Pascal & Bernoulli principles combined weaken hurricanes

[quandary]

Bernoullis principle forces it up by creating a pressure difference at both ends.

That one certainly makes sense. However, could we get enough pipes and stuff to make it work? How would they fixed if they broke (which they are liable to do)?

[x-y-no]

That part accidentally got left behind while this thread was being manipulated. I need to hone my skills a little, I guess. However the original post is further down in the thread as a quote(copies of emails).

And you stated what I left out in my comments and what has been alluded to elsewhere in the thread. GW is not only SSt's so the claim that this would affect Global Warming(if it in reality exists) doesn't wash, at least not that I can see.

OK, I see it now ...

I'd have to do a lot more calculation than I think the idea is really worth, but my immediate reaction is that in addition to the general pointlessness of the idea, I don't see that it would work anyway. The combination of the density differential between surface and abyssal waters, along with energy loss due to tubulent flow at the walls of the tunnel seem likely to be greater than any pressure differntial one could achieve by pointing the mouths of the tunnel into currents (particularly since there is no strong concentrated abyssal current conveniently near to the Gulf stream). My guess is the currents would just flow around the tunnel, and there'd be only marginal flow through it.

[Air Force Met]

sorry but you pegged me wrong doctorhurricane2003

Are you saying you are NOT "cyclonebuster" from that thread and that it is just a coincidence?

And BTW...answer this questions truthfully and we can have a wonderful discussion on your "ideas" if you "really" want to know the real answers as to why this will not work.

But first...answer the above question....and then if you really want to have a scientific debate about the subject, I will oblidge you...but it better NOT resemble anything like the post from the other forum that read "But is Europe tired of all that rain that we keep dumping on you through global warming?" because the weather in Europe was regulated by the Gulf Stream long before mankind had any global impact on his environment. That is garbage and is posted by someone who really wants to read what they type rather than debate in an intellectual discussion.

Ball is in YOUR court. Is that individual you and if not...do you not find it very unusual that they have the same idea and a screen name very similiar to you...with posts also very similiar...also posting from the same geographical area as you. Be honest.

[Air Force Met]

Problems:

"Position it to where one open end opposes the current at depth where the cool water is and the other open end at the surface faces away from the current. What happens is a difference in pressure is created at both ends and when a pressure difference is created flow occurs. "

In theory it works. Not in principle. If one of your ends is placed near Key West...where it can draw water from the ocean floor due to current, it must be placed at a sufficent depth in order to draw cold water. After all, the vast volumes of ocean water mixing will require lots of cold water to mix with it. So, let's say you need some 35F water from 2000' down. That means for every gallon of 35F water brought up from 2000' down, you can cool 3 gallons of 86F water to about 74F. So...that means you are going to ahve to have a LOT of pipes with BIG diameters! So...for construction purposes...let's say the diameters are 10'. So...1 (ONE!!!) 2000' long, 10' wide pipe contains 10,063,700 LBS of water.

Ooops. That's where your plan fails. Bernoulli's principle states that a rise in pressure through a flowing liquid must always be accompanied by a decrease in the speed of the fluid. The problem with your "idea" is there is not enough "rise in pressure" at the other end" to lift 10 millions pounds of water. The current is not (knot) strong enough. A typical ocean current flows at a couple of knots. That flow would be sufficient to lift water up through a pipe of a few feet in diameter and a for a hundred feet, maybe? don't understand? Here is something to help you. Every tried to suck the air through an empty 100' garden hose? After all...it's just air. You can't do it. It still has mass. Now....imagine doing it to 2000' of water with a slow moving current.

But just in case you think there is, I'll continue.

"The ocean temperature is regulated between 70 and 75 degrees and therefore as the storm crosses the cooler water it just weakens but it is not eliminated. BTW during the winter the temperature of the gulf is below 70 degrees so this should not harm sea life."

UHHHHHH...yeah. The WINTER temperature of the Gulf is below 70 because the SUMMER temp is 85-88. Now...if you drop the SUMMER temp to 70-75...by 10 degrees...now the WINTER temp drops into low 60's. So...what does THAT do to marine life? Remember...everything in nature is BALANCE!

"tornado's may not even form in the mid west because of the cooler temperatures in the Gulf thus cooling the warm air migrating to the North out of the Gulf Of Mexico. Since the air is cooler not as much lift is created in the atmosphere for tornados to form."

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. You obviously have no idea about how tornadoes form. Warm air will still be there in the summer because of solar insolation over LAND. "Warm Air" doesn't move up from the Gulf in summer, moisture does. All they need is a higher dew point to help spark tornadoes, dry air aloft, jet stream energy and some convergence at the sfc (cold front). If anything...this idea of yours will INCREASE tornadoes because less heat energy will be added to the poles, thus INCREASING the difference between the tropics and the mid-lats....which leads to MORE severe weather....and more jet stream energy...which leads to more severe tornadoes.


For someone who has very little knowledge about weather...well...maybe you need to stick with drinking beer (if you are the author of the posts on the other forum).

[P.K.]

Problems:
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. You obviously have no idea about how tornadoes form................

There are many different ways that they form so I can't see how this would prevent them. Active cold fronts, convergence zones, due to vortex sheading, low topped supercells, classic supercells, triple points.....

I've seen this idea previously posted onto one of the UK forums by a Cyclonebuster but I don't know if it was the same person.

[Air Force Met]

Also...just thought of this from my example...wouldn't 35F water sink right back down to the ocean floor (of course it would) before too much mixing could occur? Of course...it would never make it to the top...but even if it did...most of it woud drop back down to the bottom before it could mix.

Want to see an example of this? Try this experiment. Take an ice cube made with some dye (like red...lot's of it) and place it in a glass of warm water. Watch it drop to the bottom like a rock. Used to do that when I was a kid (science nerd even back then).

[DoctorHurricane2003]

AFM,

I know I personally made posts on the wz forum that has addressed that, but he ignored them, did not answer my questions, etc.

This suggestion is not worthwhile of any money, time, or work.

[mascpa]

I think we should introduce cyclone to Mr. Dyno-man (you remember him ... going to seed the cloud with his secret formula and dissolve the hurricane away). They seem to have a lot in common.

Man can be such an arrogant creature, to think that he can impose his will on Mother Nature. Unbelievable.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

Cyclonekiller:
It's a good idea in theory IMHO. The physics concepts when applied
could theoretically yield a significant accomplishment in terms of
precluding the genesis of severe hurricanes. However the execution
of this task would be very arduous and practically impossible for
scientists and engineers at this day and age. But I must commend you
cyclonekiller on your theoretical application of physics concepts
to this year's vigorous issue of destructive hurricanes. Because I don't
see any subversive motives behind this theory, I will give it
my complements.

However, I feel that the execution of this theory would be an
extremely challenging feat in terms of engineering, and likely
quite unwieldy as well.

[Air Force Met]

AFM,

I know I personally made posts on the wz forum that has addressed that, but he ignored them, did not answer my questions, etc.

This suggestion is not worthwhile of any money, time, or work.

I finally read through all the other thread. I really like how he would not answer any of the other questions posed...and asked people to show him the math as to why it wouldn't work. Well...I've got 10,000,000 reasons to show him why it won't....and x-y-no's point about the tubulent flow is EXCELLENT...that will just increase the amount of current needed to lift 10,000,000 pounds of water though a tube because the flow is not laminar.

But...what boggled my mind the most is the aboslute ignorance it takes to 1) think that lowering the SST's over a large body of water in the summer won't have any negative impacts downstream in winter (like Europe) and 2) the total amount if sheer idiocy it takes to think that strong hurricanes are only now occuring because of the amount of heat we are inputting into the environment...so we must take some of it out by pulling up some cold water from hundreds of feet down.

And BTW Einstein (not you...Him!)...have you EVER calculated how MUCH water it would take to lower thousands of cubic MILES of ocean water by 10 degrees? Given 1 gallon of 35F per 4 gallons of 85F...and assuming it would work...which it won't...and assuming no adverse effects...which there will be...and assuming no frictional impacts on the tubes (which there will be) and assuming a 10' diameter pipe every 300' (to offset the solor isolation that will WARM the water and the cold water that will sink and not cool the warm water)...and a flow of 2 kts out of the pipe (which won't happen)...which is about 125 cubic feet per second...cooling 370 cubic feet per second....

...that is 18,585,600 individual 2000' pipes in the Gulf ALONE

OR...7,040,000 MILES of 10 foot diameter pipe. Assuming the pipe is 1" in diameter which is probably WAY to thin) and made of something that is sturdy like aluminum (light)...which weighs 2700 kg/ cubic meter. That means 1 tube weighs 2,876,000 lbs. So, all the piping weighs 53,452,185,600,000 lbs.

So since aluminum is cheap (around $1300 per ton)...and is certainly cheaper than any other material you will find to use for your "project"...your project for material alone will cost $34,743,920,640,000...not including manpower. For manpower...throw in a few more trillion.

That's 34 TRILLION dollars for the Gulf Alone. You wanted math? There's your math.

Think about it.

Boy...that was fun.

[Air Force Met]

Cyclonekiller:
It's a good idea in theory IMHO. The physics concepts when applied
could theoretically yield a significant accomplishment in terms of
precluding the genesis of severe hurricanes. However the execution
of this task would be very arduous and practically impossible for
scientists and engineers at this day and age. But I must commend you
cyclonekiller on your theoretical application of physics concepts
to this year's vigorous issue of destructive hurricanes. Because I don't
see any subversive motives behind this theory, I will give it
my complements.

However, I feel that the execution of this theory would be an
extremely challenging feat in terms of engineering, and likely
quite unwieldy as well.

Sorry...it won't even work in theory because it's not a "theory."

The mass of the water is too great to be lifted by the small amount of differential pressure created by 2 knots of flow. This is not like the airplane in the 1700's...where the theory is there but the technology is not. This is not possible even in theory because of mass.

Let me further clarify my previous example. Take a short straw in a glass of water and blow over it. It will raise the water up the staw slighty due to this effect. Now...get our 100' garden hose and stick it in the same glass of water. Now blow over the garden hose. There will not be the same effect because of mass. You can suck air through a straw but not a 100' hose.

The "theory" only works when you supply sufficient force at the other end to offset the mass of the object, in this case the 10 million pounds of water. That means you cannot have a 2 knot current...just like you cannot have your lungs to to pull the air out of a 100' garden hose (you would need an air compressor or something more powerful, right?)...you will need a lot more powerful current than mother nature can provide. I am not an engineer but if there is one on this board they could probably calculate how much pressure/force it would take to force millions of pounds of water up hundreds/thousands of feet.

So...it's not right in theory if the initial parameters or not correct. Garbage in...garbage out. Remember, in science, a theory needs to start out as a hypothesis...and TESTED to see if it stands the scrutiny of observations and if the initial precepts are false...then so is the hypothesis....and therefore it's not a theory. His idea is not valid because the pressures caused by a 2 knot current is not enough to raise millions of pounds of water....not to mention a whole host of other reasons that he did not think of...because he's not a scientist...ans the fact that he is not listening to other scientists as they point these things out to him should speak volumes.

[cyclonekiller]

Problems:

"Position it to where one open end opposes the current at depth where the cool water is and the other open end at the surface faces away from the current. What happens is a difference in pressure is created at both ends and when a pressure difference is created flow occurs. "

In theory it works. Not in principle. If one of your ends is placed near Key West...where it can draw water from the ocean floor due to current, it must be placed at a sufficent depth in order to draw cold water. After all, the vast volumes of ocean water mixing will require lots of cold water to mix with it. So, let's say you need some 35F water from 2000' down. That means for every gallon of 35F water brought up from 2000' down, you can cool 3 gallons of 86F water to about 74F. So...that means you are going to ahve to have a LOT of pipes with BIG diameters! So...for construction purposes...let's say the diameters are 10'. So...1 (ONE!!!) 2000' long, 10' wide pipe contains 10,063,700 LBS of water.

Ooops. That's where your plan fails. Bernoulli's principle states that a rise in pressure through a flowing liquid must always be accompanied by a decrease in the speed of the fluid. The problem with your "idea" is there is not enough "rise in pressure" at the other end" to lift 10 millions pounds of water. The current is not (knot) strong enough. A typical ocean current flows at a couple of knots. That flow would be sufficient to lift water up through a pipe of a few feet in diameter and a for a hundred feet, maybe? don't understand? Here is something to help you. Every tried to suck the air through an empty 100' garden hose? After all...it's just air. You can't do it. It still has mass. Now....imagine doing it to 2000' of water with a slow moving current.

But just in case you think there is, I'll continue.

"The ocean temperature is regulated between 70 and 75 degrees and therefore as the storm crosses the cooler water it just weakens but it is not eliminated. BTW during the winter the temperature of the gulf is below 70 degrees so this should not harm sea life."

UHHHHHH...yeah. The WINTER temperature of the Gulf is below 70 because the SUMMER temp is 85-88. Now...if you drop the SUMMER temp to 70-75...by 10 degrees...now the WINTER temp drops into low 60's. So...what does THAT do to marine life? Remember...everything in nature is BALANCE!

"tornado's may not even form in the mid west because of the cooler temperatures in the Gulf thus cooling the warm air migrating to the North out of the Gulf Of Mexico. Since the air is cooler not as much lift is created in the atmosphere for tornados to form."

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. You obviously have no idea about how tornadoes form. Warm air will still be there in the summer because of solar insolation over LAND. "Warm Air" doesn't move up from the Gulf in summer, moisture does. All they need is a higher dew point to help spark tornadoes, dry air aloft, jet stream energy and some convergence at the sfc (cold front). If anything...this idea of yours will INCREASE tornadoes because less heat energy will be added to the poles, thus INCREASING the difference between the tropics and the mid-lats....which leads to MORE severe weather....and more jet stream energy...which leads to more severe tornadoes.


For someone who has very little knowledge about weather...well...maybe you need to stick with drinking beer (if you are the author of the posts on the other forum).

One must remember that the conservation of energy within the pipe or tunnel applies since it is a completly enclosed system that is under water at both ends. Now calculate the difference of gravity between both ends it is virtually nil because the altitude has changed very little. You can see how easy the water will flow through the tube because of the difference of pressure at both ends. Any pressure difference and there will be flow.

[Air Force Met]

One must remember that the conservation of energy within the pipe or tunnel applies since it is a completly enclosed system that is under water at both ends. Now calculate the difference of gravity between both ends it is virtually nil because the altitude has changed very little. You can see how easy the water will flow through the tube because of the difference of pressure at both ends. Any pressure difference and there will be flow.

Wrong. You still have mass that must START moving. It is a MASS difference...that is what the principle states...as I stated. The garden hose experiment is a "completely closed system" with air at both ends...and I challenge you to move 100' of 3/4" air with your lungs. You can't. Same principle.

You did not (or will not) answer the questions. Do you really think your one paragraph answer above is sufficient to refute all of the science? And...your answer is totally insufficient because the only role gravity plays in this is the impact on the 10 millions pounds of water. Take away gravity and you still have MASS!...which is the real issue. Now..answer that question...which was the real question in the first place...AND ANSWER IT ACCORDING TO THE PRINCIPLES OF PRINCIPLE!!! The rise in pressure must offset the descrease in speed of fluid. So...now let me spell this out...since you didn't understand it...if pressures stay the same (in a liquid) and flow rates remain constant (at the top)...a force of increasing order (at the top) MUST be applied to offset increasin mass of a column. Do you not understand that? The principle is not a principle that works where a 2 knot current will move a 10' long tube of water or a 2000' long tube of water. It doesn't work that way. Why? MASS.
Do you understand now? If not...again...go get yourgarden hose...suck through a 10' piece and a 100' piece... see which is easier.


Also...what about the 34 trillion dollars it will take to do the failed concept? Where will that come from? And that was just for the Gulf.

Also...you need to answer for the tornadoes and the other questions as well.

THE BIG QUESTION YOU FAILED TO ANSWER WAS ARE YOU THE OTHER POSTER FROM THE OTHER FORUM? NICE DODGE.

[cyclonekiller]

One must remember that the conservation of energy within the pipe or tunnel applies since it is a completly enclosed system that is under water at both ends. Now calculate the difference of gravity between both ends it is virtually nil because the altitude has changed very little. You can see how easy the water will flow through the tube because of the difference of pressure at both ends. Any pressure difference and there will be flow.

Wrong. You still have mass that must START moving. It is a MASS difference...that is what the principle states...as I stated. The garden hose experiment is a "completely closed system" with air at both ends...and I challenge you to move 100' of 3/4" air with your lungs. You can't. Same principle.

You did not (or will not) answer the questions. Do you really think your one paragraph answer above is sufficient to refute all of the science? And...your answer is totally insufficient because the only role gravity plays in this is the impact on the 10 millions pounds of water. Take away gravity and you still have MASS!...which is the real issue. Now..answer that question...which was the real question in the first place...AND ANSWER IT ACCORDING TO THE PRINCIPLES OF PRINCIPLE!!! The rise in pressure must offset the descrease in speed of fluid. So...now let me spell this out...since you didn't understand it...if pressures stay the same (in a liquid) and flow rates remain constant (at the top)...a force of increasing order (at the top) MUST be applied to offset increasin mass of a column. Do you not understand that? The principle is not a principle that works where a 2 knot current will move a 10' long tube of water or a 2000' long tube of water. It doesn't work that way. Why? MASS.
Do you understand now? If not...again...go get yourgarden hose...suck through a 10' piece and a 100' piece... see which is easier.


Also...what about the 34 trillion dollars it will take to do the failed concept? Where will that come from? And that was just for the Gulf.

Also...you need to answer for the tornadoes and the other questions as well.

THE BIG QUESTION YOU FAILED TO ANSWER WAS ARE YOU THE OTHER POSTER FROM THE OTHER FORUM? NICE DODGE.

You must realize the pipeline is already evacuated and all the air is removed already. You are comparing apples to oranges. The air is gone already in the tube. The mass is already moving in the gulfstream,also. You are also ignoring that the gravity difference between the two open ends are virtually nil. Also you fail to realize the tunnels are so large the frictional loss becomes less as the size increases and so frictional losses are almost nil,also. And no I am not dodgeing anyone. Yes I am that person. Why?

[Air Force Met]

You must realize the pipeline is already evacuated and all the air is removed already. You are comparing apples to oranges. The air is gone already in the tube. The mass is already moving in the gulfstream,also. You are also ignoring that the gravity difference between the two open ends are virtually nil. Also you fail to realize the tunnels are so large the frictional loss becomes less as the size increases and so frictional losses are almost nil,also. And no I am not dodgeing anyone. Yes I am that person. Why?

I asked because you didn't answer the question...and on that thread many people pointed out many scientific things to you...and you never answered the questions. You told drhurricane that he pegged you wrong. I read the thread. He's pegged you very correct. This thread is proof. You do not understand even what I am saying to you now about mass. You can't even undestand that I am trying to exaplain to you that the mass of air is so small, yet you cannot move 100' of it with your lungs yet you expect to move 10 million pounds of it with a 2 knot current. You can't even comprehend (or won't) that I am not even remotely suggesting that there is air in the tube...but that I am using an analogy.

Besides the physics pointed out to you...bottom line...it's a dumb idea. It's an expensive idea and will have unknown environmental impacts. IT's wreckless. Pro and Amatuer mets alike have tried to point out to you why it is a bad idea...not just from physics...but from ideology...even if it would work and we could afford it. But you won't listen. On the other forum numerous people gave you numerous examples why it was a terrible idea...even if it would work...but would you even entertain a conversation about it? Would you even discuss it? no. In your world it's perfect.

That's why I asked if you were that poster. You said you were pegged wrong. I wanted to make sure you weren't saying it wasn't you. Now that I know it was you...I know I am wasting my time...as I was told so wisely by DrHurricane...I should have listened...discussing this with you is a waste of time because you don't want to really learn anything. The other forum was all the proof I need that logical debate is beyond your grasp. That's why I asked if you were that person. Now I know.

[cyclonekiller]

Ok here you do this experiment. Place an empty monometer tube in the ocean where one end is one foot above sea level and it desends to 1000 feet. Then place the other end one foot below sea level. What happens?

[DoctorHurricane2003]

Hmm the way this thread is turning out is a big surprise!

Oh, wait a minute...

[Air Force Met]

Ok here you do this experiment. Place an empty monometer tube in the ocean where one end is one foot above sea level and it desends to 1000 feet. Then place the other end one foot below sea level. What happens?

Why don't you tell me? What happens? Surely you wouldn't ask me to run an experiment that you haven't run. Give me the data. Tell me where and when you have run this experiment...and what was the result? If you wish...you can email me a pdf version of your data or an excel spreadsheet of raw data.

Oh...and did you mean for me to use a manometer tube? Because I'm not sure what a "monometer tube" is. Try your experiment with a manometer tube and see if it works now.

[Air Force Met]

Hmm the way this thread is turning out is a big surprise!

Oh, wait a minute...

You know...reflecting on the forum you linked...I think cyclonekiller is best suited to sitting on his porch drinking beer...rather than contemplating the complexities of scientifc thought and theory.

[cyclonekiller]

Ok here you do this experiment. Place an empty monometer tube in the ocean where one end is one foot above sea level and it desends to 1000 feet. Then place the other end one foot below sea level. What happens?

Why don't you tell me? What happens? Surely you wouldn't ask me to run an experiment that you haven't run. Give me the data. Tell me where and when you have run this experiment...and what was the result? If you wish...you can email me a pdf version of your data or an excel spreadsheet of raw data.

Oh...and did you mean for me to use a manometer tube? Because I'm not sure what a "monometer tube" is. Try your experiment with a manometer tube and see if it works now.

Ah shoot I should have used spelcheck