Skip to content
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Publication Details
AFRICAN RESEARCH NEXUS
SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAN RESEARCH
agricultural and biological sciences
The equations ofmotion formoist atmospheric air
Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 122, No. 14, Year 2017
Notification
URL copied to clipboard!
Description
How phase transitions affect the motion of moist atmospheric air remains controversial. In the early 2000s two distinct differential equations of motion were proposed. Besides their contrasting formulations for the acceleration of condensate, the equations differ concerning the presence/absence of a term equal to the rate of phase transitions multiplied by the difference in velocity between condensate and air. This term was interpreted in the literature as the “reactive motion” associated with condensation. The reasoning behind this reactive motion was that when water vapor condenses and droplets begin to fall the remaining gas must move upward to conserve momentum. Here we show that the two contrasting formulations imply distinct assumptions about how gaseous air and condensate particles interact. We show that these assumptions cannot be simultaneously applicable to condensation and evaporation. Reactive motion leading to an upward acceleration of air during condensation does not exist. The reactive motion term can be justified for evaporation only; it describes the downward acceleration of air. We emphasize the difference between the equations of motion (i.e., equations constraining velocity) and those constraining momentum (i.e., equations of motion and continuity combined). We show that owing to the imprecise nature of the continuity equations, consideration of total momentum can be misleading and that this led to the reactive motion controversy. Finally, we provide a revised and generally applicable equation for the motion of moist air. © 2017. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.
Authors & Co-Authors
Makarieva, Anastassia M.
Russian Federation, Gatchina
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute Pnpi
United States, Washington, D.c.
United States Department of Agriculture
Gorshkov, Victor G.
Russian Federation, Gatchina
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute Pnpi
United States, Washington, D.c.
United States Department of Agriculture
Nefiodov, Andrei V.
Russian Federation, Gatchina
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute Pnpi
Sheil, Douglas
Norway, As
Norges Miljø- og Biovitenskapelige Universitet
Nobre, Antônio Donato
Brazil, Sao Jose Dos Campos
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais
Bunyard, Peter Paul
Colombia, Bogota
Sergio Arboleda University
Nobre, Paulo A.
Brazil, Sao Jose Dos Campos
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais
Li, Bailian
United States, Washington, D.c.
United States Department of Agriculture
Statistics
Citations: 7
Authors: 8
Affiliations: 5
Identifiers
Doi:
10.1002/2017JD026773
ISSN:
01480227
Research Areas
Environmental