Polar Vortex

[jc456]

{Note: this topic is not about Climate Change, Global Warming, or Greenhouse Gases}

They claim we just got "blasted" again here in the NE with another "polar vortex" and that it will likely happen again within the coming weeks before winter mercifully goes away. Local reaction sounds like, "I just planted two hundred petunias. Sure hope they survive!" Meanwhile, stuck back inside again, I just ponder the term "polar vortex" itself. One of these terms that's always struck me as plain wrong. To me, it suggests Daniel Day-Lewis, from There Will Be Blood, as The North Pole dipping a straw from his milkshake into our warm weather and blowing it all away instead of sucking it up -or- Old Man Winter competing with the Sun to get some guy to put his coat back on.

Anyway, here's the problem. Hot goes to cold, not vice-versa. Always. Scientifically verifiable fact. Cold sucks heat from your body causing you to shiver. You heat your home in winter to replace to the warmth bleeding out of it into the colder environment, not because cold air is getting in through the same openings as commonly described. Heat flux, never cold flux.

Similarly, these "polar vortices" are commonly presented as coming out of the Arctic or Antarctic. Example:



Note how "the stratosphere" magically "warms up" apparently with no further explanation called for. Could it just be due to more spring Sun? If so, how come this sort of thing is now going on in the fall, all winter long, and well into the spring?

well the real question is why is it only warming up over the arctic and why does the arctic cold move just because it warmed up above it?

 

[Grumblenuts]

This is why the merry-go-round analogy sucks, the major force involved being centripetal, not Coriolis-like.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You may be using "hot" and "cold" incorrectly ... these are comparators, and a matter of opinion ... something to be avoided in science ... the Inuit will tell you 50º is hot, the Columbian will say cold ... who do we believe ...

Why? I'm trying to keep things as simple stupid as possible is all. One thing being described as relatively hot (a given), the other must logically be cold. Perhaps try lending others more benefit of the doubt.

I think you're reading far too much into the idle speculations of some TV beat reporter with nothing better to do ... the polar vortex may or may not have and effect on tropospheric weather ... we don't know ... we're in the stratosphere here, only 18% of the mass of the atmosphere ... so to compare, swirl the very top layer of a glass of water with your fingertip ... how much does this effect the bottom? ...

I think you enjoy creating excuses to be disagreeable.

 

[ReinyDays]

I do to some extent, but not so much at the poles. Here National Geographic supplies an alleged 4th grade explanation of the "Effect":

The Coriolis Effect: Earth's Rotation and Its Effect on Weather

The Coriolis effect describes the pattern of deflection taken by objects not firmly connected to the ground as they travel long distances around the Earth.

www.nationalgeographic.org

I don't think that really explains much of anything. Right off the bat:

If you were really standing at the Equator, your friend in North America would be well over the horizon, out of sight. If you fired the ball straight at his GPS location, it would hit the ground between. Add gravity and you'd have to fire it significantly upward so that it would arc over the Earth between and come back down on the second half of its flight. Seems to me you'd have to fire it to the left as well, but the merry-go-round analogy doesn't seem very helpful (nor analogous). One should first presume two reasons for why the atmosphere spins at all along with the Earth. First due to its frictional contact with the surface (and none with space), and secondly, inertia.

I think your references to "cross product" and inertia are getting somewhere, but these alleged orthogonal forces need more fleshing out. I can picture an inertial gradient existing between the Earth's surface and space. In other words, the Earth drags the lower atmosphere along while the upper atmosphere coasts and eventually slows down to nothing where it meets space, even though space can exert no frictional drag upon it.

So as cooling, wetter air gains in density it falls due to gravity, but also gains inertia causing it to experience more drag due to the Earth's surface friction. The reverse occurs on the upward leg of its vertical convective journey with the same sideways result.

Bullet at 17,000 mph would be in orbit, never to strike the Earth ... 90 minutes each, just DUCK every 24 hours ... neglecting the air ... with the air, we have drag ... the air builds up in front of an airplane, and evacuates out from behind, creating an honest-to-goodness pressure force pushing the airplane back the way it came ...

Now we come to Crazytown ... watch your step please ...

Spin a globe, see how Dallas has to cover more distance than Chicago just because Dallas is further from the axis of rotation? ... so Dallas has to travel roughly 100 mph faster every day to keep up ... if our air parcel read "calm" in Dallas, and we move it up to Chicago, without any other forces, then in Chicago this air parcel with read "100 mph" and the wind will be said to be coming from the West (i.e. the vector is pointed east) ... because the air parcel is still moving at Dallas speed ...

Obviously, that doesn't happen ... as we're moving to the north, drag starts to develop pushing back on the air parcel, slowing it down, so it's a more average 10 mph in Chicago ...

Make a fist with your right hand ... with your index finger, point to the north, the direction of the convection forces ... take your middle finger and point this to the west, the direction of the pressure force (or drag) ... your other two fingers curl in the direction of the torque we've just generated with our two linear forces ... "counter-clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere ... "

My copy of Halliday/Resnick doesn't mention Coriolis force or effect ... and of the Centrifugal force they give one sentence explaining that it is a pseudo-force and has no bearing on any serious physics ...

 

[ReinyDays]

I think you enjoy creating excuses to be disagreeable.

I have my college physics textbook here in front of me fact-checking the comments I'm posting ... are you disagreeing with basic physics? ...

 

[ReinyDays]

This is why the merry-go-round analogy sucks, the major force involved being centripetal, not Coriolis-like.

The rock is rotating with the boy and merry-go-round ... as soon as the boy releases the rock, the rock moves through space independently of the child or merry-go-round ... and it will move through space straight as seen by the people on the ground ... the people on the ground will also see the little girl rotating into the line-of-flight of the rock ... bang ...

The boy is perceiving the merry-go-round as his "stationary", it is the world around that is spinning ... he threw the rock at the other boy, without taking into account the other boy would just spin out of the way ... and the rock's trajectory would appear to the boy as curving off into the unsuspecting little girl ...

We stand on the merry-go-round and say the Sun, Moon and stars rotate around us ... now don't we? ...

=====

You asked why the polar vortex spins ... there is no simple answer other than "pseudo-forces" ... I've given you the simplest I can give, just some things can't be simplified enough ...

 

[Grumblenuts]

Bullet at 17,000 mph would be in orbit, never to strike the Earth ... 90 minutes each, just DUCK every 24 hours ... neglecting the air ... with the air, we have drag ... the air builds up in front of an airplane, and evacuates out from behind, creating an honest-to-goodness pressure force pushing the airplane back the way it came ...

Got it. Again, the major force at such orbital velocities is obviously centripetal, not analogous to any Coriolis Effect.

Spin a globe, see how Dallas has to cover more distance than Chicago just because Dallas is further from the axis of rotation? ... so Dallas has to travel roughly 100 mph faster every day to keep up ... if our air parcel read "calm" in Dallas, and we move it up to Chicago, without any other forces, then in Chicago this air parcel with read "100 mph" and the wind will be said to be coming from the West (i.e. the vector is pointed east) ... because the air parcel is still moving at Dallas speed ...

Obviously, that doesn't happen ... as we're moving to the north, drag starts to develop pushing back on the air parcel, slowing it down, so it's a more average 10 mph in Chicago ...

Make a fist with your right hand ... with your index finger, point to the north, the direction of the convection forces ... take your middle finger and point this to the west, the direction of the pressure force (or drag) ... your other two fingers curl in the direction of the torque we've just generated with our two linear forces ... "counter-clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere ... "

Agreed. I've been acknowledging that from the start. Now when you get to the poles.. not so much, right?

I have my college physics textbook here in front of me fact-checking the comments I'm posting ... are you disagreeing with basic physics? ...

Am I?

 

[Grumblenuts]

You asked why the polar vortex spins ... there is no simple answer other than "pseudo-forces" ... I've given you the simplest I can give, just some things can't be simplified enough ...

I think I've done better.. and without even one mention of zee Aether, lol. Still, I'd agree not very satisfying so far..

 

[jc456]

The rock is rotating with the boy and merry-go-round ... as soon as the boy releases the rock, the rock moves through space independently of the child or merry-go-round ... and it will move through space straight as seen by the people on the ground ... the people on the ground will also see the little girl rotating into the line-of-flight of the rock ... bang ...

The boy is perceiving the merry-go-round as his "stationary", it is the world around that is spinning ... he threw the rock at the other boy, without taking into account the other boy would just spin out of the way ... and the rock's trajectory would appear to the boy as curving off into the unsuspecting little girl ...

We stand on the merry-go-round and say the Sun, Moon and stars rotate around us ... now don't we? ...

=====

You asked why the polar vortex spins ... there is no simple answer other than "pseudo-forces" ... I've given you the simplest I can give, just some things can't be simplified enough ...

The vortex falls because pressure systems move it or pressure leaves a region

 

[ReinyDays]

Now when you get to the poles.. not so much, right?

The motion I've been describing never makes it past the polar front ... here it rises and returns back towards the equator aloft ... it's in that turn of the air flow at the top of the polar front where we (kinda sorta) accumulate the most of this Westerly component ... thus the polar jet stream ... in the temperate circulation cell ...

If you want my opinion ... it's this polar jet stream that drives the polar vortex ... not the other way around ... there's very little in the stratosphere that effects weather ... think of us having a lid at the tropopause, nothing but jet engine soot above that ... oh, and chemtrails ... and hurricane inducing meteor dust, why we call this meteorology ...

 

[Grumblenuts]

Pictures are are clearly called for. For example, from the OP:

Me no see no stinkin' "polar jet stream"!

 

[jc456]

Pictures are are clearly called for. For example, from the OP:

Me no see no stinkin' "polar jet stream"!

It’s about the pressure

 

[ReinyDays]

Pictures are are clearly called for. For example, from the OP:

Me no see no stinkin' "polar jet stream"!

jc456 is right ... this diagram is showing a pressure trough in the troposphere ... not the polar vortex in the thin stratosphere ... the image might be from NOAA ... but the descriptions were added by someone else ... unless you have a link ...

I can't believe you don't see where the diagram clearly says "jet stream" ...

Polar vortex - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Rossby wave - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Atmospheric circulation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Edify yourself ...

 

[Grumblenuts]

I can't believe you don't see where the diagram clearly says "jet stream" ...

I take it back. You don't try to be disagreeable. Ever. I recall almost editing that afterward to just quote the "polar" bit, then thinking Nah, it will make no difference. Took a most excellent nap instead.. and like magic.. at long last.. the winds have died down.. it's getting warmer!

 

[Grumblenuts]

Polar vortex - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Now you're just cheating. How dare you simply look up the WIKI on the very term itself? Have you no pride? No decency, woman?

The stratospheric and tropospheric polar vortices both rotate in the direction of the Earth's spin, but they are distinct phenomena that have different sizes, structures, seasonal cycles, and impacts on weather.

Okay, who knew that? Be honest..

The tropospheric polar vortex is often defined as the area poleward of the tropospheric jet stream.

"Tropospheric jet stream" vs. "stratospheric jet stream" vs. "polar vortex" vs. "jet stream" vs. "polar jet stream" vs "stratospheric and tropospheric polar vortices".. This is just giving me a headache!

It’s about the pressure

Exactly!

Now I've got to recalibrate..

 

[Sunsettommy]

Now you're just cheating. How dare you simply look up the WIKI on the very term itself? Have you no pride? No decency, woman?

Okay, who knew that? Be honest..

"Tropospheric jet stream" vs. "stratospheric jet stream" vs. "polar vortex" vs. "jet stream" vs. "polar jet stream" vs "stratospheric and tropospheric polar vortices".. This is just giving me a headache!

Exactly!

Now I've got to recalibrate..

NOAA explains what it is:

"The polar vortex is a large area of low pressure and cold air surrounding both of the Earth’s poles. It ALWAYS exists near the poles, but weakens in summer and strengthens in winter. The term "vortex" refers to the counter-clockwise flow of air that helps keep the colder air near the Poles. Many times during winter in the northern hemisphere, the polar vortex will expand, sending cold air southward with the jet stream (see graphic above). This occurs fairly regularly during wintertime and is often associated with large outbreaks of Arctic air in the United States."

and,

"It is also not a feature that exists at the Earth’s surface. Weather forecasters examine the polar vortex by looking at conditions tens of thousands of feet up in the atmosphere; however, when we feel extremely cold air from the Arctic regions at Earth’s surface, it is sometimes associated with the polar vortex."

LINK

 

[jc456]

Now you're just cheating. How dare you simply look up the WIKI on the very term itself? Have you no pride? No decency, woman?

Okay, who knew that? Be honest..

"Tropospheric jet stream" vs. "stratospheric jet stream" vs. "polar vortex" vs. "jet stream" vs. "polar jet stream" vs "stratospheric and tropospheric polar vortices".. This is just giving me a headache!

Exactly!

Now I've got to recalibrate..

Dude, the vortex drops every time the Pacific Ocean water warmth moves up north of Alaska. I’m no scientific brain but I pay attention to flue of systems

 

[ReinyDays]

Now you're just cheating. How dare you simply look up the WIKI on the very term itself? Have you no pride? No decency, woman?

Okay, who knew that? Be honest..

"Tropospheric jet stream" vs. "stratospheric jet stream" vs. "polar vortex" vs. "jet stream" vs. "polar jet stream" vs "stratospheric and tropospheric polar vortices".. This is just giving me a headache!

Exactly!

Now I've got to recalibrate..

Don't tighten the hold-downs on those calibrations yet ... you'll be recalibrating on a regular basis ... not a woman, an elf who will tell you both yes and no ...

There's still much about the atmosphere we don't know ... new information keeps rolling in and we get to the point where we can't even decide what ... exactly ... is the polar vortex ... we have two choices, so which do we mean ...

I also gave a link to the Rossby Wave article ... and this is how you will find these matters discussed in the scientific literature (usually) ... and using this model we call this "polar vortex" structure in the troposphere as a "long wave disturbance" ... and this is how it's described in NWS forecast copy ... short wave disturbances form along the jet stream in Alberta and cross down into the United States ... so called "Alberta Clippers" ... this language is more portable for the exact same phenominome that are outside the polar regaions and more of a wave structure rather than a full vortex ...

For the vortex ...

For the wave

y = sin x

which would you rather solve? ...

The Atmospheric Circulation article should be memorized ... this dominates everything about the atmosphere; weather, climate, oceans ...

 

[jc456]

Don't tighten the hold-downs on those calibrations yet ... you'll be recalibrating on a regular basis ... not a woman, an elf who will tell you both yes and no ...

There's still much about the atmosphere we don't know ... new information keeps rolling in and we get to the point where we can't even decide what ... exactly ... is the polar vortex ... we have two choices, so which do we mean ...

I also gave a link to the Rossby Wave article ... and this is how you will find these matters discussed in the scientific literature (usually) ... and using this model we call this "polar vortex" structure in the troposphere as a "long wave disturbance" ... and this is how it's described in NWS forecast copy ... short wave disturbances form along the jet stream in Alberta and cross down into the United States ... so called "Alberta Clippers" ... this language is more portable for the exact same phenominome that are outside the polar regaions and more of a wave structure rather than a full vortex ...

For the vortex ...

For the wave

y = sin x

which would you rather solve? ...

The Atmospheric Circulation article should be memorized ... this dominates everything about the atmosphere; weather, climate, oceans ...

in laymen's terms, Polar Vortex is splitting now bringing on severe mid-continent storms & Atlantic bomb cyclones

Bomb cyclone after bomb cyclone have exploded for the past two weeks in the far north Atlantic with the most intense weather over the Labrador and Greenland seas but extreme conditions also slammed northern Europe. Those storms sent heat upwards in winter version of a heat dome over northern Europe. Meanwhile, over the far north Pacific an intense storms that formed offshore of Japan and swung up into the Aleutian Islands formed the winter version of a heat dome over Alaska and the Alaskan side of the Arctic ocean. These two atmospheric domes caused an intense planetary wave number 2 to form sending an intense pulse of heat upwards into the stratosphere, disrupting the polar vortex. Extremely high levels of ocean heat in the north Atlantic off of the east coast of north America have provided extraordinary amounts of energy to intensify the bomb cyclones and build the ridge of warm air over Europe that has triggered the polar vortex splitting.

 

[ReinyDays]

in laymen's terms, Polar Vortex is splitting now bringing on severe mid-continent storms & Atlantic bomb cyclones

Bomb cyclone after bomb cyclone have exploded for the past two weeks in the far north Atlantic with the most intense weather over the Labrador and Greenland seas but extreme conditions also slammed northern Europe. Those storms sent heat upwards in winter version of a heat dome over northern Europe. Meanwhile, over the far north Pacific an intense storms that formed offshore of Japan and swung up into the Aleutian Islands formed the winter version of a heat dome over Alaska and the Alaskan side of the Arctic ocean. These two atmospheric domes caused an intense planetary wave number 2 to form sending an intense pulse of heat upwards into the stratosphere, disrupting the polar vortex. Extremely high levels of ocean heat in the north Atlantic off of the east coast of north America have provided extraordinary amounts of energy to intensify the bomb cyclones and build the ridge of warm air over Europe that has triggered the polar vortex splitting.

Climate is about averages ... 0ºF here ... 120ºF there ... 60ºF average, why the hell are you complaining? ...

The same with bad weather and good weather ... this stuff in the quote is happening while we here in the PNW have had nothing but perfect weather ... four to six weeks ahead of the season since the beginning of the year ... today would be seasonable in late April, and it's been this way for weeks ...

And here I'm defining "good" weather as ... well ... you know ... Los Angeles ...

Right ... Rossby Waves ... you're learning ... Good + Bad = 0 ... or the universe collapses according to the colander heads ...