Now we throw thousands of dollars worth of equipment into the storm and still have no clue how it works. It's impossible to justify your place in the universe to the government as a weather scientist.
+Maksims Ivanovs much better Idea than we used to have. There's many more unjustifiable things, just on example is the excessive military budget, which won't save any more lives by spending more. Spending more money on detecting and understanding tornadoes will obviously help people
Tornadoes have always facinated me. How they form to produce wind that can destroy even the best built structures is just unbelievable. Great video Sir...
wade hicks lol 3 fronts = massive thunderstorms once the storm starts making updrafts which creates hail then hot and cold air starts to fight creating a mesocyclone which rotates 90 degrees then some other stuff happens and a tornado is formed
it's interesting, but I don't really understand why he's describing computer as though they are this new hip thing that nobody has heard of. He describes the simulation on his hard drive as though that's a novel idea, and says the term "computer model" as though he coined the term.
I found that a lot of scientist who have such vast knowledge in their field, they lose sight a bit of what is general knowledge and what isn't known to the average person. They seem to be have trouble assessing in how far they have to dumb down whatever they are talking about, so they just over-explain every little thing.
Tammy H in my experience it's the exact opposite - scientists lose sight of what's general knowledge so they use a bunch of unexplained jargon that nobody understands.
+Peter Schmidt Yeah, I can see how it could go either way. Whatever the case, I'm just happy when scientists share their knowledge and don't use it for evil. :)
When ever the sirens go off I check the news to see where it’s at and if it’s far enough from me I go look for it take a photo or two then go to my basement but if it’s close to me I instantly go to the basement.
Brilliant, thank you for sharing, super interesting.. Loved how you simplified the explanation for people not as smart as you, as well as technically explained for people who chase or are highly intelligent and crave a bit more. ..
PEOPLE LIVING IN THESE STORM PRONE AREAS NEED TO START BUILDING "MONOLITHIC DOME" HOUSES. People are still building rectangular houses in these areas - and they keep getting destroyed. Learn from mistakes of the past people.
There's a reasonable idea. Supercomputer models are great! But do we really need one to understand that when a tornado siren goes off we should immediately retreat to the basement? Your idea of environmental engineering is a lot more interesting and practical.
Yep, concrete domes don't fold over like a cardboard box. That is my dream home. Actually, a one level torus shaped home with a center court yard is what I'd like; constructed the same way as a monodome.
Incentives, your Supreme Highness. Tell the people living there that the insurance rates on their house will reflect the risk inherent in their design. Then offer a tax break to those wishing to transition to the low-risk housing. Also, break out the PR/Marketing minions to convince the people how cool that low-risk housing is. Aren't they ashamed to have crappy, stupid rectangular housing? Don't they want to be Awesome and live in unique and innovative housing?
Or, better yet, just become an architect, sell your ideas, once it catches on people will want to buy in. Insurance companies will see how big it is. Tax breaks? Please, the way the free market works, anyone with half a brain will see if the product being sold is good or not, the government won't need to be involved even 1%.
I want one. I'm looking for something inexpensive to build and I have seriously thought about a dome home. I live in open country in a rectangular home.
@@mrbagel8751 tornado rates are caused by the damage they create, so if an ef5 forms in a flat plain, but only knocks down a chair, it will be considered a ef0
Do they consider all important variables in their simulation, like water vapor behavior and electromagnetism? Or do they adjust their simulation only to look realistic?
Peter Luxus They consider all variables known to be important, and others can be added as well, to see if they make a difference. However, these kind of models only calculate things on the relevant scale. Electromagnetism is the force that governs particle-particle interactions within a gas, all those interaction (several billion-trillion-trillions of them) behave in a way that allows for large scale behavior to be calculated from averages. Because of how many electromagnetic interactions there are, that average behavior well be incredibly close to reality. Thus, when large amounts of gas is involved, classical hydrodynamics and mechanical methods are used. This saves a lot of time, money and computing power. Indeed, calculating the behavior via quantum electro dynamics (the branch of physics that describe electromagnetism most accurately) would be impossible for large scale, due to practical constraints.
Laws of physics, Laws of physics, Calculating, Calculating, Computer model, Computer model.... BOOM THIS IS HOW TORNADOES WORK! OH WAIT I STILL DIDN"T EXPLAIN...
There is a EF6 in both catagories. a EF6 does so much damage, the cars explode by the debris. the ef6 destroyes roads and landscape... it is "Monstrous".
Nope. Only EF5 exists. An EF5 tornado entails total destruction. You can't get past complete destruction. Therefore any tornado more powerful than a typical EF5. Is still an EF5
As an eastern European that has never had any experiences with tornadoes, I find them totally fascinating and also scary. There is one practical question though that's been bugging me. In my country 99% of the houses are steel reinforced concrete. The ones up in the mountains are even sturdier stone houses. Why do they build wooden houses so easily torn apart in the Tornado alley of the US...? Shouldn't they build them a little more sturdy?
An EF5 tornado will flatten the structure regardless. Therefore it makes more economic sense to build houses out of cheaper materials. Making more shelters seems like the only practical method to reduce deaths in terms of construction. Sadly in places like Oklahoma, it's incredibly hard to make shelters as far as I've heard. I'm obsessed with tornadoes too. UK
Ellemphriem Nil because it's cheaper. The American government decided to not evacuate people in Houston, which killed about thirty people or more because it was cheaper too. It tends to do that, prioritize money over anything else.
i think in this video we only able to see what's happening above the ground only, what really happened is underground, and way above in the sky, electrically, when the + and the - dancing trying to meet equilibrium.. yeah, because this is an electric universe.. 😉
Ya know, I had a thought today at work. We have planes and pilots that fly through hurricanes to collect data on them. Could the same plane fly through a supercell and the mesocyclone to collect data? Or send a drone with instruments up there to collect data?
not a scientist, but my guess is based off the size difference between the two types of weather. Hurricanes are hundreds of miles wide, with the eye being miles wide as well. Tornados are much more localized with the biggest being measured in a few miles and much more violent and unstable. Only lasting briefly, tornados die out quickly, while hurricanes last for weeks. This is all my guess, but I'm fairly confident in it.
I get a bit frustrated when scientists put data into a computer, get something out that looks like the data they put in, and claim that they have solved the problem "with pretty high confidence". Oh yeah? Well how come your model didn't predict sideways funnels, multiple funnels, funnels rotating in opposite directions, invisible funnels, and the grounding of incoming solar radiation via those funnels? You get out of a computer model only what you put in.
Atmospheric conditions are not going to tell you whether a tornado has multiple vortices, sister vortices, etc. What they are doing is trying to gain a better understanding of the atmospheric conditions that determine which cells will produce tornados and what conditions affect strength of said cells and tornadoes.
This model is to see why some storms produce long track tornadoes and others don't produce any tornadoes at all. It's incredibly hard to take into account all the variables. I'm sure with more simulations being run, their confidence will increase.
I hate to be cynical...but whenever i see a trailer park or village flattened by a tornado then the inhabitants whining on TV how their life is "devastated" i immediately think "WAKE UP YOU IMBECILES!!" you live in a house/trailer in the middle of a tornado prone area...expect the worse....or if you cant handle that build a house on the rim of Mt Vesuvius....or perhaps a nice condo on the San Andreas Fault. One of hte definitions of madness is to do the same thing and expect a different result. oh and befor you deem me cruel and un sympathetic....i lived in the flood plains of gloucestershire UK and in 2007 i lost everything when my flat was under 6ft of water and i had no insurance, I just got on with it
