The original objective of this work was to establish a coherent theory for tornado development. I had to explain why my theory might, or might not conflict with current weather theory at every turn. Soon it became clear that I would have to introduce a new theory from the foundation to the cap shingles. (Those are a roof’s very top shingles which bridge the two slopes of a rooftop.)
For example, years ago I found that available popular literature bore no resemblance to physical reality with its rolling horizontal axis spin converted to vertical axis tornado spin concept. One of the first posits of this paper is that tornado generation requires vertical motion before spin begins. Spin is an effect, not a cause of tornadoes.
Think about water setting in a toilet bowl. The water doesn’t start spinning until the flush (vertical movement) starts. And by the way, coriolis forces are inadequate to provide the acceleration required to spin a three-inch diameter column of water in less than a second, so there’s another theory down the drain. The manufacturer’s design determines highly energetic spin in a toilet bowl to rinse the bowl sides – no shit. This is a serious paper but there is no reason for it to be too dry. Consider the lack of spin in your shower, which is falling a greater distance or the lack of spin when you spray water into the air from a water hose. I am familiar with coriolis forces, from my military daze and know that it is slight and proportional to distance traveled.
A hurricane’s spin is more of a fluid eddy in two dimensions. The two dimensions are the earth’s lower atmosphere as determined by the earth’s surface and the gravitational field limited extent of the atmosphere. In fact, a hurricane is the confluence of multiple thunderstorms. I have a complete description of the process later.
I tried to access current government research to support my theory but that is a nut too difficult to crack. I did take college-level online course weather from Penn State after I developed the predecessor to this paper. My theories are so drastically different from current college level theory, I didn’t want to embarrass myself by trying to reconcile them. Did you ever notice there is always an ass in embarrass?
I have a couple of college degrees and spent decades working on some of the most ground breaking technologies in modern life from primitive DNA (electrophoresis) equipment and Tomographic scanners to verification engineer for the most ubiquitous cell phone microprocessor. I don’t tell you this so you will accept this work out of hand, I want you to take it apart syllable by syllable, find every wart hidden on its backside, point out inconsistencies and inaccuracies and tell the world of your findings and your opinions, but be specific. “I just don’t like it.” is a stupid review, which all will ignore. “You missed a sign in the equation for XXX.” will be welcomed evaluated and corrected if appropriate – including attribution if you desire.
So, now I’m willing to climb out on that limb and state that weather theory is more difficult to research than to understand. I’m not saying the existing theory is wrong and I am right, but I am saying that I am right. Popular media’s weather discussions are works of fiction. Unfortunately, many weatherpersons seem to get their weather information from popular media.
I scoff at peer review. Peer review is a joke since the only people with access to the reviews are those predisposed to agree. Also, the medium encourages obfuscation of relevance through mischaracterization. Accuracy and originality is sacrificed for personal reputation and/or research funding allocation. Those that would further the science essentially have no financial impetus to write papers which the ignorant will ignored and ridiculed. They reminded me of Galileo and the Catholic Church or Hitler and his hatred for “Jewish science.” At 73 years of age, I began my contrarian ways in the 1970s with an alternative theory of quantum mechanics which is my segue to:
Check out A Quantum can be a little bit of fun on this web site.
Teasers are:
- it explains dark matter,
- it unifies wave and particle field theory,
- it explains gravity,
- it explains black holes,
- it explains why time travels only forward – for now, and
- it explains entropy, Hint: Entropy is a function of expansion not randomness.
Enough of the commercial, let’s go back to the weather.
Getting this work accepted is going to be an uphill battle, but the rewards will be considerable in terms of personal satisfaction. It’s too bad there won’t be financial remuneration. They don’t give Nobel Prizes for weather, I think.
Next Abstract
Back to 21st Century Weather Science