Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Free set of rusty screwdrivers if you order now.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                 

Weather Control

Why "rain dances" sometimes work
  (-2)
(-2)
  [vote for,
against]

As computers for forecasting weather become more powerful, atmospheric scientists attempt to gather data that is more fine- grained than before.

In other words, instead of having weather-measurement stations every 10 kilometers apart, on the average, a more-powerful computer might process data from weather-measurement stations located only 5 km apart. An even-more-powerful computer might handle all the data from weather stations located 1 km apart. And so on.

The basic idea is, as the weather in one locale changes, it tends to affect the weather in other locales. At a fine-enough scale, this is known as "the butterfly effect" (see link). In theory, if we had a computer as large as, say, the Sun, it could process all the data represented by the position and motion of every single gas- molecule and dust-particle in the Earth's atmosphere, to accurately forecast the weather weeks in the future.

WELL! If we could achieve that level of accuracy, then that means we would KNOW what the large-scale consequences are, of small- scale events.

Clearly, someone performing a "rain dance" is shoving significant quantities of air molecules around, in ways they wouldn't experience if the dance was not performed. Per the butterfly effect, those changes in molecular motions can influence future weather, perhaps enough to cause a rainstorm a few days later.

So, in that future era, when a powerful-enough weather- forecasting computer is available, give me some Ping Pong paddles to wave around, and I can control the weather! (cue evil laugh)

Vernon, Sep 15 2015

Butterfly effect http://www.urbandic...rm=butterfly+effect
As mentioned in the main text. [Vernon, Sep 15 2015]

[link]






       I'm pretty sure that in order to get that level of accuracy you are going to have to simulate the sun and moon as well (both radiation and gravitational influence). And possibly Jupiter as well (sure it's only 3.7e-6% of Earth's influence, but it's definitely non zero). And of course things like extrasolar gamma rays.   

       In other words, while it may be possible to make a computer that can do this, if it is, we're likely already living inside it.
MechE, Sep 15 2015
  

       // we're likely already living inside it // Actually I contend that the computer required for hosting our existence doesn't actually need to be that complicated or powerful. Since many natural processes appear to be quite random, it isn't actually necessary to simulate the details of the movement of every atom, every molecule or even every liter or air. A random number generator can be used in many cases, as long as the details aren't being observed*. The best evidence for this is quantum physics. "Whoever" is running the simulation we are in was actually starting to get worried some time during the last hundred years since they had to keep inventing new particles as scientists identified atoms, then subatomic particles, etc. To avoid massively upgrading the simulation, they finally abandoned the notion of tracking everything observed and simply refused to allow us to see both the velocity of position of a particle simultaneously. Therefore while we may be able to observe subatomic particles, the overall simulation doesn't actually have to keep track of the position and velocity of subatomic particles, just some average statistics.   

       Of course if this view was true, then it would actually be impossible for us to create a computer to track all the particles because then our computer is actually a virtual computer and there's no way to have a virtual computer more powerful than the computer on which it is being hosted.   

       The key to predicting the future is to figure out what pseudo-random number generation algorithm is being used.
scad mientist, Sep 15 2015
  

       The real difficulty in all this will be in trying to simulate the behaviour of butterflies.
MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 15 2015
  

       You guys appear to be missing something. I specified "rain dancers" and "Ping Pong paddles" --things that are far larger than butterfly wings. Which means the needed measurement-scale and computation power is not quite as great as you are assuming!
Vernon, Sep 16 2015
  

       But if a butterfly in South America can affect a tornado in Kansas, then a fruit fly can alter the affects of your rain dance. Therefore, we need to predict the behavior of butterflies (and fruit flies) and all the people driving and pilots flying... And whether or not you're going to sneeze before during or after your rain dance.
scad mientist, Sep 16 2015
  

       //You guys appear to be missing something. I specified "rain dancers" and "Ping Pong paddles" -- things that are far larger than butterfly wings. // Vernon, you appear to be missing something. The point of the butterfly effect is that arbitrarily small things produce successively larger consequences over time. Hence, you _will_ need to account for butterflies, but you'll need to know what they were doing 30 minutes before you picked up your paddles.
MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 16 2015
  

       He needs justification?   

       I'm seriously hoping that he gets elected.
MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 16 2015
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle