The jet stream and the Earth's rotation

All you have to do is look up the Wikipedia facts for the Earth back in April 2021 using the article history. The false conclusion ties the wrong value for each rotation to nonsensical Equatorial rotation velocities which still remain.

Maybe I will spend the next 20 years convincing them what the proper velocities are coincident with a rotation rate of 15 degrees per hour.

Almost impossible to reply to your comment as delay in keyboard response is awful.

You come from the dysfunctional period in this forum and have long lost your influence once the forum's icon went on a solo run with even more dire conclusions than his opponents. That must have made you feel pretty rotten so you are better off sticking to modelling short term weather where you have some say and leave climate to people who can discuss it. It is the best I can do for you.

Starting with the cause of the sunrise/noon/sunset cycle as the planet turns once every 24 hours. Previously, modellers insisted the Earth didn't rotate once every 24 hours because they followed an exceptionally stupid conclusion inherited from the 17th century and only up to recently have they started to change to the correct framework based on the 24 hour and Lat/Long systems. This is how 'science' is done and I have no objections as long as they remove silly conclusions made by careless people-

People, like yourself, are so full of hysterics that you cannot come to grips with Equatorial rotational velocities consistent with a Equatorial geography where 15 degrees of separation is consistent with 1669.8 km or 1037.5 miles and also 1 hour time difference. These values can be reduced to 4 minutes clock time for every 1 degree of geographical separation or even smaller divisions.

The jet stream is linked to rotational speeds across latitudes, so anyone who wants to believe in values other than the ones given in the previous paragraph and only those values can just stick to modelling upcoming events in the short term. It suits me as it is possible to develop planetary climate along with planetary motions and those who can't link one sunrise/noon/sunset cycle with one rotation as cause and effect disqualify themselves from this conversation and any other for that matter.

If you want to be a nuisance then be my guest, but basically climate involves interpretation and not predictions, those short term weather predictions can be left to you and others in the forum while climate doesn't even involve meteorology unless the meteorologist is interested in planetary motions and that I have yet to see.

Planetary climate is a gorgeous topic comprising of two separate parts that combine so the Earth's planetary climate can be defined against the climate of other planets. One part is geographical climate based on continental landmasses, proximity to the oceans, latitudinal location and things like that most associated with weather. The other part is planetary climate where the Earth has a definite climate in contrast to the other planets using its daily and orbital motions and the relationship of axial inclination to the orbital plane.

The latter determines how fast or slow conditions change across latitudes over the course of an orbital period. The further inclination the axial inclination is from the orbital plane (like Venus and Jupiter) the more benign the conditions, the closer to the orbital plane (Uranus for example) the more volatile the conditions.

Planetary climate is the rate of change in surface, oceanic and atmospheric conditions as the planets rotate and orbit the Sun. The Earth has a largely Equatorial climate as its inclination is above 45 degrees from the orbital plane yet it has a sizable polar climate component.

A lot to discuss and consider if these people can be found. I respect the contributors of this forum are just interested in the weather ahead, however, geographical weather intersects with planetary motions in so many ways that discerning the motions of the Earth after an awful period of academic indulgence is part of the solution for everyone.

You making the right decision based on your annoyance.

The Earth rotates in two separate ways to the Sun or through the light and dark hemispheres of the Earth where the North and South Poles act as a beacon for the surface rotation as a function of the orbital motion of the Earth. It is for a different type of person as the direction of travel into the topic of climate doesn't rely on what humans do or do not do and it is restricted to the interpretation of information in front of people rather than making predictions which can be left to short term weather events.

https://calgary.rasc.ca/images/planet_inclinations.gif

Planetary climate is defined as a spectrum between Polar and Equatorial based on the relationship between the daily rotational inclination of the planet and the orbital plane of the Earth. For example, Venus has an Equatorial climate as the atmospheric changes is minimal across latitudes as the planet orbits the Sun is negligible with no appreciable variations in daylight/darkness lengths, whereas Uranus, with its inclination close to the orbital plane experiences rapid variation in conditions across latitudes and therefor has a Polar climate.

The relationship of the daily rotational Equator changes to the orbital plane across the year, while the North/South poles (where daily rotation is absent) turn parallel to the orbital plane (to the Sun in the above graphic). Think of it as a small day/night cycle (daily rotation) sitting inside a large annual day/night cycle (orbital surface rotation) so the combination of these two surface rotations gives us the seasons.

The video in the next response shows Uranus as it orbits the Sun over the course of 5 years. About 50 seconds in, it becomes possible to identify two actual surface rotations of the planet as the time lapse speeds up demonstrating the explanation for the seasons on Earth and other planets. This is where climate research starts.

Modelling is a wonderful thing to do when interpretation and predictions go hand in hand rather than just open-ended conclusions based on guessing outcomes. If responsible modellers were operating from basic and proper principles, it would become possible to elucidate the Earth's climate using comparisons with other planets and even experiment with different axial inclinations to the orbital plane in order to appreciate why life on Earth is possible whereas on others it is not by the traits of dynamics alone-

As an aside, it is now possible to model the structure of the solar system using both interpretation and predictions in real time and every bit as enjoyable as short term weather modelling apart from the certainty of appearances of the planets as they travel behind the Sun as Jupiter is doing presently as seen from a satellite tracking with the faster moving Earth-

https://sol24.net/data/html/SOHO/C3/96H/VIDEO/

Just scrolling the dates forward will show the Earth and Jupiter's position to the central Sun while the time lapse shows the dazzling Jupiter come into view.

This is the proper use of modelling in terms of the Earth's motion, the Sun;s central position and the motions of the other planets as they come and go within range of a camera with its focus on the central Sun. Considering that direct/retrogrades haven't been touched since Copernicus first accounted for the direct/retrograde motions of the slower moving planets using a different framework, it can be dismaying that there isn't enough discipline among observers here to make sense of the use of interpretation and predictions rather than dire predictions.

There is quite a difference modelling conclusions with what is going on at present and modelling conclusions based on future outcomes and climate research should be based on the former in order to understand the Earth science first and foremost.

A forum where interpretation/modelling/predictions is pursued for short term weather events is perfectly fine and I enjoy it myself as all people should, however, the same principle can be applied to large scale observations in solar system research and specifically the relationship of the motions of the Earth to Earth sciences like climate. The timekeeping misadventure of Royal Society modellers with its core in assigning the wrong rotation rate to the planet and subsequently wrong Equatorial rotation velocities has an immediate impact on cause and effect, including the cause of the day/night or sunrise/noon/sunset cycle.

I work with interpretation/modelling/predictions too in terms of a new way to appreciate our position and motion in a solar system structure allowed by satellite data just as weather modellers use satellite imaging for weather purposes. It is even possible to discern our planet's climate by using planetary comparisons with other planets using common traits such as axial inclination to the orbital plane which determines the rate of change in atmospheric, oceanic and surface conditions as the planets orbit the Sun.

https://sol24.net/data/html/SOHO/C3/96H/VIDEO/

I doubt very much if contributors in this forum bothered to look at either the solar system model or the time lapse in real time to draw the many conclusions that exist with just a little effort as it is all new to observers. These conclusions rely less on predictions than working principles for solar system structure, the motions of the Earth (the annual change in the position of the stars from left to right of the stationary Sun) and ultimately into Earth sciences like climate, geology and biology.

I insult nobody as they insult themselves if they assign false values for the planet's rotation at the Equatorial circumference coincident with the false rotational period-

Equatorial rotation velocity - 1674.4 km/h; 1040.4 mph

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth

There was a period in this forum when the situation was dysfunctional until one of the icons suddenly announced his predictions were more dire than his opponents. That period has passed along with those who were engaged in graph warfare.

This is different, this issue is demonstrating that models/interpretation/ predictions are fine for short term weather events, whereas conclusions based on climate are partitioned into geographical climate most closely associated with weather and separately planetary climate which is a more encompassing topic with many historical and technical issues to sort out.

A meteorologist may have some influence on geographical climate, however, on the stage of planetary climate they act against genuine research based on cause and effect between planetary motions in a Sun-centred system with effects on the surface, in the oceans and in the atmosphere across an orbit.

Presently, the area where the Sun remains constantly out of view with the North pole at its centre is beginning to shrink rapidly as the North pole turns towards the light hemisphere after the December Solstice when it was midway to the light hemisphere of the Earth.

Planetary climate is based on the extent of that surface area which is represented on Earth as the Arctic and Antarctic circles. Were the Earth, with its present rotational/orbital traits have an inclination like Uranus where the poles are positioned close to the orbital plane, the Arctic/Antarctic area would be enormous thereby the variations in surface, oceanic and atmospheric conditions would result in volatile weather across a season and far in excess of anything this forum could imagine.

Planetary climate is a gorgeous topic where modelling is exceptionally help to explain conditions on Earth and why inclination matters in making our planet habitable across large regions of the globe. If the Earth had an inclination like Uranus then life would be impossible.

When the theorists in the 17th century decided to shift the reference for daily and orbital motion away from the central Sun at the centre of all planetary motions and appealed to the daily change in position of the stars, they lost not only the cause and effect between one rotation and daily temperature fluctuations (day/night cycle), they locked out the annual change in position of the stars as a consequence of the planet's orbital motion which sets the Sun up as a stationary reference for interpretation and conclusions-

That observation falls under an interpretation and a conclusion as the only analogy/experiment that can be applied is that background objects appear to change position from one side of a roundabout to the other as a car runs a circuit of the roundabout imitating the components of the background stars, the central Sun (centre of roundabout) and a moving Earth (car). Everything else expands from that principle including the motion of Jupiter from right to left of the Sun even though it appears to move in the opposite direction with the stars.

What is called RA/Dec in an attempt to project the Earth's daily rotational characteristics into the Universe as both a fixed celestial sphere and a rotating one. This clockwork framework is useful for predictions only and this is where modellers jump the tracks by assigning too much significance to a clock and the 24 hour day (clockwork solar system). They tried to organise the motion of the Earth to the daily return of a star to the same place and treated orbital motion as incidental-

Researchers have been dragging this setup around for centuries like a chain even though they believe it is a treasure but it loses cause and effect at the most basic level there is- the ability to determine that one rotation is Not one day/night cycle-

" It is a fact not generally known that, owing to the difference between solar and sidereal time, the Earth rotates upon its axis once more often than there are [24 hour] days in the year" NASA /Harvard

Modelling with clockwork in the 17th century led to such vandalism of solar system research and our planet's motions with its relationship to Earth sciences while computer modelling of climate is totally deranged based on the same indulgences where the primary principles are ignored and forgotten. The statement above from NASA falls below what it means to be civilised, intelligent, reasonable and all the other positive attributes of humanity and a great loss to a creative and productive society.

The major issue is modelling to interpretative/conclusion purposes as a stable venture and modelling for predictive purposes which is severely limited to short term weather and, in a solar system context, the relative positions of celestial objects to each other within a fixed celestial sphere.