WEBVTT 00:04.100 --> 00:06.333 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% - I'd like to introduce to you Rick Anthes who is a former student here going way back 00:06.433 --> 00:10.500 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% into 1962 when he was an undergraduate student 00:10.600 --> 00:12.400 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% from out of state, I believe. 00:12.500 --> 00:15.633 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% Is that right? You came from Virginia. 00:15.733 --> 00:19.966 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% And then he went on to a masters degree and a PhD. 00:20.066 --> 00:23.466 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% His talk today is gonna be more of a general topic 00:23.566 --> 00:26.233 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% just about philosophy and modeling and what we can do 00:26.333 --> 00:28.200 align:left position:10%,start line:89% size:80% with weather prediction overall, 00:28.300 --> 00:31.066 align:left position:10%,start line:83% size:80% called "Demons and Butterflies," so here's Rick. 00:31.166 --> 00:34.166 align:left position:37.5%,start line:89% size:52.5% (applause) 00:38.933 --> 00:41.666 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% - So without further ado, and you'll see why in a minute, 00:41.766 --> 00:46.433 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% I'm going to get started, and with a prologue. 00:47.433 --> 00:50.300 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% Actually more than half of the slides are not even 00:50.400 --> 00:51.833 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% directly related to my talk. 00:51.933 --> 00:53.666 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% This is kind of interesting. 00:53.766 --> 00:58.300 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% The prologue is very long, and the title of the prologue 00:58.400 --> 01:04.533 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% is "Sandy, Harvey, Irma and Maria: A Photographic Essay." 01:04.633 --> 01:07.966 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% And I hope this is relevant from a societal point of view 01:08.066 --> 01:12.600 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% about what the real talk is going to be about. 01:12.700 --> 01:15.600 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% So hurricanes, you've seen many pictures. 01:15.700 --> 01:18.800 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% They're absolutely beautiful from space. 01:18.900 --> 01:21.533 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% They're just majestic, artistic almost. 01:21.633 --> 01:24.000 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% They're just amazing to see. 01:24.100 --> 01:26.533 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% And so many people, this is one of the reasons 01:26.633 --> 01:28.000 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% I got interested in hurricanes 01:28.100 --> 01:31.033 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% because from a distance they're just wonderful. 01:33.100 --> 01:35.300 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% But when you actually experience one, 01:35.400 --> 01:39.100 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% it's anything but beautiful. Hell on Earth. 01:40.166 --> 01:41.933 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% And I'll start out with Sandy. 01:42.033 --> 01:46.200 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% This is a split image of New York City on a typical night 01:47.300 --> 01:51.800 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% at top, and the night after Sandy hit 01:51.900 --> 01:54.333 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% in the lower half where almost 01:54.433 --> 01:57.300 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% all the city is without power. 01:58.333 --> 02:00.066 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% So now I won't say anything 02:00.166 --> 02:02.433 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% for the next hundred slides or so. 02:06.766 --> 02:09.600 align:left position:32.5%,start line:89% size:57.5% (somber music) 02:09.700 --> 05:39.600 align:left position:87.5%,start line:5% size:2.5% ♪ 05:39.700 --> 05:43.100 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% And then, I'm trying to inject a tiny bit of humor 05:43.200 --> 05:44.500 align:left position:27.5%,start line:89% size:62.5% at the end of this. 05:44.600 --> 05:46.700 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% There's Hurricane Nate where the chief damage 05:46.800 --> 05:50.100 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% was blowing a bunch of pumpkins out of a field. 05:51.200 --> 05:54.833 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% But anyway these are picture stories that I don't think 05:54.933 --> 05:57.033 align:left position:25%,start line:89% size:65% I get from the news. 05:59.166 --> 06:02.466 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% You hear of 27 deaths and a billion dollars of damage 06:02.566 --> 06:06.133 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% and this kinda thing and it doesn't until you see 06:06.233 --> 06:08.733 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% the variety of people who are affected by these things 06:08.833 --> 06:11.566 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% and the amount of time it takes to rebuild their lives. 06:14.466 --> 06:16.500 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% So what about Hurricane Sandy? 06:16.600 --> 06:19.966 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% And I was inspired to do this talk right after Sandy 06:20.066 --> 06:21.833 align:left position:32.5%,start line:5% size:57.5% which was 2012. 06:21.933 --> 06:25.100 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% It formed in the western Caribbean late in the year, 06:25.200 --> 06:29.266 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% October 22nd, almost this time of year. 06:29.366 --> 06:33.700 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% It made landfall in New Jersey on October 29th, very late. 06:33.800 --> 06:36.566 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% The largest Atlantic hurricane on record. 06:36.666 --> 06:38.133 align:left position:20%,start line:89% size:70% And these are statistics. 06:38.233 --> 06:39.766 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% They just don't tell the story you saw. 06:39.866 --> 06:44.900 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% 53 people killed, $32 billion in damage 06:45.000 --> 06:47.566 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% which is about 1/3 of the government sequester 06:47.666 --> 06:49.400 align:left position:32.5%,start line:89% size:57.5% at that point. 06:49.500 --> 06:54.700 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% So how good were the forecasts of Hurricane Sandy? 06:54.800 --> 06:58.100 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% They were superb, they were excellent, 06:58.200 --> 07:02.366 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% they were unbelievable, and it wasn't by chance. 07:03.566 --> 07:05.600 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% How many more lives would have been lost 07:05.700 --> 07:07.366 align:left position:35%,start line:83% size:55% without these excellent forecasts? 07:07.466 --> 07:08.833 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% You saw the damage that was done, 07:08.933 --> 07:12.800 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% and it's a remarkable thing that only 53 people were killed. 07:12.900 --> 07:16.600 align:left position:15%,start line:5% size:75% Probably thousands would have been killed if that storm 07:16.700 --> 07:18.766 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% had come in unannounced. 07:20.200 --> 07:22.933 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% And imagine if people weren't prepared for it 07:23.033 --> 07:25.066 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% what the loss of life would be. 07:25.166 --> 07:29.233 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% Never before had a hurricane approached the East Coast 07:29.333 --> 07:32.166 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% from the east in late October. 07:33.333 --> 07:37.233 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% Came in from the east. Never before. 07:37.333 --> 07:41.400 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% Here is a set of tracks, the historical tracks, 07:41.500 --> 07:44.466 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% of hurricanes that came within 200 nautical miles 07:44.566 --> 07:47.600 align:left position:30%,start line:89% size:60% of New York City 07:47.700 --> 07:50.400 align:left position:27.5%,start line:89% size:62.5% from 1851 to 2011, 07:50.500 --> 07:54.366 align:left position:10%,start line:89% size:80% the entire record up until 2012. 07:54.466 --> 07:56.500 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% You see every one of those tracks, 07:56.600 --> 08:00.666 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% by the time the storm hit past the Virginia capes 08:00.766 --> 08:03.366 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% was heading off to the north and northeast. 08:03.466 --> 08:09.466 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% The Hurricane Sandy came up the coast 08:09.566 --> 08:14.400 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% and, if you were a forecaster who had no satellite 08:14.500 --> 08:19.100 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% observations or models and you saw that track, 08:19.200 --> 08:22.500 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% everybody would have forecast continuing moving out to sea. 08:22.600 --> 08:25.266 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% Instead it did something that no storm had ever done before. 08:25.366 --> 08:27.266 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% It turned to the left and came in 08:27.366 --> 08:30.433 align:left position:10%,start line:89% size:80% and made landfall from the east. 08:30.533 --> 08:34.600 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% Never ever before happening, and yet it was well predicted. 08:34.700 --> 08:36.200 align:left position:30%,start line:89% size:60% How can that be? 08:39.500 --> 08:41.133 align:left position:30%,start line:89% size:60% Here's a forecast 08:41.233 --> 08:43.533 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting 08:43.633 --> 08:46.000 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% 9 1/2 days before landfall. 08:46.100 --> 08:48.600 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% And on the left you can see that their outlook 08:48.700 --> 08:50.666 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% nearly 10 days before landfall 08:50.766 --> 08:58.500 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% had this grayish area off the Atlantic Coast 08:58.600 --> 09:02.200 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% where already they were forecasting, 09:02.300 --> 09:04.900 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% some of their models were forecasting major events, 09:05.000 --> 09:07.933 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% significant probability of the severe windstorm 09:08.033 --> 09:10.066 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% affecting the Northeastern United States. 09:10.166 --> 09:12.866 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% Then by the time three days later, 09:12.966 --> 09:16.033 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% 6 1/2 days before landfall, the various models 09:16.133 --> 09:19.466 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% were forecasting those tracks that you see 09:19.566 --> 09:21.433 align:left position:25%,start line:89% size:65% in the middle panel. 09:21.533 --> 09:24.933 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% And already almost a week before landfall, 09:25.033 --> 09:27.400 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% the models were forecasting this left turn, 09:27.500 --> 09:29.500 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% which again had never happened before. 09:29.600 --> 09:32.866 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% So this is not an empirical model based on past data. 09:32.966 --> 09:36.100 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% It is a model based on laws of physics 09:36.200 --> 09:38.100 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% and mathematics and observations. 09:38.200 --> 09:41.966 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% And then the observed track is shown on the right panel. 09:42.066 --> 09:43.433 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% So extremely well forecast. 09:43.533 --> 09:47.066 align:left position:10%,start line:89% size:80% People had many days of warnings 09:47.166 --> 09:49.766 align:left position:22.5%,start line:89% size:67.5% and were well prepared. 09:54.100 --> 09:56.366 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% A lot of people say, "Well, we got through that disaster. 09:56.466 --> 09:59.066 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% "It'll never happen again in my lifetime 09:59.166 --> 10:01.066 align:left position:35%,start line:5% size:55% "and it can't happen to me again." 10:01.166 --> 10:03.066 align:left position:20%,start line:89% size:70% Well, this is this year. 10:03.166 --> 10:07.033 align:left position:10%,start line:89% size:80% Jump forward nine years to 2017, 10:07.133 --> 10:09.066 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% or five years I guess it is. 10:09.166 --> 10:12.333 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% Through September there have been 15 separate 10:12.433 --> 10:15.866 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% $1 billion weather and climate disasters 10:15.966 --> 10:17.666 align:left position:22.5%,start line:89% size:67.5% just through September. 10:17.766 --> 10:19.766 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% So we're on a track for a record year. 10:19.866 --> 10:21.400 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% And you see they're all over the country. 10:21.500 --> 10:23.133 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% There's hurricanes, there's tornado outbreaks, 10:23.233 --> 10:27.133 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% there's fires, all kinds of things. 10:27.233 --> 10:31.933 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% And it's just no question this is not just anecdotal. 10:32.033 --> 10:35.366 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% There's no question that the frequency of severe 10:35.466 --> 10:40.033 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% weather and climate events is getting higher. 10:40.133 --> 10:41.666 align:left position:30%,start line:89% size:60% And why is that? 10:41.766 --> 10:44.800 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% Well, this is not a talk on global warming, 10:44.900 --> 10:48.266 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% but, "It is global warming, stupid." 10:48.366 --> 10:51.133 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% And that's all I'll say about that. 10:51.233 --> 10:53.700 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% So the lecture is "Demons and Butterflies," 10:53.800 --> 10:55.366 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% but I'm trying to set the context 10:55.466 --> 10:58.566 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% for something that's important. 10:59.566 --> 11:00.900 align:left position:35%,start line:89% size:55% What is this? 11:01.000 --> 11:03.166 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% It's a fortuneteller. It's a wizard. 11:03.266 --> 11:05.733 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% Somebody that tells the future. 11:08.733 --> 11:11.333 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% Amazing people would believe this guy 11:11.433 --> 11:13.166 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% before they believe science. 11:15.166 --> 11:18.266 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% But foretelling the future has always been 11:18.366 --> 11:20.433 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% a fascination of humanity, 11:20.533 --> 11:22.433 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% and prophets over the ages 11:22.533 --> 11:24.766 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% have been worshiped and vilified. 11:24.866 --> 11:27.300 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% It's said that-- You've already heard this joke I'm sure. 11:27.400 --> 11:29.100 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% A meteorologist says weather forecasters 11:29.200 --> 11:32.133 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% are the second oldest profession in the world. 11:32.233 --> 11:34.833 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% People want to know what's gonna happen in the future. 11:35.933 --> 11:38.666 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% So foretelling the future has always been a fascination 11:38.766 --> 11:40.533 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% whether it's forecasting the stock market 11:40.633 --> 11:44.066 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% or forecasting a football game results or whatever it is, 11:44.166 --> 11:47.100 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% people love to talk about forecasting the future. 11:48.666 --> 11:50.933 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% And you see it in these common expressions. 11:51.033 --> 11:54.166 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% I should have known. I should have seen it coming. 11:56.233 --> 11:58.566 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% In retrospect, it was obvious. 12:00.366 --> 12:01.766 align:left position:30%,start line:89% size:60% 20-20 hindsight. 12:04.533 --> 12:07.533 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% The signs were there for all to see. 12:08.633 --> 12:10.366 align:left position:35%,start line:89% size:55% Sixth sense. 12:12.633 --> 12:14.233 align:left position:35%,start line:89% size:55% Premonition. 12:16.566 --> 12:19.300 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% And in today already walks tomorrow. 12:20.900 --> 12:23.133 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% The present is big with the future. 12:24.333 --> 12:28.133 align:left position:10%,start line:83% size:80% Good detectives such as Sherlock Holmes and Hercule Poirot 12:28.233 --> 12:30.700 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% deduce what has happened and sometimes what will happen 12:30.800 --> 12:32.666 align:left position:20%,start line:89% size:70% from a few observations. 12:36.533 --> 12:39.700 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% Foretelling the future can be based on past behavior, 12:39.800 --> 12:43.333 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% empiricism, or the natural laws of mathematics, 12:43.433 --> 12:45.233 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% physics, and chemistry. 12:45.333 --> 12:48.633 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% But all predictions, one way or another, 12:48.733 --> 12:51.300 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% are based on observations. 12:51.400 --> 12:55.100 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% Whether you're a fortuneteller 12:55.200 --> 12:59.266 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% or a mathematical modeler of hurricanes, 12:59.366 --> 13:02.900 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% you're using observations one way or another. 13:04.066 --> 13:07.333 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% Well, the philosophy of forecasts 13:07.433 --> 13:10.233 align:left position:25%,start line:89% size:65% goes back many years 13:10.333 --> 13:12.566 align:left position:22.5%,start line:89% size:67.5% and Gottfried Leibniz, 13:12.666 --> 13:17.033 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% famous for Leibniz's rule in mathematics, if you know that. 13:17.133 --> 13:19.566 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% I think we all learned that in our calculus courses. 13:19.666 --> 13:22.866 align:left position:35%,start line:89% size:55% 1646 to 1716. 13:22.966 --> 13:24.900 align:left position:20%,start line:89% size:70% A very interesting quote. 13:25.833 --> 13:28.333 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% "Everything proceeds mathematically. 13:28.433 --> 13:31.366 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% "If someone could have sufficient insight 13:31.466 --> 13:34.533 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% "into the inner parts of things, and in addition 13:34.633 --> 13:37.700 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% "had remembrance and intelligence enough to consider 13:37.800 --> 13:41.800 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% "all of the circumstances and take them into account, 13:41.900 --> 13:45.666 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% "he would be a prophet and see the future in the present 13:45.766 --> 13:47.566 align:left position:30%,start line:89% size:60% "as in a mirror." 13:47.666 --> 13:50.533 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% So read that carefully. 13:50.633 --> 13:53.766 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% You have to have insight, remembrance, intelligence, 13:53.866 --> 13:55.533 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% and to consider everything. 13:55.633 --> 13:59.700 align:left position:15%,start line:5% size:75% This is foreseeing models in a way, very complex systems. 13:59.800 --> 14:01.733 align:left position:35%,start line:5% size:55% If you could understand everything, 14:01.833 --> 14:03.300 align:left position:15%,start line:5% size:75% you could predict everything. 14:04.933 --> 14:08.800 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% And even more direct, 14:08.900 --> 14:11.233 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% the Marquis de Laplace. 14:11.333 --> 14:14.166 align:left position:32.5%,start line:5% size:57.5% You know about de Laplacians, right, 14:14.266 --> 14:17.166 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% Laplace in mathematics. He was a mathematician. 14:17.266 --> 14:21.166 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% He dreamed of an intelligent being, an intellect, 14:21.266 --> 14:24.700 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% which was later dubbed, I guess by his colleagues, 14:24.800 --> 14:28.666 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% "Laplace's Demon," who knew the positions. 14:29.800 --> 14:33.066 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% He dreamed of an intelligent being who knew the positions 14:33.166 --> 14:37.333 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% and velocities of every single atom in the universe. 14:38.333 --> 14:41.700 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% And using Newton's equations of motion, 14:41.800 --> 14:45.266 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% he could predict the motion of each one of these atoms, 14:45.366 --> 14:48.100 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% all the molecules that the atoms are part of. 14:48.200 --> 14:52.933 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% They didn't know about smaller, subatomic atoms at that time, 14:53.033 --> 14:56.266 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% but predict the future of the entire universe. 14:57.566 --> 15:01.200 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% And this long quote at the end is actually 15:01.300 --> 15:05.166 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% very prescient in terms of the theory 15:05.266 --> 15:07.833 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% behind developing numerical weather prediction models. 15:07.933 --> 15:09.866 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% We may regard the present state of the universe 15:09.966 --> 15:13.366 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% as the effect of its past and the cause of its future, 15:13.466 --> 15:16.700 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% an intellect, which at any given moment knew all the forces 15:16.800 --> 15:19.366 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% that animate nature and the mutual positions 15:19.466 --> 15:21.266 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% of the beings that compose it. 15:21.366 --> 15:24.733 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% If this intellect, think supercomputer, 15:24.833 --> 15:27.733 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% were vast enough to submit the data to analysis, 15:27.833 --> 15:29.966 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% could condense into a single formula to move 15:30.066 --> 15:32.266 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% one of the greatest bodies of the universe 15:32.366 --> 15:34.200 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% and that of the lightest atom, 15:34.300 --> 15:37.033 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% for such an intellect, nothing could be uncertain, 15:37.133 --> 15:39.466 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% and the future just like the past would be present 15:39.566 --> 15:41.066 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% before its eyes. 15:42.066 --> 15:45.433 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% The condition of every one of us in the room, 15:45.533 --> 15:51.166 align:left position:32.5%,start line:5% size:57.5% every molecule, every wave out there, 15:51.266 --> 15:53.800 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% and all around the world, including the molecules 15:53.900 --> 15:59.400 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% in life itself, if you knew exactly where they were today, 15:59.500 --> 16:01.600 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% according to Laplace, you could predict 16:01.700 --> 16:03.266 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% everything in the future, 16:03.366 --> 16:05.100 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% how humans would behave, when they would die, 16:05.200 --> 16:07.200 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% how many children they would have, 16:07.300 --> 16:08.666 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% how many children the children would have, 16:08.766 --> 16:10.333 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% and so on and so on. 16:10.433 --> 16:13.400 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% A perfectly deterministic system if you knew 16:13.500 --> 16:16.366 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% where everything was and you knew all of the laws 16:16.466 --> 16:18.200 align:left position:32.5%,start line:89% size:57.5% that we follow. 16:20.166 --> 16:21.666 align:left position:20%,start line:89% size:70% That was Laplace's view. 16:22.666 --> 16:26.533 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% And then Niels Bohr, the famous physicist, 16:26.633 --> 16:30.200 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% had a much simpler statement which sounds to me 16:30.300 --> 16:34.233 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% like Yogi Berra, more like Yogi Berra than Niels Bohr. 16:35.466 --> 16:37.600 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% "Prediction is difficult, especially the future." 16:37.700 --> 16:40.333 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% True, I think we can all agree with that 16:40.433 --> 16:44.366 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% even though we may question Laplace's Demon a little bit. 16:46.733 --> 16:49.700 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% Well, Bjerknes, Vilhelm Bjerknes, getting into our field 16:49.800 --> 16:53.533 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% in 1904, the father of the Norwegian school 16:53.633 --> 16:58.033 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% of weather prediction, said the following. 16:58.133 --> 17:00.366 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% "If it is true, as any scientist believes, 17:00.466 --> 17:02.733 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% "that subsequent states of the atmosphere develop 17:02.833 --> 17:05.266 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% "from preceding ones according to physical laws, 17:05.366 --> 17:07.833 align:left position:25%,start line:77% size:65% "one will agree that the necessary and sufficient conditions 17:07.933 --> 17:11.033 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% "for a rational solution of the problem of meteorological 17:11.133 --> 17:12.933 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% "prediction are the following. 17:13.033 --> 17:15.133 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% "Number one, one has to know with sufficient accuracy 17:15.233 --> 17:17.666 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% "the state of the atmosphere at a given time." 17:17.766 --> 17:19.366 align:left position:10%,start line:89% size:80% Those are the observations, and, 17:19.466 --> 17:22.700 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% "One has to know with sufficient accuracy the laws 17:22.800 --> 17:24.766 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% "according to which one state of the atmosphere 17:24.866 --> 17:26.266 align:left position:20%,start line:89% size:70% "develops from another." 17:26.366 --> 17:29.766 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% That's the mathematics and physics of how motion reacts 17:29.866 --> 17:34.933 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% to forces at a given time. 17:35.033 --> 17:37.400 align:left position:10%,start line:5% size:80% And this is definitely the basis 17:37.500 --> 17:39.333 align:left position:35%,start line:5% size:55% for numerical weather prediction. 17:40.966 --> 17:45.233 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% Well, then some 50 years later, along comes 17:45.333 --> 17:48.633 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% brilliant mathematician, actually a meteorologist, 17:48.733 --> 17:51.766 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% who became brilliant in the field of mathematics, 17:51.866 --> 17:54.833 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% one of the few ones that ever did this, Ed Lorenz 17:54.933 --> 17:59.000 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% from MIT, got into chaos theory 17:59.100 --> 18:03.900 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% and is alleged to have said, at least interpreted 18:04.000 --> 18:06.366 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% to have said, "Does the flap of a butterfly's wing 18:06.466 --> 18:10.366 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% "in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?" 18:10.466 --> 18:14.533 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% This is now in popular mythology, in popular speeches, 18:14.633 --> 18:17.500 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% is the butterfly effect, and it's the idea 18:17.600 --> 18:20.333 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% that you can never measure everything to a sufficient 18:20.433 --> 18:24.066 align:left position:27.5%,start line:77% size:62.5% accuracy to make a good prediction, a perfect prediction. 18:24.166 --> 18:26.466 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% There's always gonna be a butterfly somewhere 18:26.566 --> 18:28.800 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% that you don't know, you can't follow, 18:28.900 --> 18:31.500 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% and the butterfly flaps its wings and that sets off 18:31.600 --> 18:34.900 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% a cascade of events that lead to something 18:35.000 --> 18:38.933 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% as severe as a tornado in Texas or a hurricane in New Jersey. 18:43.000 --> 18:46.900 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% In the '70s, Greg was talking about why I was developing 18:47.000 --> 18:50.500 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% numerical models and he had the so-called Mesoscale, 18:50.600 --> 18:52.900 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% and a lot of the larger scale dynamists said, 18:53.000 --> 18:56.400 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% "that you're wasting your time because the smaller scales 18:56.500 --> 18:58.600 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% "of motion are never gonna be predictable, 18:58.700 --> 19:01.566 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% "and why are you trying to do Mesoscale models?" 19:01.666 --> 19:03.833 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% So I was trying to think of a rebuttal to this 19:03.933 --> 19:07.633 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% and I came up with the idea that in many synoptic situations 19:07.733 --> 19:10.066 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% large scale situations, the small scales are forced 19:10.166 --> 19:11.533 align:left position:25%,start line:89% size:65% by the larger scales. 19:11.633 --> 19:14.900 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% So if you know the large-scale waves, they produce fronts 19:15.000 --> 19:17.366 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% in more or less the right place, smaller scale events. 19:17.466 --> 19:20.800 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% They produce areas favorable for convection and so forth, 19:20.900 --> 19:24.066 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% so that if you know the large scale initial conditions 19:24.166 --> 19:27.033 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% and you can predict them, they will lead to 19:27.133 --> 19:32.166 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% small-scale phenomena, create small-scale phenomena, 19:32.266 --> 19:35.466 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% even before the small- scale phenomena exist. 19:35.566 --> 19:38.333 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% And so you actually see that today. 19:38.433 --> 19:40.966 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% People are forecasting tornado outbreaks 19:41.066 --> 19:45.133 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% three or four days before tornadoes actually occur, 19:45.233 --> 19:47.666 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% even start to occur, because the large scale 19:47.766 --> 19:49.400 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% has predicted well and it predicts 19:49.500 --> 19:52.566 align:left position:15%,start line:5% size:75% the environment of tornadoes. 19:52.666 --> 19:56.733 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% So, that was my argument for the fact that there 19:56.833 --> 20:00.233 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% was predictability in the smaller scales of motion, 20:00.333 --> 20:02.000 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% which according to predictability theories 20:02.100 --> 20:05.500 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% should be less predictable than for the very large scales. 20:05.600 --> 20:09.666 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% Anyway, if we look at some real data in this case. 20:09.766 --> 20:13.900 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% These are forecast accuracies of the European Centre 20:14.000 --> 20:17.733 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting, ECMWF. 20:17.833 --> 20:21.066 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% Since 1981, has had the best 20:21.166 --> 20:23.566 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% global prediction model in the world. 20:23.666 --> 20:25.766 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% And the United States has tried desperately to catch up 20:25.866 --> 20:29.466 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% to this model, but has always lagged behind it 20:29.566 --> 20:31.900 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% by about a half a day's worth of forecast. 20:32.000 --> 20:35.566 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% What this shows is the-- You don't need to understand 20:35.666 --> 20:39.000 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% what the skill scores are, but 100 at the top 20:39.100 --> 20:42.800 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% would be a perfect forecast, and 30 would be like 20:42.900 --> 20:46.133 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% a correlation coefficient of 30, wouldn't be much value, 20:46.233 --> 20:48.333 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% but still some value over guessing. 20:48.433 --> 20:52.233 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% And the colors are different links to the forecast. 20:52.333 --> 20:58.000 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% So the blue envelope is I guess day three forecast. 20:58.100 --> 21:01.233 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% So the day three forecast tend to be very accurate 21:01.333 --> 21:04.033 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% and they've been increasing in accuracy with time 21:04.133 --> 21:08.200 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% going from about 87% in the Northern Hemisphere 21:08.300 --> 21:13.500 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% in 1981, to nearly 96% in recent years. 21:13.600 --> 21:15.166 align:left position:20%,start line:89% size:70% And they've leveled off. 21:15.266 --> 21:18.933 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% They aren't getting much better, because apparently 21:19.033 --> 21:21.300 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% the 3-day forecast is close to as good 21:21.400 --> 21:22.800 align:left position:22.5%,start line:89% size:67.5% as it's ever gonna get. 21:22.900 --> 21:25.400 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% The lower part of that green envelope at the top 21:25.500 --> 21:27.666 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% is the Southern Hemisphere forecast. 21:27.766 --> 21:30.600 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% And you can see that it was much worse in 1981 21:30.700 --> 21:33.000 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% than the Northern Hemisphere. 21:33.100 --> 21:35.200 align:left position:15%,start line:5% size:75% And why is that? It's because the Southern Hemisphere 21:35.300 --> 21:36.833 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% doesn't have as much data. 21:36.933 --> 21:39.800 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% There are a lot more oceans and they don't have 21:39.900 --> 21:41.566 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% as many balloons and so forth. 21:41.666 --> 21:46.566 align:left position:15%,start line:5% size:75% But that gap is closed, until today it's almost nonexistent 21:46.666 --> 21:48.300 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% and that's because of satellites. 21:48.400 --> 21:49.833 align:left position:22.5%,start line:89% size:67.5% Satellites are global. 21:49.933 --> 21:52.700 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% They measure globally, and so the Southern Hemisphere 21:52.800 --> 21:56.166 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% gets just as good observations as the Northern Hemisphere now. 21:56.266 --> 21:59.100 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% And this is a dramatic testament to the power 21:59.200 --> 22:02.566 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% of global satellites of which Wisconsin, of course, 22:02.666 --> 22:08.266 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% is the leader in the world in satellite meteorology. 22:08.366 --> 22:11.166 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% The red curves are like five-day forecasts 22:11.266 --> 22:13.200 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% and the green curves are seven days or whatever. 22:13.300 --> 22:15.966 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% It doesn't matter, but the forecasts are getting better 22:16.066 --> 22:17.566 align:left position:27.5%,start line:89% size:62.5% at all-time scales. 22:17.666 --> 22:20.633 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% And the gap between the Northern Hemisphere 22:20.733 --> 22:23.333 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% at the top of each of the bands and the Southern Hemisphere 22:23.433 --> 22:26.533 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% is diminishing because of global observations. 22:26.633 --> 22:32.066 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% Absolute truth, positive truth of the impact of 22:32.166 --> 22:36.233 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% global models and satellite observations. 22:36.333 --> 22:40.733 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% So another one of the reasons I'm bringing up the resolution 22:40.833 --> 22:43.766 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% of these global models one at a time 22:43.866 --> 22:48.266 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% roughly at the same time scale as the bottom, 22:48.366 --> 22:51.800 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% so in 1981 the European Centre model had a horizontal 22:51.900 --> 22:55.400 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% spacing between data points of about 200 kilometers, 22:55.500 --> 22:56.666 align:left position:32.5%,start line:89% size:57.5% 100 some miles. 22:56.766 --> 22:59.533 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% And what you're seeing here is the resolution 22:59.633 --> 23:03.033 align:left position:20%,start line:77% size:70% getting finer and finer, the pixel size getting smaller and smaller. 23:03.133 --> 23:05.633 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% The model is resolving finer and finer scales. 23:05.733 --> 23:07.766 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% And that's the picture of a hurricane. 23:07.866 --> 23:13.933 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% When it gets down to 16 kilometers and the last one is 23:14.033 --> 23:18.433 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% 10 kilometers, you can actually see Hurricane Katrina. 23:18.533 --> 23:20.333 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% But that's what Hurricane Katrina looks like 23:20.433 --> 23:22.633 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% at 250 kilometers on the far left. 23:22.733 --> 23:24.666 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% It's just a blur, a smudge. 23:24.766 --> 23:28.133 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% So you can't even resolve hurricanes back in 1981 23:28.233 --> 23:31.566 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% with these models, but currently you can, 23:31.666 --> 23:35.733 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% and that's a testament to the value of computer power 23:35.833 --> 23:39.433 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% and good models in addition to the good observations. 23:39.533 --> 23:42.000 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% So the predictions are getting better all the time. 23:43.333 --> 23:47.400 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% The next slide shows a different way of judging 23:47.500 --> 23:49.200 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% how good models are. 23:49.300 --> 23:54.833 align:left position:22.5%,start line:89% size:67.5% This goes back to 2008 23:54.933 --> 23:57.533 align:left position:35%,start line:83% size:55% technology of geostationary satellites. 23:57.633 --> 24:00.433 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% It's the Meteosat observations. 24:00.533 --> 24:04.100 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% And if I didn't have these things labeled, 24:04.200 --> 24:08.600 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% even in 2008, you have trouble telling 24:08.700 --> 24:12.833 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% which is the model and which is the satellite, 24:12.933 --> 24:15.433 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% if you didn't have these labeled, right? 24:15.533 --> 24:18.366 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% And you could probably tell if you stared at it long enough, 24:18.466 --> 24:21.333 align:left position:22.5%,start line:77% size:67.5% if you were an expert, if you were either an expert in the models 24:21.433 --> 24:23.833 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% or in the geostationary satellite imagery, 24:23.933 --> 24:27.700 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% but just looking at it, the casual person is gonna say 24:27.800 --> 24:30.500 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% that model on the right is damn good, 24:30.600 --> 24:32.566 align:left position:10%,start line:89% size:80% even without looking at numbers. 24:33.566 --> 24:36.366 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% And so you know the model is doing something right. 24:36.466 --> 24:41.833 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% And we were looking at one of the 24:41.933 --> 24:45.466 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% tornado models this morning or this afternoon. 24:45.566 --> 24:48.000 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% In the tornado model, the clouds were so accurate, 24:48.100 --> 24:49.633 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% you just know that they're right, 24:49.733 --> 24:51.000 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% even without a lot of numbers. 24:51.100 --> 24:53.433 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% But this is actually one way of verifying models 24:53.533 --> 24:56.733 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% is to look at the pattern recognition. 24:56.833 --> 24:59.766 align:left position:22.5%,start line:77% size:67.5% Humans are very good at seeing whether something looks good or not, 24:59.866 --> 25:02.333 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% whether it's right or not, and you can see it there. 25:02.433 --> 25:04.033 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% And that was quite a few years ago. 25:04.133 --> 25:10.800 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% The models in the geostationary satellite like GOES are, 25:10.900 --> 25:13.333 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% what do you call them now, GOES-16? 25:13.433 --> 25:14.800 align:left position:27.5%,start line:89% size:62.5% (mumbled response) 25:14.900 --> 25:19.166 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% Yeah, is a much better resolution 25:19.266 --> 25:21.966 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% on the satellites and much better resolution on the models. 25:22.066 --> 25:24.733 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% So they still look very good together. 25:25.766 --> 25:27.366 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% But numbers are important. 25:27.466 --> 25:31.533 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% Here's a record of official hurricane 25:31.633 --> 25:35.100 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% track errors over time from 1970, 25:35.200 --> 25:37.933 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% before models and before satellites 25:38.033 --> 25:41.033 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% out to 2016, the latest data I had 25:41.133 --> 25:42.933 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% from the National Hurricane Center. 25:43.033 --> 25:47.100 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% And the track errors are in nautical miles, 25:47.200 --> 25:52.166 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% which are very close to miles, from zero to 700. 25:52.266 --> 25:54.300 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% In this case, a low number is good 25:54.400 --> 25:56.666 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% because the track error, the error, the position error 25:56.766 --> 25:58.966 align:left position:20%,start line:89% size:70% of the storm is smaller. 25:59.066 --> 26:00.933 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% And so you can see that the different forecasts, 26:01.033 --> 26:04.933 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% the red curve is 24 hours, the green is 48 hours 26:05.033 --> 26:09.600 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% and so on up to 120 hours, the dark blue at the top. 26:09.700 --> 26:12.866 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% With some year-to-year variation, all of these 26:12.966 --> 26:16.433 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% official forecasts are getting better. 26:17.433 --> 26:19.700 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% And they're starting to maybe converge. 26:19.800 --> 26:21.533 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% Of course, you can't get any better than zero, 26:21.633 --> 26:24.966 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% so at least the one-day, the two-day, and the three-day 26:25.066 --> 26:27.266 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% forecasts are getting pretty darn good 26:27.366 --> 26:32.733 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% to less than a 50-mile error in position of the storm. 26:34.133 --> 26:37.866 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% So anecdotally the forecasts are getting better, 26:37.966 --> 26:40.266 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% like Hurricane Sandy. 26:40.366 --> 26:41.900 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% Statistically they're getting better. 26:42.000 --> 26:45.066 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% We know why, it's computer, it's models, 26:45.166 --> 26:47.233 align:left position:32.5%,start line:5% size:57.5% it's satellite observations of all kinds. 26:47.333 --> 26:49.800 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% It's better physics, it's scientists working on this. 26:49.900 --> 26:51.600 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% This is not an accident. 26:52.600 --> 26:56.933 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% It's not because of political philosophy or 26:57.033 --> 26:58.800 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% the people are better or anything like that. 26:58.900 --> 27:05.833 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% It's pure science, physics, measurements, education. 27:05.933 --> 27:09.733 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% This is all something that we did, we as a community, 27:09.833 --> 27:13.500 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% as a university community, as government centers 27:13.600 --> 27:16.200 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% in Europe and the United States, we did this. 27:16.300 --> 27:19.933 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% This is not forgone, this is not an accident. 27:20.033 --> 27:22.966 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% It's the results of mathematicians and physicists 27:23.066 --> 27:25.366 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% and chemists and computer scientists 27:25.466 --> 27:28.166 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% and educated people and supportive graduate students 27:28.266 --> 27:31.533 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% and government grants doing all of this. 27:31.633 --> 27:33.333 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% And it's saving thousands of lives, 27:33.433 --> 27:35.466 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% maybe hundreds of thousands of lives, 27:35.566 --> 27:37.100 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% just in this one little area, 27:37.200 --> 27:38.833 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% this little tiny area of weather prediction, 27:38.933 --> 27:41.100 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% it's science and education. 27:41.200 --> 27:44.300 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% It's not philosophy, it's not praying to God. 27:44.400 --> 27:46.100 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% It's doing something about it. 27:46.200 --> 27:49.466 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% It's helping God by doing something for ourselves. 27:50.466 --> 27:53.100 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% And yet you have people that want to cut funding 27:53.200 --> 27:54.700 align:left position:32.5%,start line:89% size:57.5% in these areas. 27:54.800 --> 27:58.566 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% The total NESDIS budget is about $2.1 billion a year, 27:58.666 --> 28:00.200 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% the satellite budget in the United States. 28:00.300 --> 28:04.233 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% $2.1 billion, it sounds like a lot, right? 28:04.333 --> 28:07.300 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% We've had 15 $1 billion disasters already 28:07.400 --> 28:09.266 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% in nine months of this year. 28:13.600 --> 28:16.066 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% And they, they want to cut it. 28:16.166 --> 28:18.733 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% I'm trying to design the satellite system for 2030 28:18.833 --> 28:20.566 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% and beyond, when I'll be dead. 28:20.666 --> 28:23.266 align:left position:15%,start line:5% size:75% I still think it's important even though I'll be dead. 28:23.366 --> 28:25.900 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% I have children, I probably won't have grandchildren, 28:26.000 --> 28:27.666 align:left position:32.5%,start line:5% size:57.5% but many of you have grandchildren. 28:27.766 --> 28:29.433 align:left position:15%,start line:5% size:75% They're gonna have children. 28:30.800 --> 28:34.100 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% And we need to be preparing for the science 28:34.200 --> 28:36.100 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% and the forecasts of 2030 and beyond. 28:36.200 --> 28:37.566 align:left position:15%,start line:5% size:75% That's what I'm trying to do. 28:37.666 --> 28:39.233 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% Let's get back to what might be possible. 28:39.333 --> 28:41.600 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% Let's get back to what some fun stuff is. 28:42.600 --> 28:44.833 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% All right, well this is an interesting thing 28:44.933 --> 28:48.933 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% that's actually fairly old technology in the modeling area 28:49.033 --> 28:51.333 align:left position:30%,start line:77% size:60% and visualization compared to some of the things you can do now. 28:51.433 --> 28:54.966 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% But what it is, is a five-day forecast using a massive model, 28:55.066 --> 28:57.333 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% a very high resolution advanced model 28:57.433 --> 29:00.100 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% of Cyclone Nargis which is a major storm 29:00.200 --> 29:03.566 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% that developed in the Indian Ocean. 29:03.666 --> 29:06.800 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% And this shows the five-day forecast in this model 29:06.900 --> 29:08.666 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% of this genesis of this storm. 29:08.766 --> 29:11.833 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% It's kind of an interesting, beautiful depiction 29:11.933 --> 29:15.033 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% but these are basically the wind flow at different levels. 29:15.133 --> 29:18.233 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% The greenish colors are low level flow, 29:18.333 --> 29:21.466 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% and the reddish colors are the upper level jets, 29:21.566 --> 29:23.533 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% and so you see a kinda low level flow. 29:23.633 --> 29:26.300 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% You're looking at the Indian Ocean there. 29:26.400 --> 29:31.266 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% And you can see with time this vortex develops 29:31.366 --> 29:32.733 align:left position:25%,start line:89% size:65% in the Indian Ocean. 29:32.833 --> 29:34.466 align:left position:20%,start line:89% size:70% And there you can see it. 29:34.566 --> 29:37.966 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% That's Cyclone Nargis in 2008. 29:38.066 --> 29:40.366 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% You can see this developing 29:40.466 --> 29:43.700 align:left position:10%,start line:83% size:80% with no hint of anything of that scale in the initial conditions. 29:43.800 --> 29:45.566 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% The large scale just did it. 29:46.600 --> 29:50.333 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% It was predictability of that tropical cyclone 29:50.433 --> 29:53.966 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% five days in advance by this global model 29:54.066 --> 29:58.500 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% in the right place and pretty much at the right time. 29:58.600 --> 30:01.700 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% Not exactly in the right place or exactly at the right time. 30:01.800 --> 30:06.233 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% And this is becoming or could become a routine. 30:06.333 --> 30:09.400 align:left position:12.5%,start line:83% size:77.5% You saw this in Hurricane Sandy which is a real data case. 30:09.500 --> 30:11.266 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% So there's the cyclone well developed. 30:11.366 --> 30:14.366 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% You can see the low-level inflow and the outflow, 30:14.466 --> 30:18.833 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% global model and initialized with real data. 30:19.866 --> 30:22.500 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% So again, we know what we're doing. 30:23.533 --> 30:26.366 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% Okay, here's a climate model for, 30:26.466 --> 30:28.933 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% I say quote "September 2000" 30:29.033 --> 30:32.400 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% which might be September 2500, 50 years from now, 30:32.500 --> 30:34.300 align:left position:25%,start line:89% size:65% for an entire month. 30:34.400 --> 30:37.433 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% And again, does this pass the reality test? 30:37.533 --> 30:39.900 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% Do you see hurricanes forming in the Atlantic 30:40.000 --> 30:43.000 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% and moving toward Florida or toward New Orleans? 30:43.100 --> 30:46.166 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% Does this look realistic? Well, look at that. 30:46.266 --> 30:48.200 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% That looks exactly like Hurricane Katrina. 30:48.300 --> 30:51.300 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% There's more forming in the Atlantic. 30:51.400 --> 30:54.800 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% These large-scale models, with the righty physics 30:54.900 --> 30:59.133 align:left position:32.5%,start line:83% size:57.5% and right ocean interactions, can produce 30:59.233 --> 31:03.166 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% hurricanes in the right place and time ontologically 31:03.266 --> 31:05.233 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% at least at the right seasons. 31:06.733 --> 31:10.133 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% Okay, so I am gonna start wrapping this up. 31:11.500 --> 31:15.733 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% Anyway, the summary is getting away from Laplace's 31:15.833 --> 31:18.500 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% abstraction and being able to predict everything 31:18.600 --> 31:22.166 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% all the time at all scales and every human's behavior 31:22.266 --> 31:24.366 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% and all their children's behavior and all that. 31:24.466 --> 31:28.200 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% There is evidence that you can have greatly improved 31:28.300 --> 31:31.433 align:left position:20%,start line:83% size:70% forecasts of such severe weather as tropical cyclones. 31:31.533 --> 31:33.933 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% I hope you remember the prologue, but these are really 31:34.033 --> 31:37.566 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% high impact events, days in advance. 31:37.666 --> 31:40.833 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% And then the boring line 31:40.933 --> 31:43.500 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% but you've got to keep pounding this home 31:43.600 --> 31:48.200 align:left position:27.5%,start line:5% size:62.5% to the politicians that this is not by accident. 31:48.300 --> 31:49.833 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% We need high resolution models, 31:49.933 --> 31:51.566 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% probably at four kilometers or better. 31:51.666 --> 31:54.000 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% We need improved physics, it means understanding. 31:54.100 --> 31:57.333 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% We need more PhD students working on these problems. 31:57.433 --> 31:59.900 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% And we need interactive ocean-atmosphere models. 32:00.000 --> 32:02.466 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% We need improved and initial conditions in the atmosphere 32:02.566 --> 32:05.966 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% temperature, water vapor, and winds-satellite observations 32:06.066 --> 32:07.966 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% are absolutely essential here. 32:08.066 --> 32:10.933 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% We need better data assimilation techniques. 32:11.033 --> 32:15.033 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% That's ways of using these strange forms of data 32:15.133 --> 32:18.200 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% from the satellites and we need faster computers. 32:18.300 --> 32:22.533 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% So again this is one slice and one aspect of society 32:22.633 --> 32:24.700 align:left position:20%,start line:5% size:70% but we know how to do it, 32:24.800 --> 32:28.933 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% and we just don't have the will to do it, it seems sometimes. 32:30.066 --> 32:33.933 align:left position:22.5%,start line:5% size:67.5% So back to the answer, the big picture. 32:34.033 --> 32:38.200 align:left position:17.5%,start line:5% size:72.5% Who wins, the butterfly or the demon, Laplace's Demon? 32:39.400 --> 32:41.066 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% Well, there is a different between 32:41.166 --> 32:43.166 align:left position:12.5%,start line:5% size:77.5% what is theoretically possible, 32:43.266 --> 32:44.933 align:left position:25%,start line:5% size:65% that's what's called predictability, 32:45.033 --> 32:46.733 align:left position:30%,start line:5% size:60% and what can ever actually be done, 32:46.833 --> 32:49.266 align:left position:10%,start line:5% size:80% and that's actually predictions. 32:49.366 --> 32:52.033 align:left position:30%,start line:83% size:60% The demon may be theoretically possible, 32:52.133 --> 32:54.866 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% and that's the question I think for philosophers. 32:55.966 --> 32:58.233 align:left position:27.5%,start line:83% size:62.5% Not for us, because we'll never be there 32:58.333 --> 32:59.733 align:left position:15%,start line:89% size:75% in a practical point of view. 32:59.833 --> 33:03.100 align:left position:22.5%,start line:83% size:67.5% But the butterflies are ultimately going to win. 33:03.200 --> 33:07.266 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% And I see there's no reason not to help the demon a little, 33:07.366 --> 33:11.300 align:left position:15%,start line:83% size:75% in such beneficial activities as weather prediction. 33:11.400 --> 33:15.533 align:left position:12.5%,start line:89% size:77.5% And that's the end of my talk. 33:15.633 --> 33:17.066 align:left position:25%,start line:89% size:65% Thank you very much. 33:17.166 --> 33:19.300 align:left position:25%,start line:83% size:65% I'd be happy to take any questions or outrageous 33:19.400 --> 33:24.400 align:left position:17.5%,start line:83% size:72.5% statements or challenges or denial or whatever 33:24.500 --> 33:26.233 align:left position:17.5%,start line:89% size:72.5% alternative points of view. 33:26.333 --> 33:27.633 align:left position:37.5%,start line:89% size:52.5% Thank you. 33:27.733 --> 33:30.400 align:left position:37.5%,start line:5% size:52.5% (applause)