 |
| Look Closer |
This Dredd Blog series is adamantly focused on the difference between "Newtonian kinetic ocean thermohaline currents" and the official TEOS-10 potential enthalpy as the ocean heat flux.
"Newtonian kinetic ocean thermohaline currents" means ocean currents generated by IOS-80 heat/salinity dynamics, but those hypotheses do not use the current standard of official oceanography science when they develop their data and dogma.
Those current hypotheses used in thermohaline ocean current models generate "unworthy values" as pointed out by a recent (2023) analysis of them:
"The mid-depth ocean circulation is critically linked to actual changes in the
long-term global climate system. However, in the past few decades, predic-
tions based on ocean circulation models highlight the lack of data, knowledge, and long-term implications in climate change assessment. Here, using 842,421 observations produced by Argo floats from 2001-2020, and Lagrangian simulations, we show that only 3.8% of the mid-depth oceans, including part of the equatorial Pacific Ocean and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, can be regarded as accurately modelled, while other regions exhibit significant underestimations in mean current velocity."
(Widespread global disparities between modelled and observed mid-depth ocean currents, emphasis added). Those results should be no surprise since Newtonian kinetic ocean current models do not use the modern official standard for the science of oceanography.
That new standard replaces the old IOS-80 standard:
"TEOS-10 is based on a Gibbs function formulation from which all thermodynamic properties of seawater (density, enthalpy, entropy sound speed, etc.) can be derived in a thermodynamically consistent manner. TEOS-10 was adopted by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission at its 25th Assembly in June 2009 to replace EOS-80 as the official description of seawater and ice properties in marine science."
(Thermodynamic Equation Of Seawater - 2010). The models that extol the virtues of Newtonian mechanics do not use the proper quantum physics formulas and calculations for ocean heat, salinity and temperature:
"Furthermore, it is shown that a flux of potential enthalpy can be called “the heat flux” even though potential enthalpy is undefined up to a linear function of salinity. The exchange of heat across the sea surface is identically the flux of potential enthalpy. This same flux is not proportional to the flux of potential temperature because of variations in heat capacity of up to 5%. The geothermal heat flux across the ocean floor is also approximately the flux of potential enthalpy with an error of no more that 0.15%. These results prove that potential enthalpy is the quantity whose advection and diffusion is equivalent to advection and diffusion of “heat” in the ocean. That is, it is proven that to very high accuracy, the first law of thermodynamics in the ocean is the conservation equation of potential enthalpy. It is shown that potential enthalpy is to be preferred over the Bernoulli function. A new temperature variable called “conservative temperature” is advanced that is simply proportional to potential enthalpy. It is shown that present ocean models contain typical errors of 0.1°C and maximum errors of 1.4°C in their temperature because of the neglect of the nonconservative production of potential temperature. The meridional flux of heat through oceanic sections found using this conservative approach is different by up to 0.4% from that calculated by the approach used in present ocean models in which the nonconservative nature of potential temperature is ignored and the specific heat at the sea surface is assumed to be constant. An alternative approach that has been recommended and is often used with observed section data, namely, calculating the meridional heat flux using the specific heat (at zero pressure) and potential temperature, rests on an incorrect theoretical foundation, and this estimate of heat flux is actually less accurate than simply using the flux of potential temperature with a constant heat capacity ... it is perfectly valid to talk of potential enthalpy, h0, as the “heat content” and to regard the flux of h0 as the “heat flux.” Moreover, h0 is shown to be more conserved than is θ by more than two orders of magnitude. This paper proves that the fluxes of h0 across oceanic sections can be accurately compared with the air–sea heat flux, irrespective of whether the fluxes of mass and of salt are zero across these ocean sections. This has implications for best oceanographic practice for the analysis of ocean observations and for the interpretation of “temperature” in models."
(Potential Enthalpy: A Conservative Oceanic Variable for Evaluating Heat Content and Heat Fluxes, emphasis added; cf. Thermodynamic Concepts used in Physical Oceanography). Ocean heat flow (flux) is infrared photons in motion, and heat content is the amount of infrared photons (moles equivalent) seawater atoms contain (which is how many infrared photons they have absorbed).
When a seawater atom's maximum-moles level is reached, or cooler seawater atoms are encountered, seawater atoms emit infrared photons (hot flows to cold, warm flows to cooler) which other seawater atoms absorb.
Until equilibrium is reached.
That is how ocean heat content moves at every depth level in every ocean area.
The previous post in this series is here.
