Sentences with phrase «same difference in temperature»

8 ˚ F increase in temperatures by 2100 which would be irreversible for hundreds of years (the report notes that 8 ˚ F is almost the same difference in temperature between the ice age and our modern time);

Not exact matches

By using simulations that were created by running the same model multiple times, with only tiny differences in the initial starting conditions, the scientists could examine the range of summertime temperatures we might expect in the future for the «business - as - usual» and reduced - emissions scenarios.

It's probably tidally locked, meaning that it always presents the same face to the star, resulting in permanent day and night sides with huge differences in temperature.

With 755 horsepower the 2019 Chevrolet Corvette zr1 is the most powerful Corvette ever it's also the most technologically advanced behind me are the rolling s's at Road Atlanta and we're here to see if we can reach to the supercar levels of performance afforded by this thing's massive power big tires and the tall wing on the back after that we'll take to the streets to see if a car this powerful can behave itself in public this is a monster of a car I've had some brief track opportunities moving this morning to get used to the pace of this machine which is phenomenal we're gonna warm up as we get out to the road Atlanta and sort of build up to the pace that this car can operate at now initially when you hop in this car you have this shrine to the engine right above you you see the line of the hood it kind of dominates the center of the view you can see over it it doesn't affect visibility but it's immediately obvious and that kind of speaks to what makes this car special it's a monster of an engine listen to that [Music] that is tremendous tremendous acceleration and incredible power but what I finding so far my brief time here at the Atlanta is that everything else in the car is rut has risen to match hurt me while I lay into it on the back straight look you know 150 mile - an - hour indicated we're going to ease up a little bit on it because I need to focus on talking rather than driving but like I was saying the attributes of the rest of the car the steering the braking capability the grip every system of this car is riding to the same level of the power and I think that's what makes it really impressive initially this is undoubtedly a mega mega fast car but it's one that doesn't terrify you with its performance potential there's a level of electronic sophistication that is unparalleled at this price point but it's hard not to get you know totally slipped away by the power of this engine so that's why I keep coming back to it this car has an electronically controlled limited slip differential it has shocks filled with magnetically responsive fluid that can react faster to inputs and everything this car has a super sophisticated stability control system that teaches you how to drive it quick but also makes you go faster we haven't even gotten into exploring it yet because the limits of this car are so high that frankly it takes a while to grow into it but [Music] I think what's impressive about this car is despite how fast it is it is approachable you can buy this car to track dates with it and grow with it as a driver and as an owner I think that's a really special [Music] because you will never be more talented than this car is fast ever unless you are a racing driver casually grazing under 50 miles an hour on this straight okay I'm just going to enjoy driving this now [Music][Applause][Music] this particular Corvette zr1 comes with the cars track performance package a lot of those changes happen underneath the sheet metal but one of the big differences that is immediately obvious is this giant carbon fiber wing now the way this thing is mounted is actually into the structure of the vehicle and it makes you know loading the rear hatch a bit more difficult but we're assuming that's okay if you're looking for the track performance this thing delivers also giving you that performance are these Michelin Pilot Sport cup tires which are basically track oriented tires that you can drive on the street but as we wake our way to the front of the thing what really matters is what's under the hood that's right there's actually a hole in the hood of this thing and that's because this engine is so tall it's tall because it has a larger supercharger and a bunch of added cooling on it to help it you know keep at the right temperature the supercharger is way larger than the one on the zo six and it has a more cooling capacity and the downside is it's taller so it pops literally through the hood the cool thing is from the top you can actually see this shake when you're looking at it from you know a camera from the top of the vehicle this all makes for 755 horsepower making this the most powerful Corvette ever now what's important about that is this not just the power but likewise everything in the car has to be built to accommodate and be able to drive to the level of speed this thing can develop that's why you had the massive cooling so I had the aerodynamics and that's why I had the electronic sophistication inside [Applause] we had a lot of time to take this car on the track yesterday and I've had the night to think about things Matt today two crews on the road and see how this extreme performance machine deals with the sort of more civil minded stuff of street driving the track impressions remain this thing is unquestionably one of the most capable cars you can get from a dealer these days a lot of that's besides the point now because we're on the street we have speed limits they have the ever - present threat of law enforcement around every corner so the question is what does this car feel like in public when you slow this car down it feels like a more powerful Corvette you don't get much tram lining from these big wheels though we as the front end doesn't want to follow grooves in the pavement it is louder it is a little firmer but it's certainly livable on a day to day basis that's surprising for a vehicle of this capability normally these track oriented cars are so hardcore that you wouldn't want to drive them to the racetrack but let's face it you spend more time driving to the track than you do on the track and the fact that this thing works well in both disciplines is really impressive I can also dial everything back and cruise and not feel like I'm getting punished for driving a hardcore track machine that's a that's a really nice accomplishment that's something that you won't find in cars that are this fast and costs maybe double this much the engine in this car dominates the entire experience you can't miss the engine and the whole friend this car is sort of a shrine to it the way it pops out of the hood the way it's covered with coolers around the sides it is the experience of this car and that does make driving this thing special and also the fact that it doesn't look half bad either in fact I think it has some of the coolest looking wheels currently available on a new car this car as we mentioned this car has the track package the track package on this car gives you what they call competition bucket seats which are a little wide for my tastes but I'm you know not the widest person in the world this automatic transmission works well I mean there's so much torque again out of this engine that it can be very smooth and almost imperceptible its clunky on occasion I think I'd might opt for the manual although Chevy tells me about 80 % of its customers will go for the automatic I don't think they're gonna be disappointed and that's gonna be the faster transmission drag strip on the street - and on the racetrack man it was a little bit more satisfying to my taste though we've talked about the exhaust I have it set in the track setting let's quiet it down a little bit so you can hear the difference now I've set that separately from everything else so let's put it stealth what happened to the engine sound that's pretty that's pretty amazing man stealth is really stealth and then go back to track Wow actually a really big difference that's that's pretty great the Corvette has always been a strong value proposition and nowhere is that more evident than this zr1 giving you a nearly unbeatable track performance per dollar now the nice thing is on the road this doesn't feel like a ragged edge track machine either you could genuinely drive it every day the compromises are few and that's what makes this car so special if you like what you see keep it tuned right here and be sure to visit Edmunds.com [Music]

As far as I know, the 2 main sources of satellite data for temperatures in the lower troposphere are UAH and RSS, and they vastly differ in their trends in the tropical troposphere, with RSS's trend being twice as warming as the UAH trend, although they show the same trends in the remaining troposphere, resulting in a Global difference of only 0.035 C / d trend.

Given that small difference you would have to have two boxes at the same time, not the same box at diffent times, cause normal variations in temperature from day to day would swamp your results.

Given that you comment that the largest differences between the different forcings is between land and ocean or between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, have you looked at the land — ocean temperature difference or the Northern — Southern Hemisphere temperature difference, as they both scale linearly with ECS, in the same way as global mean temperature for ghg forcing, but not for aerosol forcing.

Before allowing the temperature to respond, we can consider the forcing at the tropopause (TRPP) and at TOA, both reductions in net upward fluxes (though at TOA, the net upward LW flux is simply the OLR); my point is that even without direct solar heating above the tropopause, the forcing at TOA can be less than the forcing at TRPP (as explained in detail for CO2 in my 348, but in general, it is possible to bring the net upward flux at TRPP toward zero but even with saturation at TOA, the nonzero skin temperature requires some nonzero net upward flux to remain — now it just depends on what the net fluxes were before we made the changes, and whether the proportionality of forcings at TRPP and TOA is similar if the effect has not approached saturation at TRPP); the forcing at TRPP is the forcing on the surface + troposphere, which they must warm up to balance, while the forcing difference between TOA and TRPP is the forcing on the stratosphere; if the forcing at TRPP is larger than at TOA, the stratosphere must cool, reducing outward fluxes from the stratosphere by the same total amount as the difference in forcings between TRPP and TOA.

If a doubling of CO2 resulted in a temperature increase of approximately 1 K before any non-Planck feedbacks (before water vapor, etc.), then assuming the same climate sensitivity to the total GHE, removing the whole GHE would result in about a (setting the TOA / tropopause distinction aside, as it is relatively small relative to the 155 W / m2 value) 155/3.7 * 1 K ~ = 42 K. Which is a bit more than 32 or 33 K, though I'm not surprised by the difference.

We don't really know the magnitude of that lag as well as Barton implies we do, because it is very challenging to put CO2 records from ice cores on the same timescale as temperature records from those same ice cores, due to the time delay in trapping the atmosphere as the snow is compressed into ice (the ice at any time will always be younger older than the gas bubbles it encloses, and the age difference is inherently uncertain).

The main post here uses the Box data under the assumption that temperature differences determined by the same method are likely to be correct in terms of relative position, but when compared to records determined by other methods there may be biases (possibly unknown) which distort the result.

If that is correct or even partially correct, the difference in temperature could be even greater (using the same calculations above but tonto's uptake calculation, we top out at 440 with maybe 1C warming vs 4C = a difference of 3C).

Mars and Venus follow the same principle in that their huge surface temperature differences are caused primarily by their different atmospheres and not by their different distances from the sun.

Mars and Venus follow the same principle in that their huge surface temperature differences are caused primarily by their different atmospheres and only secondarily by their different distances from the sun.

There is concern in the scientific community that the temperature change from now to the end of the century will be roughly the same as the difference between now and the last Ice Age, which occurred 10,000 years ago, resulting in dramatic changes in temperature, weather patterns, water tables, land and biodiversity.

The similarity between Venus and Earth whereby they are each at much the same temperature at the same pressure subject only to an adjustment for distance from the sun despite vast differences in atmospheric composition is empirical proof.

There is still a difference even there since visible and higher wavelengths are different out than in because Earth is not at the same temperature as the sun.

Well, in an even older publication back from 2001 and also in Nature, two of the same group of Dutch researchers (Christiaan Both and Marcel Visser, NIOO - KNAW) already hypothesised that for some migratory birds, the difference of the warming speed between their winter grounds and nesting areas could actually be irrelevant, as the timing of their migration may not depend on temperature, but on an independent biological calendar:

A publicly available computer program is used to calculate the difference between surface temperature in a given month and the average temperature for the same place during 1951 to 1980.

«The respective salinities of 36.7 and 32.2 % o make it not surprising that there is a difference in the oxygen composition of the calcium carbonate obtained from the two waters at the same temperature.

I have noted here in Oz that same difference in coastal vs inland temperature trends See http://eyesonbrowne.wordpress.com/2012/10/27/is-it-getting-warmer-in-australia-well-that-depends-on-where-you-live/.

When the policy solution emphasized a tax on carbon emissions or some other form of government regulation, which is generally opposed by Republican ideology, only 22 percent of Republicans said they believed the temperatures would rise at least as much as indicated by the scientific statement they read.But when the proposed policy solution emphasized the free market, such as with innovative green technology, 55 percent of Republicans agreed with the scientific statement.For Democrats, the same experiment recorded no difference in their belief, regardless of the proposed solution to climate change.As study authors Troy Campbell and Aaron Kay wrote in the introduction to their paper about this study, this shows «not necessarily an aversion to the problem, per se, but an aversion to the solutions associated with the problem.»

He found a sudden jump around 1941 in the difference between SST and all - hours air temperatures reported largely by the same ships.

So long as the adiabatic lapse rate is not fixed to the same value for every possible material (which we know it isn't), there will be an exploitable temperature difference somewhere in the system.

Does not your thought experiment fail, because most of the molecules in the atmosphere are all at the same heat (kinetic energy), while the difference in temperature with altitude (on a thermometer) is simply an effect of the number of molecules you meet (pressure and density).

So it's all gases at greatest density will be doing the same thing around the planet at the same time (*) and as these change with differences in density in the play between gravity and pressure and kinetic and potential from greatest near the surface to more rarified, less dense and absent any kinetic to write home about the higher one goes, then, energy conservation intact, the hotter will rise and cool because losing kinetic energy means losing temperature, thus cooling they which began with the closest in density and kinetic energy as a sort of band of brothers near the surface will rise and cool at the same time whereupon they'll all come down together colder but wiser that great heights don't make for more comfort and giving up their heat will sink displacing the hotter now in their place when they first went travelling.

Same point for a document co-authored by contrarian John Christy («Executive Summary: Temperature trends in the lower atmosphere — Understanding and reconciling differences», table 1 on page 5):

The higher I raise the box, the greater the temperature difference between the two types of gases, IN THE SAME BOX.

If you want to prove that there is a non-GHG GE involving the dynamic motion of gases, play right on through, but realize that Jelbring's paper isn't about that and is incorrect because it ascribes the same effect to a completely static, completely dry ideal gas that has been left in place, isolated, for a billion years (or as long as equilibrium takes, which won't be anywhere near a billion years at a joule of conductive transport per meter of atmosphere per degree kelvin of temperature difference per 40 seconds).

When we replace old temperature sensors with new ones, any difference in readings can be measured and these differences used to homogenize data in much the same way.

The temperature differences created eddies, or disturbances that move air back and forth at the same latitude, and those eddies, in turn, accelerated the jet streams like rotating gears driving a conveyor belt.

... he also knows that urban heat island effects are corrected for in the surface records, and he also knows that this doesn't effect ocean temperatures, and that the station dropping out doesn't affect the trends at all (you can do the same analysis with only stations that remained and it makes no difference).

what was the difference in temperature changes along the total eclipse line between areas of different CO2 concentrations with the same humidity?

The way I understand Gavin's explanation is the difference in temperatures from one day to the next for nearby stations is the same.

During these episodes I am unable to find any difference between the temperatures in the city and the sorroundings or even distant rural areas of the same region.

The difference in CO2 levels between all ice cores drilled in Antarctica with the most extreme differences in snow accumulation and temperature is not more than 5 ppmv for the same average gas age...

Theoretically it should be and it looks like that way, as an increase (1998 El Niño) or decrease (1992 Pinatubo) in temperature has about the same effect in opposite direction, and the ~ 1 °C wobble in temperature over the seasons (due to the difference in land area between the NH and SH) also shows a similar effect.

In both cases the result on the temperature series should be characterized by separate step changes in minimum and maximum temperatures; as long as all the stations in the network weren't all transitioned at the same time, these step changes should be relatively easy to identify in the difference series via pairwise homogenization approacheIn both cases the result on the temperature series should be characterized by separate step changes in minimum and maximum temperatures; as long as all the stations in the network weren't all transitioned at the same time, these step changes should be relatively easy to identify in the difference series via pairwise homogenization approachein minimum and maximum temperatures; as long as all the stations in the network weren't all transitioned at the same time, these step changes should be relatively easy to identify in the difference series via pairwise homogenization approachein the network weren't all transitioned at the same time, these step changes should be relatively easy to identify in the difference series via pairwise homogenization approachein the difference series via pairwise homogenization approaches.

With your cup of coffee, it doesn't matter if you are in the Arctic or just have a snowbank, the temperature difference between the coffee and the snow is the same (yes of course the mass of snow will determine the final temperature of each, but the heat transfer is a function of the difference in temperatures not the mass)

(Increasing temperature increases the difference in blackbody radiation over the same relative range of temperatures, and should tend to increase net LW cooling of the surface, while a decreased lapse rate would have the opposite effect.

2011-01-14 — Different Records, Same Warming Trend (NASA / EO Image of the Day) 2011-01-13 — Despite Subtle Differences, Global Temperature Records in Close Agreement 2011-01-12 — NASA Research Finds 2010 Tied for Warmest Year on Record (Release No. 11 - 014)

However, as we note in that paper, the 1934 and 1998 temperature are practically the same, the difference being much smaller than the uncertainty.

This same relationship seems to hold all throughout the Venusian atmosphere, so when you go to OTHER altitudes on Venus where the pressures are the same as on Earth, you see temperature differences in the same ratio, 1.176 (within a reasonable margin of error).

The temperature will basically be the same because temperatures get homogenized on fairly large scales by winds and the heating is basically similar except for small differences in urban heat island and so on.»

By lagging the CO2 result from temperature changes one year, the calculated variation was lagging the observed: The same coefficients were used, no difference in trends and stdev, correlation between the series = 0.732; R ^ 2 = 0.536 (which is fair).

You then asked «Or perhaps you can point me to the dataset that shows, for several individual locations for the same period as the temperature set the: * CO2 concentrations (OK, we could use Mauna Loa for that) * Aerosols (sorry, can't use global records for that, there can be huge differences on a local scale) * Absolute humidity * TSI with correction for local albedo, including cloud albedo, and the place on earth» Well actually, I can and have for the USA in terms of CO2, humidity (RH but AH also if you insist), and albedo, not to mention actual solar surface radiation, and various other variables (eg windspeed), as I have previously reported here for quite a few locations, eg Pt Barrow.

In the light bulb world, that's a noticeable difference, but with the Hue lights, the bulbs actually only reach their max lumens at specific white color temperatures, and all the other colors are fairly the same on both bulbs, including the brightness levels.