Dear all
I chose a new subject because these threads about lifted_index, total_totals_
index and Seth's new standard names for CIN etc. are closely related.
I agree with the suggestion from Philip to include _from_the_surface on names
referring to surface parcels (it was previously clarified
Dear Jonathan
This appears to be a very ad-hoc quantity, and I agree it would not make sense
to try to devise a general physical name for it. Adding atmosphere_stability,
as with the total totals index, provides useful information on what sort of
quantity is it, taking a step towards making it
Dear Mike
You nailed it, Mike. H.5 is the intended illustration where
A9.2.3.2 is referenced. Thanks for pointing out the error.
- Steve
Thanks for spotting this, Mike. Please could you open a defect trac ticket to
have it corrected?
Cheers
Jonathan
Hi Jonathan:
On 6/4/2013 4:17 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
Dear John Caron and John Maurer
I agree with John C that the problem arises when the coordinate variables
are not size one. John M's example
float lon(lon) ;
float lat(lat) ;
float alt(alt) ;
float
Dear John C
I think the two questions are linked actually. There is nothing wrong with
the size-1 dimensions in general, I would say. You could see it as a single
point extracted from a larger gridded field (time,atl,lat,lon) in which all
the dimensions were originally greater than one. It's
Dear Jonathan Gregory,
Thanks for creating the new thread
I see your point on how start and finish could imply a trajectory
and that we should avoid this. I like the word source instead of
start. Ambient doesn't imply any height, in and of itself. But,
since it is used in the standard
Another option is to use the term sink instead of ambient, which would be more
parallel to source and attribute less semantic knowledge about the destination
location. Then air_pressure_of_lifted_parcel_at_sink would be a good analog.
('Destination' is another option too.)
On Jun 4, 2013, at
Hi Jonathan (G),
I had thought we needed the finish level for CAPE and CIN, but after
consulting with a colleague, I realize we actually don't need it.
For the CAPE CIN calculations, you integrate until the parcel hits
equilibrium. I am assured that it will suffice just to mention that in the
Hi Jonathan:
If we use the time series featureType as example
(from
http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-conventions/1.6/cf-conventions.html#idp8307552)
AFAIU, the orthogonal multidimensional representation would be:
float humidity(station,time)
not
float humidity(lat, lon, time)
