[yor_on]

In one way you could call what I do to crush concepts that you take for given. In reality I'm making models, and can't say that I have sufficient knowledge to state whether the ideas I propose to be right or wrong. But if you feel yourself to have a better concept base of what I'm discussing you should use the ideas anyway, to test your beliefs.

That's what I would do
And Planck

[yor_on]

I have some physicists that made a lasting impression on me. Planck is one.

[yor_on]

keep on writing at the weirdest times those days, blame it on surgery and pain. One hours sleep is better than none if you follow my thoughts, still, I'm getting there. Eh, better than one I mean. Anyway, let's look at floodings. here's one example how we might think of it.

" How high will the sea level rise by 2020?"

" I am a little curious about why you picked 2020. That is only 3 years away. Sea level rise is currently about 1/8 inch per year (Climate Change: Global Sea Level), so figure about 3/8. Not much to worry about. ...."

that's part of the story, but not the whole story. Here are some added reasons to think again.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2018/sep/12/greenland-antarctic-ice-sheet-sea-level-rise-science-climate. The main point to take away from it though should be " Sea level rise is counterintuitive "

Let's take classical  (European) Venice. They're for the moment building " mobile gates installed at the Lido, Malamocco, and Chioggia inlets that are able to isolate the Venetian Lagoon temporarily from the Adriatic Sea during acqua alta high tides.

Together with other measures, such as coastal reinforcement, the raising of quaysides, and the paving and improvement of the lagoon, MOSE is designed to protect Venice and the lagoon from tides of up to 3 metres (9.8 ft). " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSE_Project

Does the number three remind you of something? That's right, a not too happy scenario forced upon us by Global warming. So what are the projected costs for this? " The MOSE project is estimated to cost €5.496 billion, up €1.3 billion from initial cost projections. Testing will commence in January 2019, and last two years; full completion and operations are now expected in 2022 " It's a controversial project from several points of view, but as Venice more and more regularly gets flooded something needs to be done before it becomes another Atlantis. https://www.lastampa.it/2017/10/12/esteri/venice-and-mose-story-of-a-failure-2XRaxsCgFhcmKEXidalyxJ/pagina.html

But there are worse things than that. Let's assume that it gets built and holds. So it should theoretically take care of three meter high tides. What if the tide happens to be three meter and one centimeter? A storm surge building it up for example. Well, it would definitely fail to keep the Adriatic Sea out of Venice. And, f. ex a three meter rising ocean, doesn't mean this is going to be a equally distributed sea rise. It depends on a lot of factors, just like a local weather isn't a 'climate'.

so what can we expect of the oceans?  " Today, sea level is 5 to 8 inches (13-20 centimeters) higher on average than it was in 1900. That's a pretty big change: for the previous 2,000 years, sea level hadn't changed much at all. The rate of sea level rise has also increased over time. Between 1900 and 1990 studies show that sea level rose between 1.2 millimeters and 1.7 millimeters per year on average. By 2000, that rate had increased to about 3.2 millimeters per year and the rate in 2016 is estimated at 3.4 millimeters per year. Sea level is expected to rise even more quickly by the end of the century.... Over the coming centuries, land that is today home to between 470 and 760 million coastal residents will be inundated by sea level rise associated with a 4 degree Celsius warming that will occur if we fail to curb the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Much of this population lives in cities.... Eventually, sea level is expected to rise around 2.3 meters for every degree (°C) that climate change warms the planet, and Earth has warmed by 1°C already."  https://ocean.si.edu/through-time/ancient-seas/sea-level-rise

We can't really know what level it will stay or at what time. But every little story those days seem to note that 'scientists found themselves unprepared for the rapid and accelerating change" you might want to think of such as 'scare mongering', but that's not what those climate experts say. And there needs to be a very stupid scientist hoping for this to accelerate, and one really tired of humans I might add :)

' New NOAA sea level rise projections dramatically increase by 2100 '

" The report, “Global and Regional Sea Level Rise Scenarios for the United States,” describes factors that are considered when estimating anticipated sea level rise such as ocean mass additions due mostly to melting of land-based ice; increases in global ocean volume due primarily to thermal expansion; and variability in ocean circulation. The report also reviews recent scientific literature on “worst-case” sea level rise projections and the possibility of rapid melting of the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. All of the calculations and considerations resulted in evidence suggesting a most-dire projection of 8.2 feet of sea level rise globally by 2100 is more likely that previously thought.

The NOAA report gives a range of possible scenarios, from the low of 1 foot of sea level rise by 2100 to the 8.2 feet, which is 1.6 feet higher than the previous worst-case scenario reported in 2012 as part of the National Climate Assessment. The report also projects a global mean of 2.5 meters by 2100 and an additional 0.3 to 1 meter for the New England region, bringing the total sea level rise in the Northeast to 9.2 to 11.5 feet by 2100. "

BTW: Can't link you directly, seems as if NOOA is taken down " The website you are trying to access is not available at this time due to a lapse in appropriation. NOAA.gov and specific NOAA websites necessary to protect lives and property are operational and will be maintained during this partial closure of the U.S. Government. " What do you know?

And one centimeter over a gate goes a long way inland if the elevation is low as in " Stockton California is nearly a hundred miles inland from San Francisco, yet is barely above sea level. " If you then count in what the salt water will do fields etc in form of poisoning them with salt, and probably ground water too, then this isn't what any one want to see, is it?

And no, stop thinking of it as a 'conspiracy', it's not, it's facts.

[yor_on]

Happened to see "At present we are of the opinion that Sun energy is alone responsible for raising temperature.".

Well, yes, and no.

The sun is the source, but just as different material stores and keeps heat differently, so does different aspects of Earth. That's where the heat keeping aspects of CO² and methane steps in. It's more than that though, f. ex clouds at night reflects IR (heat) back to the ground, and with more moisture there will be more clouds. And water itself, even if not storing it as long as methane and CO² have its own heat capacity short term cycle. It's oceans that are the biggest 'heat sink' for the moment, with land as number two. That means that most of the added energy we used to lose to space becomes stored there instead.

 

From https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-sea-surface-temperature'

What that does to the oceans is to create lifeless patches of no oxygen, forcing food fish to migrate as good as they can as the water temperature rises. It also create acidity in where the chemical properties of the oceans gives a added reason for fish, and everything using a shell, to move. Although those with shells ain't that awfully fast about it, so most of them failing to adapt can be expected to die out. The same goes for plankton of all kinds, as the the temperatures rise. Some species seems to find a new niche though, as with the increase of jellyfish outside the coast of Japan. It also changes the way cold water is transported, f.ex the Gulf stream that recently have been found to start wobbling. Further more the warmer water comes in under glaciers making them melt and  'move/glide' out to sea a lot faster, lubricating the ground for those on land, also depending on type of slope they are situated on. West Antarctica is a very good example of that. I could keep on adding examples but we don't want a worse headache than what we already received, do we?

At the same time as Amazonas now are expected to add more CO² than it takes up in its normal respiration. The land is starting to fail, and in a worst case scenario we will see something similar with the oceans.
=

spelling, and a pair of better glasses possibly  :)

And, well, let's add this too. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/07052018/atlantic-ocean-circulation-slowing-climate-change-heat-temperature-rainfall-fish-why-you-should-care

For that fuller picture at what is happening outside our doors.

[yor_on]

as I can't seem to sleep, I rather speculate some more. Think of a accelerating expansion, where the 'origin' of that sphere around you (space) always seem too center on you. It's true for all of us. Then think of 'many worlds'. Put them together and see what you can come up with. A new type of many worlds it would be, in where scale dependencies defined it, and where the messenger protocol 'c' would be what hinged it together, both microscopically and macroscopically. If one then think our local clock being equivalent to 'c', like me, and also wonder about it being scale dependent?

What would that mean for emergences, and entanglements?

I said 'speculate', didn't I?

[yor_on]

It's more important than you think, this 'sphere of (early) light' following you wherever you are, in time and space. Always giving you a same age.

[yor_on]

If it didn't follow you giving you the same result, then it seems to me that the universe wouldn't be 'infinite'. But as it does, and as our planet, solar system and galaxy is in constant 'relative motion' you have a proof.

[yor_on]

There are no proofs that can't be questioned. The more we know the better the questions, hopefully so :) I've tried to come up with a alternative in where you have a 'finite universe' just to see if it could be done, giving us a same effect, of that early light always being at a same age and distance to the observer.

How about you, can you think of a reasonable idea to how it could be done?

[yor_on]

In a way you can see this 'light sphere' as not 'moving' at all. You just need to define a isotropic homogeneous universe, equivalent in all aspects no matter where, or at what time, you look out in where all uniform motion are geodesics and only 'relative'  some other frame of reference.

Try it

[yor_on]

that would make uniform motion relative, which it is, and in one way 'illusionary'.

[yor_on]

Then we need to knit that to the rest of my speculations :)

Nice isn't it?
Speculating I mean. We should do it more often

[yor_on]

Now you will need to define a acceleration, and what differs it from that 'uniform (relative) motion' we wondered about.
It's locally observable, uniform motions aren't.

That's one.

[yor_on]

Uniform motions need frames of reference to exist, something against you can measure a 'speed'. A acceleration screams at you, inside you. Very local, both macroscopically and microscopically.

[yor_on]

And a acceleration is about displacements, although when defining uniform motions this 'new way' there can be no displacements taking place in those.

[yor_on]

Another thing becoming apparent thinking this way is that 'scale dependencies' are crucial for it. Quantum mechanics.

[yor_on]

Because you become the center of the 'universe' in it, as I do too. As we all do.

[yor_on]

That's local.

but then we have how it comes together, by 'c' and by 'forces', acting in time. To say that 'c' is what binds it into one seamless 'realm' is not enough. That's what I call a 'global aspect', how it allow us to exist and communicate.

[yor_on]

So what is 'local' in your life? Well, your clock is local, your constants are locally created, and expected to be (locally) equivalent anywhere and at any time. Your physical laws are 'local'. Everything is. Even the universe you act in and acts on you is a local experience, it's yours. It's 'observer dependent'

[yor_on]

Scales

[yor_on]

and chaos theory, symmetries, the way things and concepts repeat themselves. There is a symmetry to my universe versus yours.