|
#PlanetaryTemperature
#Top |
K12 Solid
Science Curriculum
CoSy and KKrishEnergy are
working together to create an HONEST essential K12 science cirriculum
More info
forthcoming .
Recent email exchange about the failure to explicitly account for gravitational energy
in planetary energy balance equations ( actually why none exist )
I simply searched for you , https://duckduckgo.com/?q=trenberth and got back that you were at NCAR and also honorary faculty in physics at Auckland . I also saw a ` 303 number for you . It remains the case that the various down & up arrow account are far from clear that the reason bottoms of atmospheres are hotter than their lumped planet+atmosphere radiative equilibrium is the adiabatic exchange of gravitational and kinetic energy . That accounts for the ~ 30c difference on Earth , ~ 400c difference on Venus . Of course the radiative intensity at any point reflects the temperature around that point . Cork Hayden who is down the road in Pueblo has an image I like :  where he intends G to label the Greenhouse effect . But that is the gravitational component --- which must be accounted for by Conservation of Energy . And I have yet to see it explicitly acknowledged in any of these energy balance accountings . As Robert Holmes points out , when you account for the gravitational component , their is very little variance left over for the slight changes in our spectrum as seen from outside due to changes in the altitude of final radiation to space of the spectrally active gases . Holmes and I are far from the only people pointing this out .  I would describe myself most pertinently as an APL programmer . Thus I look at these issues in a very classical analytical quantitative line of code by line of code approach where an expression like A B * ' + ./ can apply an inner product between each corresponding vector in arrays which are voxel maps of the atmosphere . So the first computation is what is the temperature of a gray ball in our orbit . Next , a uniformly colored one . Maybe half a dozen lines to that point . Global parameters like temperature are like gas laws : the eddies inside are a much more difficult problem , but must net to the global constraints . In my 2014 Heartland presentation I simply worked thru the quantitative absurdity of trying to explain Venus's extreme bottom of atmosphere temperature as a spectral effect . And thus the deep dishonesty of Hansen's claim that our oceans could boil . At the time , it's clear from the Q&A that I did not know what was the source of Venus's extreme bottom of atmosphere temperature , just that it could not be due to some spectral filtering phenomenon . One immediately runs into the constraint of the Divergence Theorem . It was only later in comments on WUWT that gravity , the other macroscopic force , was the elephant locked out of the room . You say you you deal with phase changes , gravity , internal , and kinetic ( both heat and macroscopic ) but have no place for them in your diagrams . Kinetic , ie: heat , is the dependent variable being explained . And gravity is the source of that temperature differential .
| -- On 2023-05-02 02:27, Kevin
Trenberth wrote:
You have a lot wrong: |
CoSy The Language
A bit of Overview
Some bits o Code
ResearchGate question :
First Humming Bird appearances here over the years searching past CoSy logs . First arrived Tuesday this year .
Also , a puzzle posted on FB w at least 2 answers one of which is given by :
i( 1 4 2 5 3 6 5 8 )i ' + .\ |>| 1 5 7 12 15 21 26 34
A problem I see in my WorkLog which I responded to on Sun.Apr,20230430 but failed to note the link . My comment was simply
101 _iotaf `f 100 %f Tau *f sinf
to generate a 101 point cycle of a sine wave ( starting and ending with
0.0 ) .
The main point was the ability to simply write the line in a CoSy text window and tap F6 to execute it , no pullng up some separate ` programming editor or having to write a multiline loop .
The line is essentially equivalent to other APLs , other than being RPN syntax .
However , unlike any traditional APL the definitions of the words are open all the way down to the chip . Here's definitions of some of the main ones :
is one of the most compex adverbs in CoSy . 20 lines as written . It's form of APL's atomic apply . It recursively goes thru corrsponding leafs of array ( tree ) arguments and applies the verb ( function ) to those correstponding leafs . It's what allows an expression like A B dot where : dot * +/ ; to apply , eg: to each corresponding vector in a voxel map of the atmosphere .
Interesting FB thread with Luboš Motl on the fundamental architectural rule of the Great Pyramid .
Self references and evaluations
are generally of near zero value .
That's why I want contacts with and to set up some presentations to `
tekys .
I do know the path I've come . And Iverson's APL and its younger somewhat simpler Whitney's K find their markets at the highest level of , in particular : financial , markets . Moore's Forth is so minimal it is almost as much a philosophy as a language and has implementations on virtually any chip that comes out . And that minimalism has led it to find significant uses in ` space tek .
Both these venerable languages have significant moats . They hold down the polar ends of the language spectrum from the chip architectural to the succinct expression of array ( ie: finite ) mathematics .
CoSy is unique in implementing an adult lifetime in APL as an extensive vocabulary in Forth , and I am personally unique in having known and knowing all three of these most significant language creators .
Also my interest from first learning APL to help learning the matrix math required for an EE pattern recognition course I was sitting in on ( ~ 1975 ) ; as Iverson put it , as a Tool of Thought . That's why various generations of CoSy have always been interactive notebook environments in which tapping a function key instead of enter tells your computer to execute the line rather than simply return carriage . And it's always been , to the extent possible , an interface written and commanded in CoSy itself . The point is to have an environment whose productivity itself can be constantly evolving .
While ` best is conversational hyperbole , I very much like the notion of ` admissibility from statistics . A stat is ` admissible if it is best , ie: as or more powerful , for some question than any other . The notion recognizes that ` best is a multidimensional surface , not a single dimension . I will just claim that CoSy is an admissible fresh paradigm in computing language and environment -- for those who can ` hack it .
I'll just close w a comment by ex KGB Andrei Kondrashev who wrote the first APL for a USSR PC equivalent :
It's a matter of genetics .
I think he too much discounts drive & determination .
I do know the path I've come . And Iverson's APL and its younger somewhat simpler Whitney's K find their markets at the highest level of , in particular : financial , markets . Moore's Forth is so minimal it is almost as much a philosophy as a language and has implementations on virtually any chip that comes out . And that minimalism has led it to find significant uses in ` space tek .
Both these venerable languages have significant moats . They hold down the polar ends of the language spectrum from the chip architectural to the succinct expression of array ( ie: finite ) mathematics .
CoSy is unique in implementing an adult lifetime in APL as an extensive vocabulary in Forth , and I am personally unique in having known and knowing all three of these most significant language creators .
Also my interest from first learning APL to help learning the matrix math required for an EE pattern recognition course I was sitting in on ( ~ 1975 ) ; as Iverson put it , as a Tool of Thought . That's why various generations of CoSy have always been interactive notebook environments in which tapping a function key instead of enter tells your computer to execute the line rather than simply return carriage . And it's always been , to the extent possible , an interface written and commanded in CoSy itself . The point is to have an environment whose productivity itself can be constantly evolving .
While ` best is conversational hyperbole , I very much like the notion of ` admissibility from statistics . A stat is ` admissible if it is best , ie: as or more powerful , for some question than any other . The notion recognizes that ` best is a multidimensional surface , not a single dimension . I will just claim that CoSy is an admissible fresh paradigm in computing language and environment -- for those who can ` hack it .
I'll just close w a comment by ex KGB Andrei Kondrashev who wrote the first APL for a USSR PC equivalent :
It's a matter of genetics .
I think he too much discounts drive & determination .
Some bits o Code
ResearchGate question :
Kuruku Ankith : From the series
1+q+q^2+q^3+q^4+............+q^19+q^20,I want to collect the sum
1+q^5+q^10+q^15. which programming language will helpful to me ?
q better be pretty close to
1 for the answer not to blow up .
In CoSy which executes directly at the chip level in Forth , the computation could be written :
Then the 2 sums you mention :
In CoSy which executes directly at the chip level in Forth , the computation could be written :
: psum ^f +/ ;Then the 2 sums you mention :
`i 21 iotaf
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0
16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 20.0
`f .999 `i 21 iotaf psum |>| 20.7913
`f .999 f( 0 5 10 15 )f psum |>| 3.9702
More traditional APLs like Dyalog's or Kx's would be
slightly more succinct but not uniquely open from the math to the chip
like CoSy .First Humming Bird appearances here over the years searching past CoSy logs . First arrived Tuesday this year .
Also , a puzzle posted on FB w at least 2 answers one of which is given by :
i( 1 4 2 5 3 6 5 8 )i ' + .\ |>| 1 5 7 12 15 21 26 34
A problem I see in my WorkLog which I responded to on Sun.Apr,20230430 but failed to note the link . My comment was simply
101 _iotaf `f 100 %f Tau *f sinf
The main point was the ability to simply write the line in a CoSy text window and tap F6 to execute it , no pullng up some separate ` programming editor or having to write a multiline loop .
The line is essentially equivalent to other APLs , other than being RPN syntax .
However , unlike any traditional APL the definitions of the words are open all the way down to the chip . Here's definitions of some of the main ones :
` _iotaf :??
| APL's ` iota on a CoSy integer singleton . And version returning float .
: iota >_ _iota ; : _iotaf _iota i>f ; : iotaf iota i>f ;
` _iota :??
| APL's iota on naked n . Returns 1st n integers . 0 is the 1st integer .
: _iota ( n -- adr )
dup intVecInit
dup vbody rot | adr bodyadr n
0 ?do i over i c+ ! loop
drop ;
` Tau :??
: Tau Pi 2. _f *f ;
`( *f sinf )` ' :?? 'm | Definitions of both ' *f and ' sinf
: *f { ' f* eachDfr } aaply ; | * 2 float vecs
: sinf { ' fsin eachMfr } aaplym ;
` eachDfr :??
: eachDfr ( LA RA fn -- r ) | each Dyadic on floats , resulting
-rot 2dup 2refs+> longer_ dup floatVecInit >aux
0 ?do over i if@ dup i if@ 2 pick execute aux@ i if! loop
2refs- drop aux> ;
`( f* fsin )` ' :?? 'm | Now we are down to the chip ( x86 x87 ) level
: f* ( f:a f:b -- f:a*b ) inline{ de c9 } ;inline
: fsin ( f:a -- f:sin[a]) inline{ d9 fe } ;inline
' aaply ( LA RA fn --
r )| APL's ` iota on a CoSy integer singleton . And version returning float .
: iota >_ _iota ; : _iotaf _iota i>f ; : iotaf iota i>f ;
` _iota :??
| APL's iota on naked n . Returns 1st n integers . 0 is the 1st integer .
: _iota ( n -- adr )
dup intVecInit
dup vbody rot | adr bodyadr n
0 ?do i over i c+ ! loop
drop ;
` Tau :??
: Tau Pi 2. _f *f ;
`( *f sinf )` ' :?? 'm | Definitions of both ' *f and ' sinf
: *f { ' f* eachDfr } aaply ; | * 2 float vecs
: sinf { ' fsin eachMfr } aaplym ;
` eachDfr :??
: eachDfr ( LA RA fn -- r ) | each Dyadic on floats , resulting
-rot 2dup 2refs+> longer_ dup floatVecInit >aux
0 ?do over i if@ dup i if@ 2 pick execute aux@ i if! loop
2refs- drop aux> ;
`( f* fsin )` ' :?? 'm | Now we are down to the chip ( x86 x87 ) level
: f* ( f:a f:b -- f:a*b ) inline{ de c9 } ;inline
: fsin ( f:a -- f:sin[a]) inline{ d9 fe } ;inline
is one of the most compex adverbs in CoSy . 20 lines as written . It's form of APL's atomic apply . It recursively goes thru corrsponding leafs of array ( tree ) arguments and applies the verb ( function ) to those correstponding leafs . It's what allows an expression like A B dot where : dot * +/ ; to apply , eg: to each corresponding vector in a voxel map of the atmosphere .
Interesting FB thread with Luboš Motl on the fundamental architectural rule of the Great Pyramid .
| CoSy
is the simplest most productive programming environment for ` ordinary people , built on the most ` powerful ideas from APL & Forth However , being minimalist language open to the chip there are no limitations to the problems it may be applicable to . |
SV-FIG 20230422 Bridgit
& Recent Code
|
Add
CoSy
to your talents , and your talents to CoSy ,
The Fresh Paradigm in
programming language and interface .
More at αlphas
Check the Daily
Blog for more , and links on these and other topics .
Coming : premium daily Blog updates : winnowed links to news , commentary & tek
Coming : premium daily Blog updates : winnowed links to news , commentary & tek
If you are running CoSy, the ` Job is downloadable at https://cosy.com/y23/blog.csy giving you all the tools for searching , extracting , etc that the CoSy vocabulary provides .
#Top |
Note , the whole of this blogPost , it's mailing list , and all
of the CoSy website is created by me ,Bob Armstrong , using CoSy and a wysiwyg editor . | BobA | 20230508.1247 |
|
 |
|
||||