tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post3251356894242514553..comments2023-03-13T07:57:36.570-07:00Comments on Astro-Climate-Connection: The rate of change in tidal stresses caused by lunar tides in the Earth's atmosphere and the QBONinderthanahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00390339452469614741noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-50709057016706347222015-10-12T06:46:47.859-07:002015-10-12T06:46:47.859-07:00WHT,
The side-lobes produced by amplitude...WHT,<br /><br /> The side-lobes produced by amplitude modulation of a carrier signal should be of roughly equal intensity - so can't help you here.<br /><br /> The QBO lengths cluster into two groups of roughly equal number around ~ 26.0 months (2.17 yrs) and ~ 30.0 months (2.5 years) with the average holding steady at ~ 28.0 months, so I would expect the spectral region in the data to have a number of close spectral peaks spread between about 2.2 and 2.5 years.<br /><br /> It is just possible that 2.335 year peak may be a(n unknown) constant integer multiple in strength of the 1.589(9) year peak e.g. 2 x, 3x, 4x, etc. if the line strengths of the spectral peak cluster are super-harmonics of the 18.6 year period and sub-harmonics of the Chandler wobble - but this is along shot. Ninderthanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00390339452469614741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-88437051053763031752015-10-06T23:13:57.647-07:002015-10-06T23:13:57.647-07:00Ian, the question I have is why is the 2.33 factor...Ian, the question I have is why is the 2.33 factor much stronger than the 1.6 factor? It is a faster frequency so perhaps it gets more quickly damped.<br /><br />2.33 is also close to the Draconic aliasing (2.368) and also double the Chandler wobble (1.185) so it may have more of a reinforcing effect.<br /><br />Any other insight? <br />@whuthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18297101284358849575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-48072056911526535452015-10-06T21:28:58.935-07:002015-10-06T21:28:58.935-07:00Thank you for your further investigations. I would...Thank you for your further investigations. I would not have noticed this phenomenon if it was not for your comments above. It helped me realize that it might have something to do with the minimum period between the peaks in the rate of lunar tidal stresses upon the Earth as a result of changes in strength and direction of the lunar tidal forces.<br /><br />I do not have the mathematical skills and ability to model these changes, that I will have to leave up to someone else. However, I hope that this blog post will get others thinking and investigating. First to check if what I am saying makes any sense [There is always a possibility that I have missed something important in the conceptualization and the physics], and second to expand on this initial idea.<br /><br />WHT, your discoveries and investigations have been truly ground breaking and I cannot wait to see your paper on QBO and ENSO published so that I can use my limited mathematical skills to further look into the details. <br /><br />I am still trying understand the full physical implications of the results of this post and I know that you have a task ahead of you to collect together all of the details of your investigations about the QBO and ENSO for their inclusion in your CSALT model.<br /><br />Best Wishes Ninderthanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00390339452469614741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-41116355789606196132015-10-06T19:56:41.527-07:002015-10-06T19:56:41.527-07:00Ian, I think you are spot on. What I earlier wrote...Ian, I think you are spot on. What I earlier wrote was a Mathematica factored expression, which is why it looked so concise.<br /><br />Also have a multiple linear regression algorithm fit for the QBO and what it can do is test sinusoidal factors and find out which values give the highest correlation coefficient. So if I tune around the 2.33 and 1.6 values, I get the following chart.<br /><br />http://imageshack.com/a/img633/2783/V7QffL.png<br /><br />You predicted 2.334(7) and the fit finds a peak at 2.334.<br />You predicted 1.598(9) and the fit finds a peak a hair under 1.599. <br /><br />This is likely not coincidence, and instead is the starting point for explaining the behavior of QBO.<br /><br />@whuthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18297101284358849575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-71449391008006936252015-10-02T13:13:22.570-07:002015-10-02T13:13:22.570-07:00Sorry, forgot to add - The Draconic year [=346.620...Sorry, forgot to add - The Draconic year [=346.620076 days] is the time for the lunar line- of-apse to realign with the Sun. Ninderthanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00390339452469614741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-6214890055238114322015-10-02T13:11:26.371-07:002015-10-02T13:11:26.371-07:00Paul,
You posted the following:
a = 29.53059 da...Paul,<br /><br />You posted the following:<br /> <br />a = 29.53059 days<br />b = 27.55455<br />c = 27.21222<br />y = 365.25<br /><br />9*a*b/(a-b)/y*2*a*c/(a-c)/y/(9*a*b/(a-b)/y-2*a*c/(a-c)/y)<br /><br />[Note I have used: a = 29.5305889 days; b = 27.55455 days; c = 27.21222 days;<br />and y = 365.242189 days]<br /><br />It turns out that a*b/(a-b)/y is just the Full Moon Cycle (FMC) in years (1.1274 trop yrs).<br />The FMC is the time required for the line-of-apse to realign with the Sun.<br />While a*c/(a-c)/y is just the Draconic Year (DY) (0.94901 trop yrs),<br /><br />so what you have written is just:<br /><br />9*FMC*2*DY/(9*FMC-2DY)<br /><br />where 9* FMC = 3706.06005 days = 10.146856 trop yrs <br /><br />is the shortest time in which the lunar line-of-apse precisely re-aligns with the Sun at New or Full Moon.<br /><br />[Note: this because 125.5 Synodic months = 3706.08890 days and 134.5 Anomalistic months = 3706.086975 days] <br /><br />and <br /><br />2*DY = 693.2415(2) days<br /><br />is the shortest time in which the lunar line-of-nodes precisely re-aligns with the Sun at New or Full Moon.<br /><br />[Note: this because 23.5 Synodic months = 693.96884 days and 25.5 Draconic months = 693.91161 days] <br /><br />Hence, there is actually a physical reason for choosing this beat period.<br />Ninderthanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00390339452469614741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-76739741171383522932015-10-02T11:12:29.387-07:002015-10-02T11:12:29.387-07:00Paul,
Thanks for the clarification. It m...Paul, <br /><br /> Thanks for the clarification. It makes you wounder if the 2 and 9 have some physical significance.<br /><br /> My post on October 1st 10:39 PM (above) was made in haste as I was rushing out the door. Consequently, it should not to be take seriously. I have added an addendum to the above post to clarify what it should have said.<br /><br />Sorry for the confusion.<br />Ninderthanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00390339452469614741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-89650443122721252572015-10-02T07:41:45.545-07:002015-10-02T07:41:45.545-07:00Just trying to follow your recipe. What I presente...Just trying to follow your recipe. What I presented were the only multiples (2 and 9) that would give the 2.335 result. @whuthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18297101284358849575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-57404956606460396512015-10-01T22:39:02.967-07:002015-10-01T22:39:02.967-07:00I am sorry, I have made a mistake in my post. I ha...I am sorry, I have made a mistake in my post. I have not used the time for the shortest alignment between the apse and the synodic period. What I have used is the shortest alignment between that of syzygy of the Earth, Moon and Sun (i.e. the time of spring tides) and the synodic cycle. My Bad!<br /> Ninderthanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00390339452469614741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-46299796075315744352015-10-01T22:33:25.124-07:002015-10-01T22:33:25.124-07:00I am not sure whether or not you are making fun of...I am not sure whether or not you are making fun of me here Paul?? <br /><br />I have just chosen the two shortest physical times for the precession of the line-apse (10.1446 years) and the line-nodes (1.8980 years) and asked myself how long do they take to realign with the Synodic cycle. This beat is based upon straight forward physical principles. <br /><br />I am sure that you are aware that what you have proposed is an arbitrary combination of numbers unless you can justify the multiples 9 and 2. Indeed you have noted that in your post. So, I will assume that your inquiry is genuine. Ninderthanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00390339452469614741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2965766791260152878.post-20525595345448013352015-10-01T17:18:00.939-07:002015-10-01T17:18:00.939-07:00a = 29.53059 days
b = 27.55455
c = 27.21222
y = 36...a = 29.53059 days<br />b = 27.55455<br />c = 27.21222<br />y = 365.25<br /><br />9*a*b/(a-b)/y*2*a*c/(a-c)/y/(9*a*b/(a-b)/y-2*a*c/(a-c)/y)<br /><br />simplifies to:<br />18 a b c / y / (9ab -2 ac -7 bc)<br /><br />this does give 2.3347, but the choice of multiples of 9 and 2 is <br /><br />@whuthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18297101284358849575noreply@blogger.com