Typhoon Tip

we need the season defining big cyclone and wind event... we had an autumn like this in 1987 I recall... almost 0 wind thru all of October, then... we had a wind event near Halloween and I remember as the cold front came in there were leaves in the column from cloud base to earth. crazy

what a bummer. Captain Picard died

It's a good approach ... the EOF derivatives are purely numeric ... they are not qualitative in that sense. In this case, the significance of the negative anomaly with that trough near NE of HA is probably lifting the PNA index farther up than the height field down wind is driving it down..

A new phenomenon may be beginning known as 'El namis'

No... 32, is cold. It is not fake. I dunno...getting close to needing to call you a choice word, and walking away. haha my god

This is why you are prone to believing fake news ... Reality is not what you want, or want to accept. It is, and you can decide whether you want to be realistic, or reside in some deluded state. The air temperature is 35, and if that is sensibly considered cold to the observer, it is a cold air mass. End of debate. Whether that air mass then rises to 70 that afternoon or not, doesn't change the fact... if/when that happens, the air mass is then a warm air mass. That's it. there is nothing else.

This is incorrect logic in the empirical sense of reality. For human sensible recognition, when it is 35 it is cold. When it is 95, it is hot. in our example of the desert, the air mass is cold a night, hot during the day. The point that is being missed is that it is the same air mass getting to a cold or hot state. If an air is always hot or always cold, than THAT is THAT air mass. The temperature is a physical representation of the average kinetic motion of the molecules and atoms. It is not fake. It is an empirical measurement of state.

...And AI has all of humanity living in a simulation apparently ... sign of the times, man. sign of the times

Yeah I'm liking this idea myself as of late. The 70 and 100 hPa level anomalies currently observed may be related.

Yeah, I'm not sure it's all that real either... as winter enthusiasts, we would rather not see the cumulative error products for D7 and D10 leads indicating a 2 SD positive busting ..haha.. prooobably's a red flag. It could also correct -

No personal feel on whether this has any portending value for later in the winter. Not sure I see how- but that's no refutation! I can come up study-able explanation for why a 10hPa warm bloob ( the official term! ) is taking place, now, that doesn't require any specific special meaning thereafter. For one, I've been following this for years ...I've noticed lag correlation. First, the Swiss Alps and Urals/ cordillera running N-S between along the Eurasian geographic region, could be instrumental ... about 10 days prior to these warm nodes popping into existence in those higher stratospheric levels. The 10 hPa being one in the 1 thru 30. It seems there is a lag correlation, a week to perhaps 10 days after active N-NE cyclone modes. The idea is, these modes inject/enhance warm advection events downs stream across mid and N Europe, prior to the 10 hPa emergence. The conjecture ( less than hypothesis at this time...) is that the geographical barrier the Eurasian cordillera imposes, assists in lifting the warm air - think 'giving it a boost'. Around the globe over here, over western N/A...we have a similar, though not as abrupt geographic barrier wrt the Rockies orientation ... impinging Pacific flow as it encroaches from the west. As this air 'back logs' due to fluid pressure it begins to deflect up... in the same way, just not as dramatically... Coriolis force additionally factors and turns toward the N... That is the reason the base-line mean flow over N/ features the flat ridge in the W with a gentle nadir coming E of ~ 110 W across the continent. ( as an aside, this is the base-line PNAP, Perennial North American Pattern). It's a useful knowledge nugget, because not ever +PNAP is really a +PNA. Nor is a -PNAP part of a long termed -PNA.. it's like any teleconnectors ..they don't always move together. Anyway, so the Urals and so forth are a younger taller mountain range. Height being the crucial difference. The active storm mode of the N-NE Atlantic sends warm advection/storminess through the central and N Europe. These encounter get deflected N and up over the Eurasian cordillera very proficiently, ... eventually penetrating the "side wall" of the PV. It may take a week to 10 days to do so... If there is a warm anomaly S of the 60 N definition... it may en masse rotated around the hemisphere a couple of time before all this happens. I have enough to at least correlate and subsequently formulate a hypothesis that connects the N-NE Atlantic storm mode with a lag to the mid stratosphere vortex presentations but ... I'm stuck in a day job like everyone else.

Yeah, that's why I'm careful to describe the downward propagating, crucially ...highly indicative using the temperature monitoring... I also am just delineating whether that specific behavior is occurring or not, is crucial. Because the correlation to the AO is very tightly correlated to that phenomenon. That site, and the information, at both ends that I provided, coherently show that. If you take those down welling examples, and compare them to historical AO records, you'll see the 20 to 30 day lag rather obviously. If you do the same with those warm nodes that did not apparently propagate, AO responses are variable and very less correlated. I'm also - again - not intending to say this November won't observe a downward inertial displacement, from 10 hPa ..thru the lower pressure coordinates and destined to affect the AO...etc... just that I'm not seeing that type of SSW totality at this time. The gist: What we're getting at here is the well-studied form of stratosphere–troposphere coupling. The current 10 hPa bloop - at least in the GFS suite I provided ...again, I have not seen the Euro and refuse to pay for it hahahaha - does not appear GFS-destined to be a coupled phenomenon. It's not likely to be a deterministic value on the AO and subsequent goodies ...etc... if even registerable at all, unless the coupling model takes place. Critical distinction being ...inertial displacement at 10 hPa only describes the PV's forced horizontal position at that level, not proof that the same displacement is traveling downward... that has to happen or the coupling won't.

Been seeing this a lot in the last decade ...but since 2023, even more, where these "missing man formation" curve peal-aways take place. This tropical curve is exceptionally deviated from the perceived canonical/historic behavior at this point... It seems it should almost have to turn and start going down but the damage is already done. Not sure if this apart/aspect of El Nino, per se; other "super" Nino years are presented but did not to demo this type of aberrant tropical separation from the pact. Interesting

Looking at the EPS spatial/synoptic hemisphere in the mids, thru the end of those 360 hours ... GEFS and GEPS too, it appears it's all coming down to how the planetary wave lengths ( literally the x-coordinate geometry of how long it stretches...) verifies across the continental mid latitudes in determining if/when winter-like anything will take place thru mid month. One aspect that is very high confidence ( unusually so for this range/model error climate) is that a poweful negative goepoential anomaly will set up NE of Hawaii in the E and particular NE Pacific. Not even sure if this is an "Aleutian low" per se, as it is not really illustrating that. More like a deep L/W anchor trough, with perhaps a few member likely closing off a low at some point or another but also likely remaining progressive just by experience of of what the mean looks like - for now... But it is deep, and it is a very strong +PNA correlation, thus seeing this ... ...has herculean legs supporting confidence. Perhaps also considering just how ridiculously crushed those members are surrounding that mean curve... The mode/mean are collocated as is almost all members, out at D10? that is a raging agreement hard-on. Convention of statistics states that lower spread is consistent with elevating confidence. Anyway, back to point ... the spatial/synoptic handling down stream of this look E Pac aspect is not nearly as coherent as this E Pac aspect, It's like an 'unmanned fire-hose' pattern down stream, where the models will tend to flop the heights and whatever impression of a ambient polar jet up and down in latitude just like a model-time-dependent flopping fire hose. Run to run, different location while the E Pac look essentially remains the same. We're creating a pattern here where the western half of the PNA domain is anchoring in positive mode, but the eastern half is indicating stress coupling... a variation that could either result warm or cool relative to normal.

I'm not seeing the complete suite off the Euro cluster ... but, the GEFs I've always used do not indicate an SSW... There's some wild confusion going on, as some folks among this social media, and outside of it, are seemingly not even aware of their confusion: appears just just wrongly attributable in what is going on.... First of all, warm thermal events pop off in the PV/stratospheric altitudes, all the time. Seldom are they down propagators after the fact, a key behavioral component in the Sudden Stratospheric Warming defined phenomenon. The modeling presentation I've found at https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat_a_f/ (NCEP/GFS Analyses and Forecasts) provides a means ( though could be improved ) to deduce if in situ outlooks for warming at those respective levels ( y-axis of the above annotated graph) may be destined to downwell. Note the unit conversion from MB to hPa (millibars to hectopascals) a conversion they do to be consistent with SI units. When you see an warm sudden introduction in the 1 thru 10 hPa, then look at the 30 --> 50 --> 70 ...etc, out in time. If the pretty red blob of the polar stereographic thermal anomaly layout are then subsequently introducing the warmth, that is at least a 'reasonable' implication of an actual downward welling behavior. If you don't see that... it's probably an event that is like this... Ie., no propagation. Having defined/illustrated these different types of stratospheric warm event basics ... just as a knowledge aspect, there does not appear to be a temperature extreme/amplitude dependency in whether an event is a propagator or not. As this image above demos, I carefully choose; it shows multiple irrelevant perturbed warm introductions. However, the last in the series there, very late in the spring of 2007, vaguely suggests there was a downward mass propagation. The key take away is the down ward movement of the temperature (warming) anomaly. We are thus using the temperature fields to infer wave mechanics taking place that will eventually become important in situ to the stratosphere-troposphere coupled model. There may be amplitude requirement the physical wave mechanics - intuitively that's no brainer. A weak downward temperature signal ... prooooobably is indicative of a weak collapsing PV ..which then weakly correlates to AO modality. Otherwise, no propagation, no crucially defined SSW event. Now, if we want to call any warm protuberance that introduces itself at all ... like those spanning that winter of 2007, as a SSW? we do so at risk of confusing and conflating the two disparate systemically effective events - like what sounds like is happening now... I did go over the modeled GFS hPa levels wrt time ... it appears around 240 hours, there is a moderate 10 hPa warm emergence, but subsequent time intervals at successively lower levels do not present any propagating behavior. That can change - sure. We're not excluding the possibility that an actual SSW will happen this year in the unusually early November window. Just not seeing it right now. Having said all that... look at the 70 and 100 hPas... There's something else happening, already, ...partly I suspect is contributing to some folks misconception of what's going on. There is a coherent warm anomaly that is all but statically occurring in those lower stratospheric levels... That is is not SSW, but... I believe it is related to CC invading the fixed hPa aspect of the monitoring system... speculation -