Well, we already proved wikipedia was wrong about waterspouts lifting water so they are not necessarily the leading authority on anything.
I agree with most of the thermodynamics below, unlike a waterspout with one string of vacuum energy they have many in multi body orbits around the eyewall doing the vacuum evaporating of the seawater, cooling the ocean and vacuum condensing the water vapor along the eyewall. Once their simple model also explains: 1) electromagnetic discharge along the eyewall 2) multiple mesovortexes within isabell's eye 3) gravity waves emanating from the disturbance and along the cold conveyor leaving the eye 4) earthquakes before and after the disturbance along the path 5) multiple interlocking strings and rainbows witnessed in the sky along the the front ahead of Sandy 6) wailing sounds in the overhead jetstreams days ahead of Sandy along her path 7) how that disturbance known as Sandy can be held together against wind shear and turn left into New Jersey/New York against the cold North Atlantic current trying to take it Northeast and still keep the central pressure low. Then I believe they will have their model nailed. I have discussed all of these on my blog. I am not sure what artificial intelligence has to do with it but it is a nice buzzword. Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Wednesday, July 3, 2013, James Bowery wrote: > Michaud's AVE model is not only a very good fit for modern high time-space > resolution measurements of atmospheric vortexes as large as hurricanes -- > it is a far simpler model. This is significant not only because recent > advances in universal artificial > intelligence<http://www.hutter1.net/ai/uaibook.htm>have proven Ockham's Razor > yields optimal predictions, and not only because > accuracy at the largest scale demonstrates scaling, but because by > validating the model at the extrema, interpolation rather than > extrapolation is used for prediction. As the first sentence of the > wikipedia article on > extrapolation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrapolation>states: > > In mathematics <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics>, *extrapolation* is > the process of estimating, beyond the original observation interval, the > value of a variable on the basis of its relationship with another variable. > It is similar to interpolation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation>, > which produces estimates between known observations, but extrapolation is > subject to greater uncertainty <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty> and > a higher risk of producing meaningless results. > > > Hurricane Isabel Intensity <http://vortexengine.ca/Isabel/Intensity.pdf> > > Louis Michaud > January 19, 2007 > > Abstract > > Hurricane minimum eyewall pressure is a function of the temperature and > humidity of the air at the eyewall. Hurricane maximum wind speed is a > function of the difference between this eyewall surface pressure and the > surface pressure at large radius. Dropsonde observations in hurricane > Isabel provided unprecedented high quality data on eyewall: air > temperature, relative humidity and sea surface temperature. The paper shows > that eyewall temperature and humidity can be used to calculate minimum > eyewall pressure and maximum wind speed. > > Heavy spray at hurricane causes eyewall air temperature and relative > humidity to approach equilibrium with the underlying sea surface > temperature (SST). Isabel eyewall surface air temperature (SAT) was 1 to > 2°C lower than its eyewall SST and its eyewall relative humidity was > approximately 97%. Therefore the approach of the eyewall temperature to > equilibrium (A) was 1 to 2°C and the approach to equilibrium of eyewall > relative humidity (B) was 3%. Hurricane intensity is shown to be extremely > sensitive to eyewall SST. An increase in eyewall SST from 26.5°C to 27.5°C > is sufficient to increase hurricane intensity from category 3 to category > 5. Cooling of the sea by the hurricane reduces eyewall SST to 28°C or below > thereby limiting hurricane intensity. Predicting hurricane intensity is > difficult because a small increase in eyewall SST has a large effect on > intensity and because warm water can swell up from below. > > ... > > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 1:58 AM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Erratum: "1mil/W fixed operating cost" should read "10mil/W/year fixed >> operating cost" >> >> If you run these numbers with a 12% zero amortization levelization, the >> price per kWh comes to about 5mil/kWh delivered to the grid: >> >> (.30dollar*.12)/W/year+.01dollar/W/year?dollar/kWh >> ([{(0.3 * dollar) * 0.12} / watt] / year) + ([{0.01 * dollar} / watt] / >> year) ? dollar / (kilo*Wh) >> = 0.0052511416 dollar/kWh >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:35 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> See slide 19 of: >>> >>> http://vortexengine.ca/PPP/AVEtec_Business_Case.pdf >>> >>> Bottom line: >>> >>> If LENR doesn't pan out as an electrical generating system, Atmospheric >>> Vortex Engines are the next best thing. >>> >>> If LENR does pan out as an electrical generating system, Atmospheric >>> Vortex Engines are not only still hard to beat, at 300 mil/W capital cost, >>> 0 variable operating cost and 1mil/W fixed operating cost, but they can be >>> used with the larger centralized energy users (there will be _some_) to >>> relatively efficiently (up to 20%) cogenerate from the waste heat. >>> >> >> >
