minimum temperature measurement, at Airport UHI * - a = slowly varying seasonal value of the UHI, at Airport UHI * - s = slowly varying seasonal value of the UHI, in Suburbia Tmax - a = «true» maximum temperature, at Airport Tmax - s = «true» maximum temperature, in Suburbia

where Tmax (j, n) is the maximum temperature you would have measured at site j and day n, had all the urbanization, asphalt, burning cans, etc. not been present; and UHI (j, n) represents the impact of all that stuff.

# 172 Hans If there is no UHI trend in Tmin or Tmax, but there is a UHI trend in Tmean (or other measures of temperature), then the UHI signal should be detectable in the divergence between the two sets of figures.

Under the assumption of (more - or-less) uniform GW, the TREND (Tmax - a — Tmax - s) should also be 0; and under the assumption that GW is not happening, it is also 0, so we're covered either way if we assume it's 0.

After looking at 100 year long daily records of Tmin and Tmax for a bunch of sites, it seemed pretty clear to me that we could do with one measure.

And Tmin and Tmax increases should be fair reflections of temperature anomalies.

Would these issues be side - stepped by focusing attention on the Tmax measurements instead of the Tmin measurements?

What are their characteristics, reliability of the data and meta - data, ranges and relationships of Tmin and Tmax, number of relocations, etc.?

More basically, I puzzle about Parker's apparent lack of explanation for the tendency of both the trends in Tmin and Tmax to be higher under his definitions of windy conditions when the data is broken down into regions of the globe.

At Tmax, for example, there has been a steady T rise as the sun moves higher in the sky, the rise helped by convection of air with hot packets in it surrounding the site, held back if frost has formed overnight, complicated if there is snow around and water phase change effects need consideration, hindered or lagged by the thermal inertia of the screen surrounding the thermometer as the screen heats up.

Now, Tmax and Tmin are rather special temperatures, because they are reached when an interplay of thermal effects reaches a described point.

This graph is Tmax % of normal versus Sunshine % of normal.

Otherwise, how can a chip with a Tmax of 150C ignite a match, or burn a «pit» in a CD?

The level P1.07 of the optical thickness t = 1.07 from the top of the air, is the lower limit of the layer sourcing 80 % of the photons lost to the cosmos; this level is the solution of 1 = tmax H2O P1.07 H2O 4.5 or 1 = tmax CO2 P1.07 CO2 1.45: see figure 6 - C and the more sketchy figure 6 - D.

The altitude where the radiation to the cosmos takes place with the associated cooling of the top of the air is near t = 1 from the top of the air, that is at a pressure (1 / tmax H2O)(1/4.5) or (1 / tmax CO2)(1/1.45); the line by line computation of figure 6 - C is a morphing from figure 6 - A.

I fear we are throwing away a lot of variance by starting with monthly Tavg or Tmean and ignoring the variance that comes from the (Tmax - Tmin) / 2 mean std error.

Tmax is going to be a function of Insolation, reflection, and perhaps waste heat.

What I usually see is everything looks plausible and relatively flat during large blocks of time, but at a certain point TMax makes a big movement (up or down, but more likely up).

That is the kind of issue I was groping toward from my layman's perspective, that it * might * matter by more than a tenth or two if a temp record is only (Tmin + Tmax) / 2