Coriolis Force

I successfully resisted the urge to call it Coriolis Farce.

Yay!! …

Coriolis effect
The observation that the deflection of objects or substances (such as air) move right in the Northern Hemisphere and left in the Southern Hemisphere.

Not north or south but flung off to the right or left according to which part of the equator… blah blah blah.

The effect is an hangover from the idea of a researcher who lived between 1792 and 1843. A lot has changed in that time. But not in scientific theory.

Was he such a giant or was he just making an observation?
Ask yourself how far can you fling air?

If you can manage to contain it in a vortex ring you can blow it quite a few feet. Obviously to make it go around the earth you need to insert the vortex into a tidal stream.

But by and large air or any gas will expand and contract according to pressure laws and according to the laws of thermodynamics any heat generated will be free to leave the system pdq.

Air is thus a BUFFER against any flinging!

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Coriolis Force”

  1. But something IS obviously happening. Some perturbation of courses. Gyres -winds and the like do behave inexplicably in a manner so described.I am going to call it loading.Hurricanes are easily destroyed, for all their power.All it takes is a cross wind.Once enough moisture is removed from what is essentially an adiabatic system (an almost a self-contained event) the power to continue is removed.This happens without a cross-wind if the mass reaches a continental shelf or a significant shallows in mid-ocean. The force dies down considerably but it can rebuild once past the dam.I have noticed some strange behaviour recently on the computed runs for the southern hemisphere. Sadly I can't reproduce them with Gimp at the moment. (I seem to have a bug with that in Zorin OS.)What appears to happen is that if a sufficiently large amount of moist air reaches an already large cyclone from it's outer edges, an imbalance takes place in the core of the vortex.It splits up into two or three low pressure centres and these spin around one another in a contrary orbit. The so called "Coriolis" observation.It is nothing to do with earth's rotation. It is all an engineering problem of loading. It's the same thing that causes vehicles to turn over when they corner too fast. A complete change of direction induced by pulling gees.Normally the weight of a car is attracted to the ground. But give it enough negative "g" and it will have a centre of mass that describes a locus. The mass appears to follow another outer edge. It's actually following the new barycentre.The hurricane is not heavier where the moisture come from but lighter. And precipitation fals through it without affecting it but if the water remains a gas it is lighter on that side until rotation takes it to the other side, or spreads it.But it is spread all around the outside.Tropical hurricanes are wetted from the inside out. The so called warm core. They tend to remain symmetrical longer. And why shouldn't they?They operate within a wide band of tepid pressure that is usually 1016 millibars for a thousand miles north and south of the equator and stretches 24,000 miles around the globe.

    Reply

  2. Originally posted by Weatherlawyer:

    And precipitation falls through it without affecting it

    It will affect it, eventually, if it falls on the windward side. As the storm runs over it, it picks it up again but because it will be a lot cooler than the original water surface…Well, you do the maths.In higher latitudes the air is a lot less stable it is full of unfallen rain and the remnants of older stuff. As a tropical storm becomes extra-tropical, it hits these pockets and elongates.By elongation I mean that the circle of a cyclone can become an ellipse. And the ellipse can extend into a trough of Low pressure.Or it can split up into more than one circulating current each of which moves around the others. Like twister sisters. Two or three (or more) tornadoes in close proximity will rotate around each other.As you watch the video, try and imagine where the energy is coming from. And what water sources there might be.

    Reply

  3. Hello dear,my name is QUEEN Oneil,it is a great pleasure to write you after viewing your profile at opera.com) i will be very happy if you can write me through my email for easiest communication and for me to send you my picture for you to know whom i am,remember distance or colour does not matter but what matters in life is love,my email address is (queenoneil41@yahoo.com),i will be waiting to hear from you,QUEEN.

    Reply

  4. I looked up something called Granular Impact. It is the mechanical principle behind sand traps and of research related to ballistic impact studies:Originally posted by Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.:

    Experiments on the low-speed impact of solid objects into granular media have been used both to mimic geophysical events [1-5] and to probe the unusual nature of the granular state of matter.While the findings are all strikingly different from impact into ordinary solids and liquids, no consensus has emerged regarding theinteraction between medium and projectile. Observation that the final penetration depth is a power of the total drop distance was interpreted by a stopping force that is a product of powers of depth and speed.Observation that the penetration depth is linear in initial impact speed was interpreted by a force that is linear in speed.Observation that the stopping time is constant was interpreted by a force that is constant but proportional to the initial impact speed. Observation that depth vs time is a sinusoid for a zero-speed impact was interpreted by a force that is proportional to depth. These four experimental results, as well as their interpretations, would all seem to be in conflict. This situation is reminiscent of high-speed ballistics impact in the 19th and 20th centuries, when a plethora of empirical rules were proposed.***Time is measured from initial impact; position is measured upwards from the granular surface, opposite to gravity. A striking feature is that, while the final position is approached smoothly, the velocity vanishes abruptly with a discontinuity in acceleration. This is counter to the viscous approach to a stable equilibrium, where acceleration vanishes continuously but it permits the stopping time to be easily gauged from the velocity vs time data. Note that [time taken to] stop actually decreases with increasing impact speed.Deeper penetration requires less time. Evidently, granular matter is very different from ordinary solids and liquids in its resistance to penetration.

    Reply

  5. I forgot the link (pdf) http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CC0QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2Fcond-mat%2F0703072&ei=ST07ULOhB4ej0QXbvoCIBg&usg=AFQjCNE2RhJx1k45t0ORej51o2Lui7-Quw&sig2=k7VA6OGu3CPj3DAbhPXZzw&cad=rja(Does anyone know of a way to stop Google munging these links?)Originally posted by Wikipedia:

    Granular convection is a phenomenon where granular material subjected to shaking or vibration circulates like fluid convection.Granular convection of different sized particles has been observed forming convection cells similar to fluid motion.There are several possible explanations:1. The center of mass of the whole system is not optimally low; it has the tendency to be higher due to there being more empty space around the larger Brazil nuts than around smaller nuts.When the nuts are shaken, the system has the tendency to move to a lower energy state, which means moving the center of mass down by moving the smaller nuts down and thereby the Brazil nuts up.2. Including the effects of air in spaces between particles, larger particles may become buoyant or sink. Smaller particles can fall into the spaces underneath a larger particle after each shake. Over time, the larger particle rises in the mixture.(According to Heinrich Jaeger, "[this] explanation for size separation might work in situations in which there is no granular convection, for example for containers with completely frictionless side walls or deep below the surface of tall containers (where convection is strongly suppressed). On the other hand, when friction with the side walls or other mechanisms set up a convection roll pattern inside the vibrated container, we found that the convective motion immediately takes over as the dominant mechanism for size separation.")3. The same explanation without buoyancy or center of mass arguments. As a larger particle moves upward, any motion of smaller particles into the spaces underneath blocks the larger particle from settling back in its previous position. Repetitive motion results in more smaller particles slipping beneath larger particles. A greater density of the larger particles has no effect on this process. Shaking is not necessary — any process which raises particles and then lets them settle would have this effect. The process of raising the particles imparts potential energy into the system. The result of all the particles settling in a different order may be an increase in the potential energy — a raising of the center of mass.4. When shaken, the particles move in vibration-induced convection flow: individual particles move up through the middle, across the surface and down the sides. If a large particle is involved, it will be moved up to the top by convection flow. Once at the top, the large particle will stay there because the convection currents are too narrow to sweep it down along the wall.

    All of this is a far cry from the NCAR explanation I found in the Encyclopaedia Britannica a long time ago.(Just as difficult to follow though.)

    Reply

  6. That was from:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granular_convectionMaybe I should have looked at this page first:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granular_materialDry as dust but it knocks seven bells out of the Continental Drift theory.How the force of impact is spread in equally matched particles: How jamming occurs at dams: With this latter phenomenon, it might be possible to kill yourself firing a shotgun where the shot is fused with wax. Various explanations have been proposed for that but I think that if there is a mechanism that moves the outer walls of the projectile faster than the centre, it could cause a blockage in the above mechanism if the barrel was long enough.Or maybe not:http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_1/368594_Dont_be_an_idiot_like_me__please_everyone_learn_from_me_.html&page=1

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s