|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
today's soundings
 Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:25 pm
|
 |
|
RH ground level 18%
temperature ground level 106 f
@ 30,000 feet
RH 20 to 50%
temperature -35 to -40
Contrails here in spots today.
A brief tutorial on RH....
Relative humidity is not an absolute measure of atmospheric water vapor content. It depends upon the temperature and shape of the surface. Other measures of atmospheric moisture are mixing ratio, specific humidity, and dew point. Mixing ratio is the mass of water vapor per unit mass of dry air. Specific humidity is the mass of water vapor per unit mass of moist air. Dew point is the temperature to which moist air must be cooled, with pressure and mixing ratio held constant, in order for this air parcel to become "saturated." To get a "feel" for the difference between relative humidity and dew point, say any-town USA reported a temperature of 97 F, a dew point of 84 F, but a relative humidity of 67%. The relative humidity doesn't sound terribly bad, does it? However, this is misleading. The temperature and dew point combined to give a heat index of 126 F!
Because relative humidity is relative to "saturation" above a flat surface, it is possible to have humidities exceeding 100%. However, because of the ubiquitous presence of condensation nuclei (e.g., dust, salt, etc.), relative humidities in the Earth's atmosphere typically do not exceed 100% at the surface or 102% within clouds.
Air in our atmosphere is a mixture of gases with very large distances between molecules. Therefore, air can accommodate a large quantity of water vapor. Water vapor is not dissolved in air and air does not "hold" water vapor. The presence of the air is not relevant to the vapor pressure and could be replaced by a vacuum.
Because cloud droplet and air temperatures are nearly the same, it appears that saturation vapor pressure depends upon air temperature. Strictly speaking, it depends on the cloud droplet temperature.
|
| |
|
|
Thermit
Joined: 08 Jul 2000
Posts: 3136
Location: Texas |
|
Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:43 pm
|
|
|
In my research, I found that the value calculated by the difference between temperature and dew point served as a good index of relative humidity, although it isn't "relative humidity" per se. I called this value "degrees of separation" for short. I'm curious as to the relationship between true relative humidity and degrees of separation.
What is the formula for RH, again?
Seeker, also expand on what you mean by "shape of the surface".
 |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Tue Jul 10, 2001 11:12 pm
|
|
|
People commonly use the term relative humidity. As its name implies, it is not an absolute measure of water vapor content. Relative humidity is relative to "saturation" over a flat surface of pure water. On a flat surface, the forces on a water molecule from its nearest neighbors tend to hold it in place and oppose the thermal energy of the molecule tending to move it away.
When you have a curved surface such as a droplet, each water molecule has fewer nearest neighbors than it would have on a flat surface. In a cloud, these droplets can be as small as a ten-thousandth of a micrometer and contain only a few dozen water molecules.
Of course, these figures are somewhat misleading because the molecules in the liquid water are three-dimensional and are moving in three dimensions. Therefore, consider these figures as a sort of average and perhaps this will help give you an idea of the situation. This effect of curvature on surface tension was discovered by Lord Kelvin.
With fewer nearest neighbors, there is now less attractive force holding the water molecule to the surface.
Does that cover your secret separation question ? 
|
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 1:22 am
|
|
|
Forget surface tension and all that...relative humidity is really a simple concept:
Relative humidity =
amount of water vapor
in the air
amount of water
vapor the air can hold
I'll get more detailed with a 5 page essay when time permits....
[Edited 3 times, lastly by cydoniaquest on 07-10-2001] |
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 1:37 am
|
|
|
Expressed another way, where (e) is a measure of the air's actual water vapor content, and the saturation vapor pressure (es) is a measure of the air's total capacity for water vapor, the actual and saturation vapor pressures can be used to determine the relative humidity of the air. Relative humidity may be expressed as:
Relative humidity = e/es X 100%
Relative humidity may also be expressed as
RH = W/Ws X 100% where W is the actual mixing ratio
Details in plain english to follow...later if anyone is still interested. |
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 1:42 am
|
|
|
Mark...I assume you are using the term "separation" to mean the temperature difference between ambient air temperature and dewpoint temperature. Dewpoint being the temperature of air at which it becomes completely saturated for a given pressure constant and moisture content.
In other words, you are talking about the temperature/dewpoint spread which is a measure of relative humidity.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by cydoniaquest on 07-10-2001] |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 3:06 am
|
|
|
Nothing like an intellectual p*ss*ng contest...cy, you said :
amount of water vapor
in the air
amount of water
vapor the air can hold
Air does not hold water vapor. Water vapor is not dissolved in air. This can easily be demonstrated by a thought experiment.
Imagine a closed container containing a beaker of pure water and a beaker of ocean water. Place the two solutions side by side so that they are at the same atmospheric temperature and pressure. The air above these two solutions is at the same temperature and pressure.
If air "holds" water vapor, then the two solutions should have the same saturation vapor pressure. However, the saturation vapor pressure above the saline solution is less than that above the pure water. In the saline solution, the salt ions replace some of the water molecules so that fewer water molecules are available for evaporation .
Sooooo, the presence of the salt reduces the rate of evaporation from the saline solution compared to the solution of pure water. This then is the reason why the saturation vapor pressure above the saline solution is less than that above pure water.
If I may add were it not for salt the Earth would be Mars...
T/S |
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 4:29 am
|
|
|
Seeker I'm not having a "pissing" contest at all. Anything but. In fact I thought this was about "civil" discussion and debate, heh,heh,heh. My goal is to put this in simple and practical terms so we can use and understand this principle. I think you're getting too detailed for your own good here. The equations I provided are used by meteorlogists.
Air does in fact hold water vapor as water vapor acts as just another gas. In fact, below is the breakdown of atmospheric composition in percent (by volume) of the Earth's atmosphere near the surface.
Basically we can divide the gases of the atmosphere into two categories, permanent gases and variable gases. First I'll list the permanent gases that make up "air" then the variable gases. Note that water vapor is considered to be a variable gas:
PERMANENT GASES
Gas | Symbol | Percent(by volume)
Nitrogen/ N2/ 78.08
Oxygen/ O2/ 20.95
Argon/ Ar/ 0.93
Neon/ Ne/ 0.0018
Helium/ He/ 0.0005
Methane/ CH4/ 0.0001
Hydrogen/ H2/ 0.00005
Xenon/ Xe/ .000009
VARIABLE GASES
Gas | Symbol | Percent (by volume)
Water vapor/ H2O/ 0 to 4
Carbon Dioxide/ CO2/ 0.034
Ozone/ 03/ 0.000004
Carbon monoxide/ CO/ 0.00002
Sulfur dioxide/ S02/ 0.000001
Nitrogen dioxide/ NO2/ 0.000001
Particles (dust,soot,etc.)/ 0.00001
As I said.....a more detailed essay to follow.
[Edited 3 times, lastly by cydoniaquest on 07-10-2001] |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 4:53 am
|
|
|
I'm not having a "pissing" contest at all. Anything but. In fact I thought this was about "civil" discussion and debate, heh,heh,heh.
LOL cy, just injecting a little humor into mix...
Hey wait a minute...I didn't see barium on that list !!!
but seriously air is not required to sustain gases, gases exist in space and that is a vaccuum...
Because air is mostly empty space, each gas acts individually as if it alone existed. Most gases are indefinitely soluble in other gases. In an equilibrium state, the amount of vapor above a liquid depends almost entirely on the temperature of the liquid.
It all comes down to temperature.
T/S |
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 5:07 am
|
|
|
Barium salts would fall into the particulate category in the variable gases.
"but seriously air is not required to sustain gases, gases exist in space and that is a vaccuum..."
I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. As I just broke them down, air is mixture of gases including water vapor. Air doesn't sustain gases....air is composed of gases.
I think somehow you're getting into a conversation about partial pressures of gases and specific gravity of fluids?
Relative humidity is an excellent subject for the discussion of contrail formation, that deserves some delving into in detail...Temperature and pressure altitude (air density) do play an important role in how much water vapor a certain parcel of air can hold... I plan to go into great detail into this subject.
But are we still talking about relative humidity?
Somewhere along the line you lost me here....
[Edited 1 times, lastly by cydoniaquest on 07-10-2001] |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 6:44 am
|
|
|
Cy,
I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here.
well...you said...
amount of water vapor
in the air
amount of water
vapor the air can hold
I made a rather good case that air does not hold h20 vapor, very small ten-thousandth of a micrometer,gravity free...I think where you may have gotten lost, was how far I'd go to prove it...lol...
Relative humidity is an excellent subject for the discussion of contrail formation, that deserves some delving into in detail...
Boy howdy...and so is temperature to me the defining factor in contrail production, and the best way to prove that contrails are other than contrails...the way I see it most of the verified accused chemtrails were well within normal variables in temperatures...I must admit when I looked at ADDS today I was surprised how cold it was up there considering what time of year it is on our tilt, I mean trails could have been produced at 30k from a 800 mile square block in the central U.S.
But are we still talking about relative humidity?
How about a pic of some partial pressures of gases and specific gravity of fluids?...lol...
|
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:23 am
|
|
|
Please tell me you had nothing to do with the parties reponsible for the orignal posting of that pic, T/S...
Even if it's not true, just tell me. |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:52 am
|
|
|
Oh please !!!
I grabbed that from a post of maverick's (i think) at deb's board....
How I described it here is correct...
I thought you fell off the earth...
you know buzz is not too far off the "body" does act as a antenna booster for rf frequency, try putting your remote control fob for your keyless entry to your chin and push the button...your range of operation will increase by 40 feet, but then again the haarp thing... there's 6 or 7 haarp's out there world wide...and pathogens have been in our air since the dawn of time...
blah blah blah
T/S |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 8:17 am
|
|
|
Some prankster posted that at Cliff's board, accompanying some ludicruos story. I'm a bit curious as to when Maverick posted that photo at the Hoax board, but on the other hand I've got my own problems...
Thermit really had the right idea when he put this site together. I'd have saved myself a lot of trouble if I had simply payed UBB their licensing fee and gotten some measure of control over the software. |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Wed Jul 11, 2001 8:33 am
|
|
|
aside from all the recent bullocks....mark has drawn new paths time and time again...
certainly the 2 new additions to this website add dimension that other boards and sites can't possibly offer....
credibility is performed daily, and our actions lend to it or detract from it...
btw, I think someone else posted the link and mav posted the picture...or I would have never seen it....cool pic...
T/S
|
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page
1, 2, 3 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 7:34 pm
|
|
|
|
|
Login
