What is Digg?16 Comments
- Lomi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I am reminded of the movie "The Weatherman" :D
How long till submitter gets hit with a mcdonalds hot apple pie? - djblast, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5how long before you can get service EVERYWHERE?!
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Also a good way to catch stealth aircraft.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2001/e20010619stealths.htm
http://seclists.org/lists/isn/2001/Jun/0106.html
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviationspace/2b86d4d03cb84010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html - theone3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3In the words of Alex Albrecht: "That is AWESOME!"
Although I do wonder how they deal with sunspots. Seems to me that those are a big factor in wireless communications, although I don't know how much they'd affect mobiles per se. - newtontwo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This is wrong. "Perfect" weather prediciton is not hindered by chaos, it can be achieved if one were able to input a complete set of initial conditions, however, THIS is what will most likely never occur. Chaos theory says that perturbing the initial conditions, even slighty, can produce completely different results (forecasts) using the same model, that is, the results are very dependent on the initial conditions.
If "perfect" initial conditions were available and input, lets say, on an atomic scale over the entire globe, the perfect forecast as you state it, very well might become available...I won't wait for that day though. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I agree with you, because in essence that's what chaos is, when a slight change can bring about an alarmingly big change in the result, if you look at the graphs of choatic equations, you will see they are normal looking equations that go haphazard because of a slight change in their original settings. The butterfly effect.
In anycase, that's all I'm saying, call it wrong or right, but weather follows a chaotic pattern, and therefore there is no way of perfectly predicting it as in the same way there is no way you can predict the
pattern of drops that fall in a leaky faucet. - Ottergoose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3While radar systems can certainly estimate rainfall, there are shortcomings to the methods they use. In the US, most radar beams are tilted above the horizon at 1.5 degrees. When combined with the the curvature of the earth, the elevation of the beam relative to the ground increases rapidly. This causes problems when using radar to get an idea of what is going on at ground level (tornado formation, good rainfall estimates, etc.). This is a problem because there are situations where what you see on the lowest tilt isn't a good representation of what's going on at the surface (e.g. rain evaporates before it hits the ground). For this reason, there is a project in Oklahoma where smaller radar systems will be mounted on cell phone towers to gain low level radar coverage in areas that are a long ways away from the NWS stations.
Another problem has to do with what the radar system is actually observing (rain vs. hail vs. snow vs. sleet vs. a flock of birds). Some of these problems can be overcome with software, but NOAA is looking into newer technology (dual polarization, phased array radar) that will help further.
Long story short, radar is great, but, it has limitations. Any technology that can be used to get a better measure of rainfall would certainly be appreciated by meteorologists, hydrologists, etc. - Ottergoose, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If you're curious, the weather data they're getting from GPS signals (mentioned in the article) is precipitable water, which is basically a measure of how much rain you could get from the atmosphere if all of the water vapor was turned into precipitation.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Yet we will never be able to predict it quite perfectly, since weather's prediction requires us to generate and equation for Chaos, and as of such, we won't be able to correctly do so. That is why weather's prediction is so hard (Check Chaos phenomenon in math)
- JulianMorrison, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"The hope now is that mobile-phone companies can be persuaded to part with this data without profiting from it, she says." -- what stupidity! Surely anyone can see that paying them for it will give them an incentive to collect more and better? They might even intentionally build such data-collecting capabilities into the design. What's with the cheapskate attitude, Ms Messer?
- Trenton, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I dugg this earlier, but never commented. I think doppler does pretty good though =)
- nosmelc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I was kidding about the stick on antennas but you still see them everywhere.
- nosmelc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1You know it's nice that they can analyze the signal fluctuations to predict the weather but it would be a real scientific breakthrough if they could analyze the signal fluctuations to give me better reception! Until then I have to use these antennas that you glue to your phone near your battery or walk around until I get a couple of bars.
- yournamehere, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1funny, those glued antennas were proven to be a scam
- strat0tele, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1first comment
edit: NOooo - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+0DIGG THIS IF YOU AGREE
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is