APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) :ssmile: :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol2: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :roll: :wink: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen:
View more smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by geckzilla » Thu Dec 12, 2013 8:54 pm

yo.quimet@gmail.com wrote:Any way to estimete the "real feel" or feels like?
Yesterday I somehow ended up reading this article which describes one aspect of how researchers deal with the cold.
He said he does not personally know how that kind of cold feels, but that he knows researchers to expose themselves to it. To be able to breathe without feeling pain, researchers have to breathe through a snorkel that travels through the arm of their coat. This warms the air and ensures the person does not accidentally inhale the cold air.
In other words, you will damage your tissues on the inside simply breathing in such a place and that's not even in the areas which were measured. You probably wouldn't even want a tiny portion of skin exposed to get that feel.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by yo.quimet@gmail.com » Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:33 pm

Any way to estimete the "real feel" or feels like?

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Chris Peterson » Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:30 pm

rstevenson wrote:
geckzilla wrote:The politics rule is somehow the most difficult one to enforce here. :doh:
Are you suggesting that a question and answer about global warming is a political, rather than a scientific, discussion?
I think we know how quickly a scientific discussion can degrade into a political or pseudoscientific one with such a politicized topic. That's the line the moderators have to walk.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by rstevenson » Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:25 pm

geckzilla wrote:The politics rule is somehow the most difficult one to enforce here. :doh:
Are you suggesting that a question and answer about global warming is a political, rather than a scientific, discussion?

Rob

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by neufer » Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:13 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
We're a bit like the Antarctic. We get cold, but not much snow.
So...you're basically just an Abominable man then.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Chris Peterson » Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:47 pm

neufer wrote:
Chris Peterson wrote: I'm nearly at 3000m height here.
Is that with or without the snow :?:
We're a bit like the Antarctic. We get cold, but not much snow.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by neufer » Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:41 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
I'm nearly at 3000m height here.
Is that with or without the snow :?:

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by neufer » Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:39 pm

Anthony Barreiro wrote:
the prime meridian, established by international treaty in 1884, just happens to run through the capital city of the biggest global empire of the nineteenth century. This is probably not a coincidence. (Moderators -- when does "politics" become "history"? :lol2: )
When Greenwich was adopted as the universal zero longitude, it had at least ten rivals: Paris, Berlin, Cadiz, Copenhagen, Lisbon, Rio, Rome, Saint Petersburg, Stockholm, and Tokyo.

However, Antarctica is divided essentially along Ptolemy's original "Fortunate Isles" prime meridian:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_meridian wrote: <<The notion of longitude was developed by the Greek Eratosthenes (c. 276 BC – c. 195 BC) in Alexandria and Hipparchus (c. 190 BC – c. 120 BC) in Rhodes and applied to a large number of cities by the geographer Strabo (c. 63 BC – c. 24 AD). But it was Ptolemy (c. AD 90 – c. AD 168) who first used a consistent meridian for a world map in his Geographia.

Ptolemy used as his basis the "Fortunate Isles", a group of islands in the Atlantic which are usually associated with the Canary Islands (13° to 18°W), although his maps correspond more closely to the Cape Verde islands (22° to 25° W). The main point is to be comfortably west of the western tip of Africa (17.5° W) as negative numbers were not yet in use. The chief method of determining longitude at this time was by using the reported times of lunar eclipses in different countries.

Ptolemy’s Geographia was first printed with maps at Bologna in 1477 and many early globes in the 16th century followed his lead. But there was still a hope that a "natural" basis for a prime meridian existed. Christopher Columbus reported (1493) that the compass pointed due north somewhere in mid-Atlantic and this fact was used in the important Tordesillas Treaty of 1494 which settled the territorial dispute between Spain and Portugal over newly discovered lands. The Tordesillas line was eventually settled at 370 leagues west of Cape Verde. This is shown in Diogo Ribeiro's 1529 map. São Miguel Island (25.5°W) in the Azores was still used for the same reason as late as 1594 by Christopher Saxton, although by this time it had been shown that the zero deviation line did not follow a line of longitude.

In 1541, Mercator produced his famous forty-one centimetre terrestrial globe and drew his prime meridian precisely through Fuertaventura (14°1'W) in the Canaries. His later maps used the Azores, following the magnetic hypothesis. But by the time that Ortelius produced the first modern atlas in 1570, other islands such as Cape Verde were coming into use. In his atlas longitudes were counted from 0° to 360°, not 180°W to 180°E as is common today. This practice was followed by navigators well into the eighteenth century. In 1634, Cardinal Richelieu used the westernmost island of the Canaries, Ferro, 19° 55' west of Paris, as the choice of meridian. Unfortunately, the geographer Delisle decided to round this off to 20°, so that it simply became the meridian of Paris disguised.

In the early eighteenth century the battle was on to improve the determination of longitude at sea, leading to the development of the chronometer by John Harrison. But it was the development of accurate star charts principally by the first British Astronomer Royal, John Flamsteed between 1680 and 1719 and disseminated by his successor, Edmund Halley that enabled navigators to use the lunar method of determining longitude more accurately using the octant developed by Thomas Godfrey and John Hadley. Between 1765 and 1811, Nevil Maskelyne published 49 issues of the Nautical Almanac based on the meridian of the Royal Observatory, Greenwich. "Maskelyne's tables not only made the lunar method practicable, they also made the Greenwich meridian the universal reference point. Even the French translations of the Nautical Almanac retained Maskelyne's calculations from Greenwich—in spite of the fact that every other table in the Connaissance des Temps considered the Paris meridian as the prime." In 1884, at the International Meridian Conference held in Washington, D.C., 22 countries voted to adopt the Greenwich meridian as the prime meridian of the world. The French argued for a neutral line, mentioning the Azores and the Bering Strait but eventually abstained and continued to use the Paris meridian until 1911.>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_Line wrote: <<Rose Line is a fictional name given to the Paris Meridian and to the sunlight line defining the exact time of Easter on the Gnomon of Saint-Sulpice, marked by a brass strip on the floor of the church in the Priory of Sion mythology, where the two are conflated. The fictional name Rose Line was also popularized by Dan Brown in his 2003 novel, The Da Vinci Code. Chapter XIII of Circuit is devoted to the Zero Meridian, with de Chérisey claiming it was established by Till Eulenspiegel.

Brown's novel also conflates the Paris Meridian with a gnomon in the Parisian church of Saint-Sulpice marked in the floor with a brass line. The Paris Meridian actually passes about 100 metres east of the gnomon, which according to author Sharan Newman and a sign in the church was "never called a Rose-Line". "Rosslyn Chapel's entrance was more modest than Langdon expected. The small wooden door had two iron hinges and a simple oak sign, Roslin. This ancient spelling, Langdon explained to Sophie, derived from the Rose Line meridian on which the chapel sat; or, as Grail academics preferred to believe, from the 'Line of the Rose' — the ancestral lineage of Mary Magdalene..."

The Da Vinci Code protagonist follows the line of Arago medallions to the Louvre museum, where (according to the book) the Paris Meridian passes beneath the so-called Inverted Pyramid in an underground mall in front of the museum. The novel hints that this is the final resting place of the Holy Grail. The fact that the meridian passes near the Inverted Pyramid is also noted in the book Le guide du Paris maçonnique by Raphäel Aurillac, who likewise ascribes some deeper, esoteric significance to this.>>

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Chris Peterson » Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:22 pm

Remo wrote:Point taken. You are absolutely correct that the sky temperature we "see" on a cold clear night, is not the temperature of the cosmic background radiation but some mix of the CMBR plus IR radiation coming from the atmosphere.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. The CMBR is so cold it radiates in the microwave part of the spectrum. Energy doesn't flow from cold to warm; the CMBR isn't contributing significantly to the temperature of the sky. The temperature of the sky- that is, the radiative surface above us, is determined by the temperature that the various gases equilibrate at, which is a factor of the radiation they receive from around and below them (at night, or the energy they store during the day), and the amount they radiate out towards the coldness of space.
To clarify my point (I know I got a little technical; now I, guess I get even more technical), the atmosphere is "optically thin" because you can see through it in both the optical and the IR spectrums.
Absolutely, the sky is quite transparent in the visual spectrum. However, it is nearly opaque across large parts of the IR spectrum. That's why IR astronomy from the ground is extremely limited.
If, as you said, you got a -70C sky reading (impressive!)...
I'm nearly at 3000m height here.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Anthony Barreiro » Thu Dec 12, 2013 5:39 pm

BMAONE23 wrote:
Anthony Barreiro wrote:Yes, those who draw the maps get to decide what to call the directions. In linguistics they say that "a language is a dialect with an army." I suppose in cartography it helps to have a navy.
The difference between eastern and western Antarctic regions is dividednby the prime meridian and dateline. Western Antarctica resides in the western hemisphere west of the prime meridian and Eastern Antarctica falls east of the prime meridian, in the eastern hemisphere.
Yes, and the prime meridian, established by international treaty in 1884, just happens to run through the capital city of the biggest global empire of the nineteenth century. This is probably not a coincidence. (Moderators -- when does "politics" become "history"? :lol2: )

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Remo » Thu Dec 12, 2013 5:34 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
Remo wrote:Have you ever slept out at night on a clear night in the desert or someplace else with a dry atmosphere. It can feel brutally cold even though the air temperature is not that low, and you can get frost in the morning on your sleeping bag. Why? Because half your body is staring out at 2.73 K, with little IR radiating back down from the warmer air. The atmosphere is "optically thin".
Not that thin!

The temperature of a clear, dry sky is usually around -40°C (the lowest I've measured is -70°C). That is determined by the radiative properties of several constituents, particularly water.

The sky is cold, which is why we can easily get frost when the air temperature is above freezing. But thankfully, the sky isn't at 2.7 K!

I monitor the weather here, and my thermometer is on a rise, so it pretty accurately reflects the true air temperature. The biggest extreme I've seen from radiative cooling was a measurement of 14°F from my station, and a simultaneous measurement a couple of miles away, in a valley, of -34°F. I've had dog water bowls ice over when the air temperature was around 50°F.
Eh, Chris,

Point taken. You are absolutely correct that the sky temperature we "see" on a cold clear night, is not the temperature of the cosmic background radiation but some mix of the CMBR plus IR radiation coming from the atmosphere.

To clarify my point (I know I got a little technical; now I, guess I get even more technical), the atmosphere is "optically thin" because you can see through it in both the optical and the IR spectrums. May get some haziness, but the absorption is less than ( 1 - 1/e ) or ~63.2%. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_depth and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_de ... rophysics). This is less than the mean distance a photon would travel before it gets absorbed.

As we both agree, on a clear night, we do see the 2.7K polluted by the IR absorption of by H2O ( and to a lesser extent CO2 and other greenhouse gases )from ground radiating IR and then reradiating the IR back to the earth. And it is noteworthy that the absorption/radiation spectrum of CO2 and H20 are not a blanket in the IR, but have selective (and kind'a mushy) frequencies. So if you pick your frequencies right, you can get some really cold background radiation readings.

If, as you said, you got a -70C sky reading (impressive!), an awful lot of what you were seeing is background temperature mixed in with some IR pollution from the atmosphere. Don't forget that blackbody radiation is proportional to the T^4 so ~ 75% of what you were seeing was the cold, cold universe.

Given that those Antarctic temperatures were done at 4000m (where air pressure is halved), at virtually zero humidity, and with a cold land temperature and no sunlight for months, the sky temperature must be really, really cold. :D http://asterisk.apod.com/images/smilies ... iggrin.gif

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by neufer » Thu Dec 12, 2013 5:20 pm


BMAONE23 wrote:
The difference between eastern and western Antarctic regions is divided by the prime meridian and dateline. Western Antarctica resides in the western hemisphere west of the prime meridian and Eastern Antarctica falls east of the prime meridian, in the eastern hemisphere.
  • Well...more or less.
Halley Research Station (named after the astronomer Edmond Halley) at 76°S, 27°W is clearly in East Antarctica. :arrow:

Halley Station is famous for publishing the discovery of the ozone hole in 1985. The Japanese at Syowa should have been the first to publish the discovery of the ozone hole but peer review rejected their submissions on the grounds that their (accurate) ground based ozone measurements (in Dobson units {capitalized}) were too low to be believed.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by BMAONE23 » Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:37 pm

Anthony Barreiro wrote:
neufer wrote:
biddie67 wrote:
It seems that from the South Pole, every point is "north". If "west" is to one's right when looking at a map facing northward, Antarctica's "west" would change as one turned around ... As silly as it sounds, how did West and East Antarctica get their names?
  • It was an occidental coincidence:
Yes, those who draw the maps get to decide what to call the directions. In linguistics they say that "a language is a dialect with an army." I suppose in cartography it helps to have a navy.
The difference between eastern and western Antarctic regions is dividednby the prime meridian and dateline. Western Antarctica resides in the western hemisphere west of the prime meridian and Eastern Antarctica falls east of the prime meridian, in the eastern hemisphere.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Chris Peterson » Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:18 pm

geckzilla wrote:Which is completely fair but I've noticed even the most simple mention of anything political has a tendency to quickly spiral out of control. Bob and Jerry have also communicated that they would never want APOD to appear partial to any political group and due to Asterisk's relationship with APOD this carries over to the forum. It drives me insane trying to figure out how to handle that.
I'd say you (and all the moderators) have managed it very well. It is rare indeed for things to get out of control, but neither does it feel like Big Brother is watching.

(And to be fair, APOD can't expect to post a subject like this and not allow for a little bit of discussion about the subject of climate change. I'm surprised there hasn't been more, and pleased that this particular posting didn't draw in the crazies, as has sometimes happened in the past.)

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by geckzilla » Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:14 pm

Which is completely fair but I've noticed even the most simple mention of anything political has a tendency to quickly spiral out of control. Bob and Jerry have also communicated that they would never want APOD to appear partial to any political group and due to Asterisk's relationship with APOD this carries over to the forum. It drives me insane trying to figure out how to handle that.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Chris Peterson » Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:06 pm

geckzilla wrote:The politics rule is somehow the most difficult one to enforce here. :doh:
Well, yes. But I took the original question to be quite valid and unpolitical. Asking a question about something that might possibly be seen as climate change denial (or anything else on the fringe) is very different than making an assertion. We do a service in answering honest questions. The moderator's axe should be there to cut off unfounded denial or continued insistence on unscientific views, not the sort of questions that people might genuinely have given the sort of stuff seen in the mainstream media.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by geckzilla » Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:01 pm

The politics rule is somehow the most difficult one to enforce here. :doh:

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Chris Peterson » Thu Dec 12, 2013 2:57 pm

weberpxw wrote:Can you add more to put this into context? Is this new record low temperature a sign of cooling of the Antarctic region, or is it simply from looking in a place where no one has generally looked before? The Vostok record is for an inhabited place, and the new record is a very remote site. It would be interesting to know if the location of the new record low has seen even colder temperatures in the past. And, how far back do the temperature records at Vostok go?
I can't answer the specifics, but in general, individual temperatures (record or not) can't be tied to climatic patterns. One has to look at trends for long periods to do that.
I can certainly see Glenn Beck and many other scientific commentators picking on this announcement as further "proof" that no warming is happening on Earth.
Please tell me that you didn't mean this the way it sounds! Glenn Beck is a scientific commentator the way Dr Pepper is a heart surgeon.

What those sort of science deniers choose to ignore is the entire concept of energy flow and climate. It's called "global warming" because the energy balance as shifted such that the Earth is absorbing more energy than it's releasing, creating a net increase in stored heat. But surface temperatures are defined by a complex system of interacting water and air. Heating the Earth doesn't mean the temperature goes up everywhere. In fact, it goes up in some places and down in others. Under the right conditions, it could even go down over all the land area, given the amount of heat that can be stored in the oceans. It's a complex matter, and one quite open to investigation and explanation- explanations that are completely ignored by the deniers.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by neufer » Thu Dec 12, 2013 2:51 pm

weberpxw wrote:
Can you add more to put this into context? Is this new record low temperature a sign of cooling of the Antarctic region, or is it simply from looking in a place where no one has generally looked before?
It is looking in a place where no one has looked before.

One can see from the APOD that the temperatures are colder higher up than Vostok Station
(and the satellite measurements are probably calibrated against the temperature measurements at Vostok).
weberpxw wrote:
The Vostok record is for an inhabited place, and the new record is a very remote site. It would be interesting to know if the location of the new record low has seen even colder temperatures in the past. And, how far back do the temperature records at Vostok go?
  • 56 years as of December 16 :!:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok_Station wrote:
<<Vostok station was established on 16 December 1957 (during the International Geophysical Year) by the 2nd Soviet Antarctic Expedition and was operated year-round for more than 37 years. The station was temporarily closed from February to November 1994.

Vostok is the World Pole of Cold. During the long winter, temperatures average about −65 °C; in the brief summer, about −30 °C. The lowest reliably measured temperature on Earth of −89.2 °C was in Vostok on 21 July 1983. This beat the station's former record of -88.3°C on 24 August 1960. Though unconfirmed, it has been reported that Vostok reached the temperature of −91 °C during the winter of 1997. Lower temperatures occurred higher up towards the summit of the ice sheet as temperature decreases with height along the surface.

Acclimatization to such conditions can take from a week to two months and is accompanied by headaches, eye twitches, ear pains, nose bleeds, perceived suffocation, sudden rises in blood pressure, loss of sleep, reduced appetite, vomiting, joint and muscle pain, arthritis, and weight loss of 3–5 kg.>>
...
weberpxw wrote:
I can certainly see Glenn Beck and many other scientific commentators picking on this announcement as further "proof" that no warming is happening on Earth.
...

Glenn Beck is a scientific commentator :?:

Is Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee a scientific commentator :?:
...

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by neufer » Thu Dec 12, 2013 2:23 pm

EdMars wrote:
When defending the metric system to all those darn Americans out there like myself, I've always challenged people to wonder what the temperature of zero would possibly represent on the Fahrenheit scale? (I know the temperature of the human body was "supposed" to be one hundred degrees, but that still doesn't answer the question.) Isn't is interesting that the Earth itself practically provides the answer!!! (In other words, "What temperature in degrees F. would you get awfully close to if you averaged the highest recorded temperature on Earth with the lowest?") What a wonderfully weird coincidence, huh?! :ssmile:
  • It's frigorific :!:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Gabriel_Fahrenheit wrote:
<<Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit (24 May 1686 – 16 September 1736) was a Dutch-German-Polish physicist, engineer, and glass blower who is best known for inventing the mercury-in-glass thermometer (1714), and for developing a temperature scale now named after him.

According to Fahrenheit's 1724 article, he determined his scale by reference to three fixed points of temperature. The lowest temperature was achieved by preparing a frigorific mixture of ice, water, and ammonium chloride (a salt), and waiting for it to reach equilibrium. The thermometer then was placed into the mixture and the liquid in the thermometer allowed to descend to its lowest point. The thermometer's reading there was taken as 0 °F. The second reference point was selected as the reading of the thermometer when it was placed in still water when ice was just forming on the surface. This was assigned as 32 °F. The third calibration point, taken as 96 °F, was selected as the thermometer's reading when the instrument was placed under the arm or in the mouth.

Work by others showed that water boils about 180 degrees above its freezing point. The Fahrenheit scale later was redefined to make the freezing-to-boiling interval exactly 180 degrees, a convenient value as 180 is a highly composite number, meaning that it is evenly divisible into many fractions. It is because of the scale's redefinition that normal body temperature today is taken as 98.6 degrees, whereas it was 96 degrees on Fahrenheit's original scale. The Fahrenheit scale is still used for everyday temperature measurements by the general population in the United States and Belize and, less so, in the UK and Canada.>>

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by weberpxw » Thu Dec 12, 2013 2:13 pm

Can you add more to put this into context? Is this new record low temperature a sign of cooling of the Antarctic region, or is it simply from looking in a place where no one has generally looked before? The Vostok record is for an inhabited place, and the new record is a very remote site. It would be interesting to know if the location of the new record low has seen even colder temperatures in the past. And, how far back do the temperature records at Vostok go?

I can certainly see Glenn Beck and many other scientific commentators picking on this announcement as further "proof" that no warming is happening on Earth.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by EdMars » Thu Dec 12, 2013 5:06 am

When defending the metric system to all those darn Americans out there like myself, I've always challenged people to wonder what the temperature of zero would possibly represent on the Fahrenheit scale? (I know the temperature of the human body was "supposed" to be one hundred degrees, but that still doesn't answer the question.) Isn't is interesting that the Earth itself practically provides the answer!!! (In other words, "What temperature in degrees F. would you get awfully close to if you averaged the highest recorded temperature on Earth with the lowest?") What a wonderfully weird coincidence, huh?! :ssmile:

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by neufer » Thu Dec 12, 2013 2:15 am

Ann wrote:
I thought temperatures on the ground are usually colder than temperatures some two meters above ground.

I remember an evening several years ago in December. It had been raining, and it was overcast. The thermometer outside my window said that the air temperature next to my house was about +4. Suddenly it cleared up. It was dark outside, unsurprisingly (in Sweden we get about eight hours of daylight and sixteen hours of darkness in December). I was going somewhere, so I got my bicycle, mounted it, cycled (illegally) a short distance along a path until I had to make a sharp turn when I got to the street. When I made that sharp turn, I immediately fell. Even though the air temperature was well above freezing, the wetness on the pavement had turned into a smooth sheet of ice when the clouds parted. It was incredibly slippery.

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Ann » Thu Dec 12, 2013 1:41 am

Beyond wrote:See what happens when you go the 'illegal' route :?: :(
Nothing so far. I'm perfectly allowed to walk there, but not to cycle there. If someone is walking there, I walk too, of course. But if the path is empty, I cycle.

Ann

Re: APOD: The Coldest Place on Earth (2013 Dec 11)

by Beyond » Thu Dec 12, 2013 1:16 am

See what happens when you go the 'illegal' route :?: :(

Top