Hello my friends! Thank you very much for your help! That was good materials. I'm knowing a lot more now. I'm not sure if it's tottaly clear yet for me, but I think it is quite enough. I'm just starting metheorology studies, but I have a reasonable knowledge about physics, and I'm trying to understand the more I can about the physical processes that determines metheorology while I study this new science area. It was very interesting reading about the vorticity and the forces that create it. But I couldn't inicially get rid of my inicial doubt (maybe bad explained by be) "why cyclones have troughs that point to equator and anticyclones have ridges that point to the pole". (I kept studying and writing this message for a long time today, and now I think my error was to associate ridges/troughs to cyclones/anticyclones. I will talk about this below) I didn't know about these jet streams, I've spent some hours yesterday and most part of the day today studying and trying to understand them and another related processes before posting here again. I didn't fully understand the jet streams, but I'm pretty convincend that at least should exist one stream (per hemiphere) of fast wind going east at some latitude because of the equilibrium there between coriolis and pressure gradient forces, and because disturbances in the flow would change coriolis force in a way that the wind tends to get back to the "jet stream place" (and the jet stream exists just because of this stability, that concentrates the wind at a narrow place). Well, some irregularities (always existing on real world) on the pressures will change the jet stream path. If we call trough a low pressure lobe, and ridge a high pressure lobe, it becomes clear that, on the jet stream path, the trough must be to equator and the ridge must be to the pole, because the jet stream is separating a low pressure area at the higher altitude from a high pressure area at the lower latitude. But this becomes a little more complicated when there's closed isobars, and we have the pole at the north and the equator at the south. Maybe because the way my book presented the subject "troughs and ridges", basically drawing circular isobars forming a low/high pressure spot with a little elongation to the south/north that was the trough/ridge, and doing this just after talking about cyclones and anticyclones, that was the same thing without the elongations, I thought this troughts and ridges were all about cyclones/anticyclones and that I should explain them by the same processes (coriolis forces and stuff) I used to explain how cyclones arise. Reading more about troughs and ridges, now I think it was an error to think this concepts would be strictly associated with cyclones and anticyclones. If I think at a ridge just as an elongation of the isobars of a high pressure region, and knowing that the poles have low pressures that attracts these "high pressures isobars" (attracts the high pressure masses, changing the isobars path), it's clear that the ridge has to be towards north, because equator has higher pressures than the pole, and all the high pressure lines will tend to go to the north. All the high pressure masses will try to squeeze themselves to find a way to go northward. For the low pressure centers, it works the opposite way: the equator high pressures will try to find a way to "inject" masses towards north, and it will "squeeze" the low pressure center starting at its south part (equivalent to a southward elongation). I don't know if my thought are quite right, but at least now I have a understanding that makes some sense and corresponds to what the books says. Thank you Coast and phil nw. Anything else you want to add saying I'm right or I'm wrong I'll be greatful.