The Mother of all Storms

[A.J]

Ok, Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans, Hurricane Andrew devastated the Carribean in '92, Scotland just got bashed by 100 mph winds, but these storms as bad as they were, would feel like a light summers' breeze when stood next to the 'mother of all storms'....The one storm you dont want to be caught out in.....I give you the 'Hypercane'

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1451...-hot-water.html

This is without doubt a horrifying prospect, truly a storm with global impact. It would be great to see forum members thoughts and feedback on such a storm, especially from the forecasting team.....just what would a synoptic chart for a storm like this look like!

[PersianPaladin]

I have great doubts about this theory.

Firstly, the heat derived from the asteroid is obtained from the atmosphere heating it upon entry...this heat is then released into land (a natural heat-sink) and energy dispersed as a crater or if it hits water; the energy is released as a tsnunami, with the asteroid cooling rapidly as it sinks downwards after displacing larger areas of water. The areas of displaced water would be superheated; but I doubt any area of the ocean would stay warm for long as oceans are not static bodies like lakes and the temporary heating affect would be outweighed by the prevailing currents and pressures that would limit convective developments.

[A.J]

I have great doubts about this theory.

Firstly, the heat derived from the asteroid is obtained from the atmosphere heating it upon entry...this heat is then released into land (a natural heat-sink) and energy dispersed as a crater or if it hits water; the energy is released as a tsnunami, with the asteroid cooling rapidly as it sinks downwards after displacing larger areas of water. The areas of displaced water would be superheated; but I doubt any area of the ocean would stay warm for long as oceans are not static bodies like lakes and the temporary heating affect would be outweighed by the prevailing currents and pressures that would limit convective developments.

Hi PP, thanks for your thoughts, but, (and there's always a but ..lol) ....In taking the asteroid impact generating a hypercane scenario, only superficial heat is generated by atmospheric friction, the vast majority of heat is obtained from the kinetic energy transfer when asteroid impacts with ocean, and we're talkin possibly billions of megatons of kenetic energy, the asteroid would simply vapourize on contact, forming a huge cavity all the way through the earths crust (say for arguments sake, a 10km diameter bollide, if a 10km asteroid impacted anywhere in an ocean, it would be as if the ocean wasn't there, its still impacting land) Only a small amount of impact energy is released in the form of a tsunami. According to research, the material left in the cavity would remain in a molten state for possibly days, thus sea water rushing back in to fill the cavity would simply immediatley vapourize. The superheated raising air and steam would be generated for as long as the impact cavity is molten, thus providing the fuel for the hypercane or series of hypercanes...As regards to a volcanic generation of a hypercane, the local expanse of ocean would also be heated for as long as the eruption continues, this could be days or even weeks, plenty of time for a hypercane to form

In closing, I think that for this theoretical storm to form, it would more likely be from an under-sea volcanic event......I just wouldnt like to be in the firing line...lol

[PersianPaladin]

Hi PP, thanks for your thoughts, but, (and there's always a but ..lol) ....In taking the asteroid impact generating a hypercane scenario, only superficial heat is generated by atmospheric friction, the vast majority of heat is obtained from the kinetic energy transfer when asteroid impacts with ocean, and we're talkin possibly billions of megatons of kenetic energy, the asteroid would simply vapourize on contact, forming a huge cavity all the way through the earths crust (say for arguments sake, a 10km diameter bollide, if a 10km asteroid impacted anywhere in an ocean, it would be as if the ocean wasn't there, its still impacting land) Only a small amount of impact energy is released in the form of a tsunami. According to research, the material left in the cavity would remain in a molten state for possibly days, thus sea water rushing back in to fill the cavity would simply immediatley vapourize. The superheated raising air and steam would be generated for as long as the impact cavity is molten, thus providing the fuel for the hypercane or series of hypercanes...As regards to a volcanic generation of a hypercane, the local expanse of ocean would also be heated for as long as the eruption continues, this could be days or even weeks, plenty of time for a hypercane to form

In closing, I think that for this theoretical storm to form, it would more likely be from an under-sea volcanic event......I just wouldnt like to be in the firing line...lol

I think there is no evidence to back-up this theory....usually ends up as a series of computerized hypotheticals.

Simple fact is that kinetic energy is likely to be displaced skywards which contributes to the vaporization of the asteroid. If you fly a plane into a building...the 'explosion ball' demonstrates that the heat is released upwards rapidly in tandem with the destruction of the aircraft. Any remaining debris is likely to cool gradually or small-scale hot spots are generated. The same silly hypotheticals argued that the molten hot spots at the bottom of the collapsed world trade centre was down to the kinetic energy of the collapse. This however has been subsequently dropped by NIST as a theory and also debunked by physics professors. The actual cause is unknown; some saying that it was down to fuel tanks exploding in lower tiers.

Kinetic energy is often 'over-ramped' by scientists. In reality....it is likely to be greatly reduced\displaced by other laws and factors (although there is no doubt that impact alone initially and the shock-wave will cause widespread superficial damage to the upper tier of the earth's crust...)

Edited January 10, 2008 by PersianPaladin

[PersianPaladin]

Hi PP, thanks for your thoughts, but, (and there's always a but ..lol) ....In taking the asteroid impact generating a hypercane scenario, only superficial heat is generated by atmospheric friction, the vast majority of heat is obtained from the kinetic energy transfer when asteroid impacts with ocean, and we're talkin possibly billions of megatons of kenetic energy, the asteroid would simply vapourize on contact, forming a huge cavity all the way through the earths crust (say for arguments sake, a 10km diameter bollide, if a 10km asteroid

Indeed...it would be like hitting a solid surface almost. If the asteroid explodes just above the water; there would be a more horizontal displacement of the energy over a wide area. I fail to see how such areas below the sea would become 'superheated' given the fact that the energy is released upwards in the enormous heat and blastwave at the same time of vaporization. If the asteroid vaporizes just above the ocean then the more horizontal and widespread energy displacement would mean the heat-sink effect of the ocean perhaps lowering surface temps to even more marginal levels after initial vaporisation.

I will believe it when I see it. If I see it lol.

Edited January 10, 2008 by PersianPaladin

[A.J]

I think there is no evidence to back-up this theory....usually ends up as a series of computerized hypotheticals.

Simple fact is that kinetic energy is likely to be displaced skywards which contributes to the vaporization of the asteroid. If you fly a plane into a building...the 'explosion ball' demonstrates that the heat is released upwards rapidly in tandem with the destruction of the aircraft. Any remaining debris is likely to cool gradually or small-scale hot spots are generated. The same silly hypotheticals argued that the molten hot spots at the bottom of the collapsed world trade centre was down to the kinetic energy of the collapse. This however has been subsequently dropped by NIST as a theory and also debunked by physics professors. The actual cause is unknown; some saying that it was down to fuel tanks exploding in lower tiers.

Kinetic energy is often 'over-ramped' by scientists. In reality....it is likely to be greatly reduced\displaced by other laws and factors (although there is no doubt that impact alone initially and the shock-wave will cause widespread superficial damage to the upper tier of the earth's crust...)

In risking going off topic, I do disagree with your point regarding displacement of kinetic energy. IMO i, n an asteroid impact, unless the impact is a very oblique angle (say less than 20 degrees) then the energy is directly transferred into the crust, craters on the earth and more particulary on other planets show this conclusively. The simplest way of demonstrating this, is a 'newtons cradle'...the flow of energy is linear..Anyways, sorry I'm rambling off topic...I really appreciate your thoughts PP, its just a shame that there have only been two contributors to this thread, as when I read the linked article, I thought it would definitely warrant lots of input!

sorry didnt catch your last post in time......The key point is that the velocity and structure of the asteroid would make it the equivelent of a knife going through butter, enrgy transfers into the crust would surely ensure the crater would remain molten for long enough to cause enough atmospheric convection to trigger a super storm....who knows?.......personally, if this impact happened, my immediate thoughts would be to put my head between my legs and kiss my backside goodbye...lol

Edited January 10, 2008 by ajpoolshark

[PersianPaladin]

In risking going off topic, I do disagree with your point regarding displacement of kinetic energy. IMO i, n an asteroid impact, unless the impact is a very oblique angle (say less than 20 degrees) then the energy is directly transferred into the crust, craters on the earth and more particulary on other planets show this conclusively. The simplest way of demonstrating this, is a 'newtons cradle'...the flow of energy is linear..Anyways, sorry I'm rambling off topic...I really appreciate your thoughts PP, its just a shame that there have only been two contributors to this thread, as when I read the linked article, I thought it would definitely warrant lots of input!

I agree. But heat from kinetic energy does behave differently than the actual impact force. Heat as a tendency to rise or if pressure changes are very great; expand horizontally in the form of a very quick instantaneous release.

The behaviour of such a body over water would likely be very different to that of land. Comparing the craters on mars or the moon with little or no atmosphere is different to that of earth; where atmospheric pressure has a very considerable distorting affect.

[Mad Murdoch]

So whats the chances of this actually happening? Because its pretty scary reading.

[Cookie]

So whats the chances of this actually happening? Because its pretty scary reading.

you better be scared, I expect you to be on the front line capturing great pics. :lol:

[A.J]

So whats the chances of this actually happening? Because its pretty scary reading.

well, according to the article and other research on this topic, it would take either an massive undersea volcanic eruption or asteroid/comet impact for this 'hypercane' to be possible, or of course global warming on an unprecedented scale, in other words, probably not in our lifetime, but one day it will happen as it has no doubt done in the past, IMO....sleep well :lol:

Edited January 18, 2008 by ajpoolshark

[0000]

Facinating reading aj mate.Did you get any further with the synopicts?What would the track of such a monster be as from what I gathered it would be dependant upon where on Earth it originated?Let's say it formed in the Pacific off Japan(arguements sake only)Could it cross the globe or travel long distances inland?

Edited January 18, 2008 by hannegan

[Icer]

well, according to the article and other research on this topic, it would take either an massive undersea volcanic eruption or asteroid/comet impact for this 'hypercane' to be possible, or of course global warming on an unprecedented scale, in other words, probably not in our lifetime, but one day it will happen as it has no doubt done in the past, IMO....sleep well

It was scary reading that I hope it don't happen when I am alive!

[A.J]

Facinating reading aj mate.Did you get any further with the synopicts?What would the track of such a monster be as from what I gathered it would be dependant upon where on Earth it originated?Let's say it formed in the Pacific off Japan(arguements sake only)Could it cross the globe or travel long distances inland?

Good question, admittedly web research has given me contradictory info, but my best guess is that these storms could only maintain their level of potency for a short time period, as soon as upper atmospheric winds move the storm system away from the oceanic hotspot, it will be cut off from its extreme fuel source. My guess is that it would morph into a normal (but very strong) hurricane, and the longevity would depend on the normal ocean temperatures away from the epicentre (28 celcius, I believe). I think though that a series of these storms would form though, my earlier posts suggest that the hot spot could last for days, spawning one after another hypercane....This is honestly best guess stuff though, I'm no expert in this topic, just have a real fascination in it!.......would make for an interesting shipping forecast though, 'eg lundy, fastnet, 400 mbars,winds cyclonic, hypercane, force 24, seas monstrous, visibilty zilch'....

Edited January 18, 2008 by ajpoolshark

[A.J]

http://www.thehistorychannel.co.uk/site/tv...ogramme_627.php

Thought I'd ressurect this thread....If anyone would like to know more about the 'Mother of all Storms' then check out the History Channel next Wednesday 20th at 20:00hrs .....and be prepared to be BLOWN AWAY! <_<

[Cookie]

loads of chance to get catch it so will try and remember to watch

[Roger J Smith]

GFS would probably deepen it too much. :o

[A.J]

For anyone who is interested, The documentary on the History Channel last night was fascinating and disturbing!....For anyone who missed it, it is available to sky+ subscribers on 'anytime' tv for the next week, and also on the internet, using the sky player software....unmissable viewing!

[0000]

For anyone who is interested, The documentary on the History Channel last night was fascinating and disturbing!....For anyone who missed it, it is available to sky+ subscribers on 'anytime' tv for the next week, and also on the internet, using the sky player software....unmissable viewing!

i forgot the bloody thing was on but its repeated on there i think