Destroying Tornadoes

[Daedalus12]

^ Just because a tornado is a mass of air flowing around doesn't mean it's not a dynamical system described by differential equations just like any projectile in free flight. Granted the math techniques we use to analyze the two type of systems mentioned are totally different but they are both physical systems.

As I pointed out in my previous post there are some papers in the scientific literature dealing with this topic but not many. The microwave beam idea is decent as a disruption mechanism but not applicable without more knowledge of the behavior of the tornado. It's a challenging problem but I don't think it's impossible even given our current level of technology. The formation of tornadoes does require precise conditions. We just need to figure out a fast and accurate formation model plus a faster enough simulator for the prediction feedback. In the end I think it all boils down to the necessary volume of air which requires to be heated for bifurcation to occur in the dynamical system (the tornado). If the volume is small enough then yes it'll be possible. If not then oh well.

Oh yes projectiles and explosives are definitely not sensible mechanisms for disruption.

 

[chardman]

I suggest we take a cue from a previous noKnowes thread, and drop Mammoths (that have been cloned from dinosaur DNA for some reason) from planes into the funnel-clouds of tornadoes. I believe that this would confuse the tornadoes so much that they'd become destabilized, and dissipate.

 

[MIB]

It's a shame we don't have a board specifically for comedy threads.

If you want to cancel or dissipate something that's packing x amount of force you must hit it with an equal or greater amount of force. Seeing as how the average tornado is packing the juice of a fairly sizable nuclear warhead, any idea involving concert speakers or missles are patently rediculous.

 

[Trekker4747]

Dear God, there's TWO of them?!?!

 

[Docbrown777]

Eh, tornadoes are hard to predict and when they do strike their damage is to a small isolated area.

What we need to be spending money on is a huge retractable wall a few thousand feet tall to build on the Gulf coast. If a hurricane comes knocking we just activate the wall to keep it out. When the storm dissipates we lower the wall back down under the ocean and all is well.

It's so simple it has to work. Right?

 

[chardman]

Great idea Docbrown777. Any chance we could put mammoths cloned from dinosaur DNA into giant hamster-wheels to raise and lower this wall?

 

[Trekker4747]

You guys have it all wrong.

We just need Captain Robau. He can stare down any tornado or hurricane.

 

[chardman]

True Trekker4747, but imagine how much more formidable even Robau would be riding on the back of a woolly mammoth that was cloned from dinosaur DNA! Or maybe riding sharks with lasers strapped to their freakin' heads?

 

[Trekker4747]

True Trekker4747, but imagine how much more formidable even Robau would be riding on the back of a woolly mammoth that was cloned from dinosaur DNA! Or maybe riding sharks with lasers strapped to their freakin' heads?

Robau is the epitome of awesome. Anything more would just be redundant.

 

[Daedalus12]

It's a shame we don't have a board specifically for comedy threads.

If you want to cancel or dissipate something that's packing x amount of force you must hit it with an equal or greater amount of force. Seeing as how the average tornado is packing the juice of a fairly sizable nuclear warhead, any idea involving concert speakers or missles are patently rediculous.

That conclusion might be correct if you talking about dissipating the tornado completely once it has formed already but that is not necessary.

The basic idea here is to disrupt the delicate conditions required for the formation of the tornado. The important thing is to realize is that the process doesn't cancel or dissipate any amount of energy. Energy is always conserved anyways. It only has to mess with condition for the tornado formation. By keeping the tornado from forming all the destructive energy remains but are in the clouds (in the form of heat or whatever) instead of being transferred to the houses on the ground.

Here is the IEEE journal article I mentioned earlier provided to you guys free no charge (it's not freely accessible unless you are at a subscribing university). It's very much readable because it's not overly technical. It's by a couple of NASA veterans.

 

[intrinsical]

Tornadoes are just one of many side effects that occur when two pressure systems clash. They are essentially eddies created by the two clashing air currents. Even if you succeed in destroying one tornado, the underlying cause still remains and more tornadoes will continue to form. It is like trying to stop cancer by destroying one cancerous cell; it doesn't work.

 

[noknowes]

It's a shame we don't have a board specifically for comedy threads.

If you want to cancel or dissipate something that's packing x amount of force you must hit it with an equal or greater amount of force. Seeing as how the average tornado is packing the juice of a fairly sizable nuclear warhead, any idea involving concert speakers or missles are patently rediculous.

That conclusion might be correct if you talking about dissipating the tornado completely once it has formed already but that is not necessary.

The basic idea here is to disrupt the delicate conditions required for the formation of the tornado. The important thing is to realize is that the process doesn't cancel or dissipate any amount of energy. Energy is always conserved anyways. It only has to mess with condition for the tornado formation. By keeping the tornado from forming all the destructive energy remains but are in the clouds (in the form of heat or whatever) instead of being transferred to the houses on the ground.

Here is the IEEE journal article I mentioned earlier provided to you guys free no charge (it's not freely accessible unless you are at a subscribing university). It's very much readable because it's not overly technical. It's by a couple of NASA veterans.

I think concert speakers firing sound blasts at it could disrupt the delicate flow conditions.


This article proves it is possible.When it becomes reality I hope you will think of me and how time has proved me right.



While I was sleeping it occurred to me that

 

[chardman]

I think concert speakers firing sound blasts at it could disrupt the delicate flow conditions.


This article proves it is possible.When it becomes reality I hope you will think of me and how time has proved me right.

I'll be wondering how a guy who thought mammoths and dinosaurs were contemporaries, and could somehow be cloned from each other's DNA, could possibly be right about tornadoes.

I'll be wondering how a guy who proclaimed that computers weren't capable of parallel processing, even though they've been parallel processing for about a decade now, could ever have gotten it right.

I'll be wondering how a guy could read an article about using ultra high powered space based lasers to destabilize tornadoes can come away from it convinced that it somehow supports his notion that the same thing could be accomplished by a set of some really bitchin' speakers.

I'm guessing from your scientific acumen that you've been home-schooled? Attend Liberty University? Are heavily medicated?

While I was sleeping it occurred to me that

Yes?






MODS: I will now gleefully accept the warning that this post will likely earn, secure in the knowledge that it was totally worth it.

 

[John Picard]

I think concert speakers firing sound blasts at it could disrupt the delicate flow conditions.


This article proves it is possible.When it becomes reality I hope you will think of me and how time has proved me right.

I'll be wondering how a guy who thought mammoths and dinosaurs were contemporaries, and could somehow be cloned from each other's DNA, could possibly be right about tornadoes.

I'll be wondering how a guy who proclaimed that computers weren't capable of parallel processing, even though they've been parallel processing for about a decade now, could ever have gotten it right.

I'll be wondering how a guy could read an article about using ultra high powered space based lasers to destabilize tornadoes can come away from it convinced that it somehow supports his notion that the same thing could be accomplished by a set of some really bitchin' speakers.

I'm guessing from your scientific acumen that you've been home-schooled? Attend Liberty University? Are heavily medicated?

While I was sleeping it occurred to me that

Yes?






MODS: I will now gleefully accept the warning that this post will likely earn, secure in the knowledge that it was totally worth it.

Warning nothing. You've hit the nail on the head. I've been alternatively laughing at these answers and shaking my head. It is so hilarious to listen to people's fears about tornadoes when they don't live anywhere near a part of the country where they occur. I know people in California who think that we, in the Midwest, are on the lookout for them every day of our lives

I honestly think some of the so-called solutions are just someone trying to alternatively yank our collective chains as well as being, well, facetious!

 

[JustAFriend]

"There are REASONS that some people are not engineers. Unfortunately, they have the Internet...."

 

[John Picard]

"There are REASONS that some people are not engineers. Unfortunately, they have the Internet...."

I am surprised that no one has suggested firing an inverse tachyeon pulse through a deflector array.

 

[Amaris]

The only reasonable way to destroy tornadoes is to remove the blanket of air surrounding the planet. No air, no tornadoes. I suggest we use this:

J.

 

[chardman]

Mega-Maid Rocks.

 

[Amaris]

Mega-Maid Rocks.

Well, she's gone from suck to blow.


J.

 

[Judge King]

I say build a solid gold death star and shoot the Earth, that solve the tornado problem forever (on Earth at least).