Rob, re
> Why don't KAM barriers to transport qualify as a fully nonlinear > theory that explains the inhibition to mixing at small spatial > scales?" A quick answer is that they ignore the PV field -- so, to accept such an explanation, you have to argue that PV is dynamically neglible, hence that Rossby waves and vortex interactions, e.g. merging, are unimportant. (I take it you mean the KAM barriers that arise in chaotic-advection theories in which particular kinds of velocity fields are prescribed. Unlike the real velocity fields, such a velocity field cannot respond to PV rearrangement.) BTW the final version, we hope improved, version of our paper in press is now up on the Kyoto website, also available via a link in the Chapman paragraph on my home page http://www.atm.damtp.cam.ac.uk/people/mem/ Best wishes, Michael McIntyre *********************************************************************** Professor M. E. McIntyre MAE FRS, Centre for Atmospheric Science at the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, Wilberforce Rd, Cambridge CB3 0WA, United Kingdom Fax +44-1223-760419 and -765900 Tel +44-1223-337871, secretary -337870 (Loraine Knight) & +44-1223-363283, mobile/cellphone +44-794-786-0441 email [EMAIL PROTECTED], secretary [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.atm.damtp.cam.ac.uk/people/mem/lucidity-principles-in-brief/ *********************************************************************** _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.atmosocean.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
