Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics

[GordMay]

How Quantum Physicists Explained Earth’s Oscillating Weather Patterns

By treating Earth as a topological insulator [a state of quantum matter], physicists found a powerful explanation for the movements of the planet’s air and seas.

Earth’s ocean currents twist and swirl. Some of these currents appear to be roiling and chaotic, but others are orderly and stable, and they fuel large-scale periodic weather patterns.
In both the ocean and the atmosphere, gargantuan waves, called Kelvin waves, always travel eastward; and they fuel oscillating weather patterns, such as El Niño.

As it turns out, Earth’s rotation deflects the flow of fluids, in a way that’s analogous to how magnetic fields twist the paths of electrons moving through quantum materials, called topological insulators. If you imagine the planet as a giant topological insulator, you can explain the origin of the equatorial Kelvin waves.

But even though the theory worked, it was still only theoretical. No one had directly observationally verified it.

Now, in a new preprint [1], a team of scientists describes the direct measurement of twisting atmospheric waves — the exact kind of evidence needed to bolster the topological theory. The work has already helped scientists to use the language of topology to describe other systems, and it could lead to new insights about waves and weather patterns on Earth.

Treating Earth as a topological insulator might someday help geophysicists better predict the emergence of large-scale weather patterns on Earth, or maybe even lead to new geophysical discoveries, about the role topology plays, in a wide array of systems.

More about ➥ https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-q...scover_science

[1] “Topological Signature of Stratospheric Poincare -- Gravity Waves” ~ by
Weixuan Xu et al
➥ https://arxiv.org/pdf/2306.12191.pdf

[GordMay]

1.“Global Atmospheric Circulations” ➥ https://www.noaa.gov/jetstream/globa...c-circulations

Without the Earth’s rotation, tilt relative to the sun, and surface water, global circulation would be simple. With the Sun directly over the equator, the ground and atmosphere there would heat up more than the rest of the planet. This region would become very hot, with hot air rising into the upper atmosphere. This would create a constant belt of low pressure around the equator. That warm air would then move directly north toward the poles, where it would become very cold and sink, creating a large area of high pressure. The temperature and pressure difference would return the now-cold air south to the equator, creating a simple global circulation.

The Earth’s rotation results in an easterly-movement of air, called the Coriolis effect (2. The Jet Stream). The uneven distribution of water and land around the globe further breaks up the uniformity of air movement, with larger amounts of land in the Northern Hemisphere creating semi-permanent highs and lows. As a result, the actual global pattern of atmospheric circulation is much more complicated than a direct flow between the equator and poles.

There are three circulations in each hemisphere:

1. Hadley cell – At low latitudes, air moves toward the equator, where it is heated and rises vertically. In the upper atmosphere, air moves poleward. This forms a convection cell that covers tropical and sub-tropical climates. This cell is named for English physicist and meteorologist George Hadley, who proposed the single circulation for each hemisphere in 1735.

2. Ferrel cell – In this mid-latitude atmospheric circulation cell, air near the surface flows poleward and eastward, while air higher in the atmosphere moves equatorward and westward. Proposed by William Ferrell in 1856, it was the first to account for westerly winds between 35° and 60° N/S, which are caused by friction, not heat differences at the equator and poles.

3. Polar cell – At higher latitudes, air rises and travels toward the poles. Once over the poles, the air sinks, forming areas of high atmospheric pressure called the polar highs. At the surface, air moves outward from the polar highs, creating east-blowing surface winds called polar easterlies. It is the smallest and weakest of the cells.

These cells describe circulations in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, although the difference in landmasses result in varying degrees of uniformity.

Between each of these circulation cells are surface-level bands of high and low pressure. The high pressure band is located at about 30° N/S latitude and at each pole. Low pressure bands are found at the equator and 50°-60° N/S.

Usually, fair and dry/hot weather is associated with high pressure, while rainy and stormy weather is associated with low pressure. You can see the results of these circulations on a globe. Look at the number of deserts located along the 30°N/S latitude around the world (including the American Southwest and Mexico, northern Africa, and Australia). Then look at the region between 50°and 60° N/S latitude (including Canada, Alaska, the British Isles, and Russia in the Northern Hemisphere). These latitudes, especially on the west coast of continents, tend to have more precipitation due to more storms moving around the Earth.







2. “The Jet Stream” ➥ https://www.noaa.gov/jetstream/global/jet-stream

See also:
“A Global Look at Moving Air: Atmospheric Circulation”
➥ https://scied.ucar.edu/learning-zone...ic-circulation

[Mr. Kevin]

Sir, you always come up with the most interesting articles.

[Chotu]

Both of these pictures are very interesting because the flow pattern points to the formation of hurricanes off the coast of Africa in the Atlantic. If you imagine this more like water flowing, you could clearly imagine a lot of whirlpools forming in that area and spinning off - like the ones you see off a canoe paddle in calm water.

Also, in my own personal north eastern part of the United States, you can pretty clearly see how nor’easters would form as well and the reason they have the winds they are named for.

[sailone3032]

How does this affect global warming?

[MartinF]

Thank you, Gord May, for the big effort you have obviously put into this post. It certainly is a change from the usual"how-to" questions

[CaptTom]

Circulation patters are interesting, but understandable. What blows my mind is quantum mechanics. But I'm not really clear on the connection here. Something about a model which works well for quantum mechanics also happens to work well for some atmospheric phenomenon. Does that prove anything?

The mind-blowing part is how everything comes back to quantum mechanics. At some level, we, the winds, the universe, all exist because of the randomness its core. Without random quantum fluctuations there could be none of what we call free will. I like to believe in free will.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by sailone3032

How does this affect global warming?

Disclaimer:
I’m not a meteorologist, and have no formal training in climate, nor weather science. I’m just an interested amateur student.
Follows, my limited understanding, of some of the inter-relationships ⇔, between atmospheric circulation, climate, & weather:

Changes that occur, in one region, of the climate system, can affect others. One of the key ways this is happening, is through changes in atmospheric circulation patterns, as the planet retains more heat. Global warming affects regional temperature, and humidity structures, and winds respond, by changing the intensity, and structure of the circulation.

Atmospheric circulation, creates winds, that, along with ocean circulation, distributes heat, and moisture, across the entire surface of the Earth, bringing us our daily weather, and shaping regional climates.

These winds affect the water cycle, including the amount of rainfall each region receives, and the frequency of storms. Over centuries, the distinct weather patterns, formed by the level of moisture, in a certain area, become our regional climates. Changes in the amount, and distribution, of heat, in the Earth system, due to an enhanced greenhouse effect, from human activities, is altering atmospheric, and ocean circulation patterns, that, in turn, alter environments around the globe.

Increasing the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, increases Earth's average temperature, and alters the air temperature differences, that determine atmospheric circulation patterns. This can cause changes in weather patterns, and climate, over time, as the location of circulation cells, and the jet streams, are altered.

Because the Arctic region is especially sensitive to overall warming, compared to lower latitudes, the temperature gradient, between the mid-latitudes, and the pole is being reduced. This increases waviness, in the north polar jet stream.
As the atmosphere continues to warm, scientists expect to see much deeper north-south waves, which will cause changes in the jet stream. This could result in weather, both stormy and clear, persisting for much longer, than would be considered normal over any particular area.

Changes in atmospheric circulation also transports heat, that drives the water cycle, including cloud formation, and precipitation patterns. In turn, the energy absorbed, and released, in the water cycle, also contributes to atmospheric circulation.

The strong winds, created by atmospheric circulation, are believed to have the ability to carry air pollution, from one region of the planet to another.
There’s evidence [1], that even smog, from China, and India, has drifted across the Pacific Ocean, into the western US, over the past 25 years. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) found that Asian air pollution caused a 65 percent increase in ozone levels, in Yellowstone, Yosemite, and 14 other western US national parks.

Climate change is already causing problems, for Cruisers, and peoples worldwide:
- Sea level rise is already forcing people to abandon coastal communities, and a wider coastal retreat will be “unavoidable”, in some areas. in all but the most optimistic sea level rise expectations.
- Climate change is already making some extreme weather more common, and more intense. Climate change links have been found in heat waves, droughts, fires, floods, storms and hurricanes.
- Climate change already impacting biodiversity, causing large-scale shifts in species, and altering ecosystems, but aiding in the spread of invasive species.



[1] “US surface ozone trends and extremes from 1980 to 2014: quantifying the roles of rising Asian emissions, domestic controls, wildfires, and climate” ~ by Meiyun Lin et al
01 Mar 2017 ➥ https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/...-2943-2017.pdf
Supplement ➥ https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/...supplement.pdf

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

Circulation patters are interesting, but understandable. What blows my mind is quantum mechanics. But I'm not really clear on the connection here. Something about a model which works well for quantum mechanics also happens to work well for some atmospheric phenomenon. Does that prove anything?

The mind-blowing part is how everything comes back to quantum mechanics. At some level, we, the winds, the universe, all exist because of the randomness its core. Without random quantum fluctuations there could be none of what we call free will. I like to believe in free will.

Is there anyone else who went to school for physics who doesn’t appreciate the pop culture fanaticism surrounding quantum mechanics right now?

It’s overhyped. It’s being used to name many products. It’s being misapplied to a lot of things. It’s cool to explore. But the hype is really kind of ridiculous.

Ultimately, if it gets more funding into the hands of people who are working on theoretical and experimental physics, I think it’s a good thing. That’s why I left physics. It doesn’t pay very much thanks to a society that tends to put profits today ahead of profits tomorrow by not funding much R&D. But the hype is a little much.

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Chotu

Is there anyone else who went to school for physics who doesn’t appreciate the pop culture fanaticism surrounding quantum mechanics right now?

I didn't go to school for physics. But I think there's an innate human desire to understand our universe, where we came from, etc.

I agree that the media (both news and entertainment) do a horrible job of presenting physics and science in general to the public. Over-hyped, over-simplified, and often totally misunderstood. They latch onto a small but sensational-sounding aspect of an otherwise complex concept. They conflate beliefs with scientific evidence.

That said, any movement toward scientific literacy by the general public has to be a good thing, long-term. Anything which sparks interest and encourages a deeper understanding could push society toward more rational behavior and away from superstition and fantasy.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

I didn't go to school for physics. But I think there's an innate human desire to understand our universe, where we came from, etc.

I agree that the media (both news and entertainment) do a horrible job of presenting physics and science in general to the public. Over-hyped, over-simplified, and often totally misunderstood. They latch onto a small but sensational-sounding aspect of an otherwise complex concept. They conflate beliefs with scientific evidence.

That said, any movement toward scientific literacy by the general public has to be a good thing, long-term. Anything which sparks interest and encourages a deeper understanding could push society toward more rational behavior and away from superstition and fantasy.

There’s definitely a trend toward superstition, fantasy, legend, and non-logical or non-critical thinking. Not getting an education is fairly popular these days and it’s been showing. I know a lot of people in younger generations and it’s somewhat unfortunate to see these trends. Hopefully they will turn around. Who knows? Maybe all of this quantum hoopla will inspire some people. You’re right.

The thing that’s weird to me is quantum theory in general dates back 123 years. It was first proposed when our great and great great grandparents were around.

Of course, there was a lot of refinement and it really didn’t hit its stride until the time of our great grandparents 100 years ago in the 1920s and 1930s.

Then experimental observation had to be done and filling in the standard model and stuff. But still.

Why now? Why is it so trendy? It’s really weird.

It’s like all of a sudden all of these things that have existed forever for many generations are pushed to the front of the media and shown as incredible new breakthroughs. It makes no sense to me. Electric cars. That’s another one. In 1920s or 30s one of the very first cars invented was electric. It’s not like it’s a new thing. But everybody treated it as this big hype.

The underlying science has always been there. There is nothing new happening. Maybe that’s exactly why. There is nothing new happening.

I guess my last little sentence is exactly why I’m going back into physics. There is nothing new happening. Experimentally? Maybe. Technologically? Maybe. Theoretically? Not so much.

Rant over. Lol. Please continue.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Chotu

... Who knows? Maybe all of this quantum hoopla will inspire some people. You’re right.

The thing that’s weird to me is quantum theory in general dates back 123 years. It was first proposed when our great and great great grandparents were around.

Of course, there was a lot of refinement and it really didn’t hit its stride until the time of our great grandparents 100 years ago in the 1920s and 1930s...

... Why now? Why is it so trendy? It’s really weird...

Perhaps, because these breakthroughs could point the way to fundamental insights into quantum chemistry, quantum computing, and other new technologies.

ie:
Quantum "Superchemistry”
US researchers have observed a phenomenon, known as ‘quantum superchemistry,’ in which ultracold atoms undergo chemical reactions, at a faster rate than usual.
The effect was predicted, theoretically, more than 20 years ago, but this is one of the first times the phenomenon been seen.
They show that atoms [or molecules], in the same quantum state, chemically react more rapidly, than do atoms [or molecules], that are in different quantum states.
Chin, and his colleagues, supercooled a gas of caesium atoms, until they combined, to form a Bose–Einstein condensate [BEC], where the atoms collectively act, as if they have a single quantum state.
The researchers then applied a magnetic field to the BEC, to stimulate a chemical reaction, in which caesium atoms partner up, to form caesium molecules.

More about ➥ https://news.uchicago.edu/story/uchi...try-laboratory

“Transition from an atomic to a molecular Bose–Einstein condensate” ~ by Cheng Chin et al
➥ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03443-0

[CaptTom]

Yes, new insights we probably can't even imagine now.

We're conditioned to think in binary. Yes or no. Black or white. Believe or dis-believe. Liberal or Conservative.

Frankly I'm not sure I fully understand quantum computing. I feel like I want the certainty of a one or a zero. All the fuzzy states in between confuse me. That's probably just a limitation of my own experience. Obviously things like predicting weather patterns require a model with the same random variation as the real system. Things like hacking into networks require guessing unimaginable numbers of encryption keys to find the one which works. I sort of get where they're going with all that, but it hurts my brain.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Perhaps, because these breakthroughs could point the way to fundamental insights into quantum chemistry, quantum computing, and other new technologies.

ie:
Quantum "Superchemistry”
US researchers have observed a phenomenon, known as ‘quantum superchemistry,’ in which ultracold atoms undergo chemical reactions, at a faster rate than usual.
The effect was predicted, theoretically, more than 20 years ago, but this is one of the first times the phenomenon been seen.
They show that atoms [or molecules], in the same quantum state, chemically react more rapidly, than do atoms [or molecules], that are in different quantum states.
Chin, and his colleagues, supercooled a gas of caesium atoms, until they combined, to form a Bose–Einstein condensate [BEC], where the atoms collectively act, as if they have a single quantum state.
The researchers then applied a magnetic field to the BEC, to stimulate a chemical reaction, in which caesium atoms partner up, to form caesium molecules.

More about ➥ https://news.uchicago.edu/story/uchi...try-laboratory

“Transition from an atomic to a molecular Bose–Einstein condensate” ~ by Cheng Chin et al
➥ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03443-0

Yes, these experimental results might result in new *technologies*. Not theory. (Although maybe if we are lucky) They are not fixing all that is wrong with our flawed understanding of how things work. There has been relatively little progress on that for 100 years now.

Quantum mechanics isn’t the be all end all. It’s not the end of our understanding. It’s flawed. It’s incomplete. It’s incompatible. (with relativity) It needs work. There have been some attempts with string theory, etc, but it’s time for some new science.

[GordMay]

As the results roll in, from theoretical & experimental physicists; the applied physicists & engineers, and entrepreneurs will be developing a multitude of new products, that a few people will leverage into fortunes, and masses of people will use.

In 1962, in his book “Profiles of the Future: An Inquiry into the Limits of the Possible”, science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke formulated his famous Three Laws, of which the third law is the best-known and most widely cited: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”
➥ https://www.newscientist.com/definit...es-three-laws/

That describes how I think feel about quantum mechanics.