tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1163623182638963042.post8687920635138331871..comments2022-03-27T15:33:42.404-05:00Comments on EH2R - latest work in progress: SEA ICE phase changes mimicked by the vertically shifting horizonEH2Rhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15138541663354420708noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1163623182638963042.post-41235702123760509532013-06-09T15:40:16.091-05:002013-06-09T15:40:16.091-05:00Thanks Kevin, That is so, ice melts on the under...Thanks Kevin, That is so, ice melts on the underside when temperatures are well below freezing, you can look and see what this gives:<br /><br />http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_OoL3cuZer_0/TPolAnM28aI/AAAAAAAALt4/QTNuguil1Vg/s1600/deep%252Bsea%252Bunder%252Bthe%252Bpole.jpg&imgrefurl=http://poorplanet.blogspot.com/2010/12/deep-sea-under-pole-amazing-arctic.html&h=531&w=800&sz=59&tbnid=kJTl9Rcoas4JhM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=136&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dunder%2Bthe%2Bpole%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=under+the+pole&usg=__Cb0v6VNHO9pn259uRlIM2AmGOt8=&docid=_gMbUc_gm5qwKM&sa=X&ei=0-S0UZOpHfjK4APxq4HIDA&ved=0CEUQ9QEwBA&dur=1810<br /><br />incredible ice geometry with all kinds of physics and chemistry playing architects. <br /><br /> Must cite buoy 2012L as further evidence as such. http://imb.crrel.usace.army.mil/irid_data/2012L_thick.png<br />Mass buoy 2012L is particularly interesting because it monitors very thick ice, therefore at its accretion limit. When 2012L was measuring thickness during the coldest month of 2013 it actually shrank the thickness, all while when temperatures warmed, accretion started again. These were likely slightly false echoes, because the speed of sound <br />is greater in much colder than warmer ice. So proof is hard to come by. Unless further research by divers is done, <br />we will have to rely on what we have at hand. Manual ice auger drilling is insufficient in precision because the observations are done at various spots, there is a variance reflecting under ice topography. What is left is the horizon, ultra precise in explaining the ongoing surface to air thermal effects. <br /><br />EH2Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15138541663354420708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1163623182638963042.post-91567057223283982022013-06-09T00:41:45.655-05:002013-06-09T00:41:45.655-05:00Wayne, thanks. If melting can occur with surface ...Wayne, thanks. If melting can occur with surface temperatures that far below freezing it helps explain why volume can drop even during a 'cold' spring.<br /><br />Most people look at the surface temperatures and assume there can't be ice melting when temperatures are below freezing. They forget that bottom melt can be as large or larger than surface melt. Your work helps show that air temperatures can be misleading vis a vis ice melting.Kevin O'Neillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06692943768484857724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1163623182638963042.post-46510708073763316462013-06-07T08:34:45.717-05:002013-06-07T08:34:45.717-05:00Hi Kevin, It was about -24 C. But cloudy with...Hi Kevin, It was about -24 C. But cloudy with a low ceiling. The melting it turns out was fragile and short lived. Only with someone actually observing from under the ice can we grasp at what it is all about. A few years ago, North of 83 N when temperature was at -11 C , French divers noted that the underside ice looked normal, until touching it, at contact an apparent bottom sheet disintegrated. When the thermal heat rays from the sea do not escape to space the net effect is a warming at the bottom. On that May 12 day, accretion has slowed to a stop, only to continue the day after following a persistent cloud clearing. Temperature is important, but thermal rays do the melting. Now imagine what happens when there is a thin layer of melt, if its mostly fresh water, it will float between the ice bottom and top of sea water. Long term this process causes incredible underside ice geometry. EH2Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15138541663354420708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1163623182638963042.post-12481574720553525312013-06-07T06:43:33.129-05:002013-06-07T06:43:33.129-05:00Wayne, what was the average air temperature when y...Wayne, what was the average air temperature when you recorded the first 12 hour period of melt?Kevin O'Neillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06692943768484857724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1163623182638963042.post-17215309050118209262013-05-11T13:40:43.625-05:002013-05-11T13:40:43.625-05:00Sorry Mr Pustay, these shots are from land to sea ...Sorry Mr Pustay, these shots are from land to sea horizon. Your idea about NOAA webcam floating moving about in various tides is wrong, tides are about 100 cm high, while the optical effect gives the impression the sea horizon has risen or dropped a whole lot more. 1 arc minute variation at 40 miles away gives a variation of 22 meters!<br />With the lower NOAA camera setting the effect would be about 1.5 meters. But this does not mean the north Pole drop is impossible to detect. Unfortunately a higher resolution camera was not mounted. Finally the tide is equal in height considering shorter distances. And the horizon can be far away given a better camera set up. EH2Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15138541663354420708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1163623182638963042.post-19081715008026483912013-05-11T13:32:59.147-05:002013-05-11T13:32:59.147-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.EH2Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15138541663354420708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1163623182638963042.post-55811903271711202122013-05-11T10:15:15.428-05:002013-05-11T10:15:15.428-05:00Your methodology assumes the camera platform is at...Your methodology assumes the camera platform is at a fixed, stable elevation with respect to the horizon. It's not, thus this approach is not valid.<br /><br />The camera is mounted on the ice sheet that varies in height due to tidal forces and local atmospheric pressure; factors totally independent of ice thickness. The small change in position of the horizon with respect to the camera focal point does not mean what you claim. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05352323567291236947noreply@blogger.com