I find it interesting to hear the theory reiterated that it is the RFD that is responsible to surface vertical vorticity. Being a mere hobbyist and not a scientist in this field, I am curious about how much of a divide there is between camps now that more recent supercomputer models, particularly the work of Leigh Orf, seem to be showing that it isn't the downdraft but a feature called the streamwise vorticity current (SVC), which comes from the cold pool, that is actually behind tornadogenesis and that the RFD is more of a symptom than a cause. This video is a bit dated but I would love to hear more about how evenly divided (or not) the scientific community is about these two hypotheses.
Rfd? Liegh Orf has entered the chat I’d love to hear Him and Orf duke it out about the role of rfd in tornado genesis. If Orf’s simulations are spot on, it shows that an rfd may not be needed for tornado genesis. Interesting stuff.... RFD? Or Stream wise vorticity current vortices continuously adding to the main updraft? Interesting stuff
IAMRANNDIZZLE Well yes. If you see his simulations he talks about that same pressure perturbation that comes before the stretching vortices. His theory is that the strreamwise vorticity current provides longevity to the mesocyclone and tornadoes as well as genisis.
I just made a similar comment then saw yours... I am curious to hear how since the making of this video the scientific community has responded to Orf's hypotheses.
Excellent description of vorticity. We can think of it as an entity that conserves wind shear. It points to an undiscovered physical principle: what maintains the vorticity?
This is an interesting, but fairly technical video. The audience seems to be folks who have college-level meteorology training. That doesn't mean people who are out-of-field won't find it interesting (my degree is in government). But it would be nice if some of the technical jargon were explained a little bit better. For example, toward the end there is a discussion of "LCL" as a factor in assessing whether vortices in the the rear-flank downdraft can be stretched into a tornado; I had to Google what "LCL" means (it's "lifted condensation level"). While I am probably butchering this, I think this probably means that RFD areas with low cloud bases (i.e. point where air condenses into cloud stuff) are more likely to generate a tornado. I assume this probably corresponds to "wall clouds" (a term that amateur weather nerds understand) although that may be stretching the original point too thin. But if that's basically what Mr. Thompson means, it would be helpful for him to just say it to illustrate the point. Just my two cents. :)
because WSR-88d doppler radars can only measure winds moving toward or away from them. If you are scanning a storm 100 miles away, you are seeing it from the side, so updrafts and downdrafts are not going have much of a vector toward or away from the radar site.
I don't know if anyone can understand this but why is a violent tornado, the entire thing being a part of the mesocyclone itself? I mean, one comes from the other, trying to understand that.
![LAVROV's interview with Tucker CARLSON 😁 [Parody]](/img/1.gif)
Great Job👍
I find it interesting to hear the theory reiterated that it is the RFD that is responsible to surface vertical vorticity. Being a mere hobbyist and not a scientist in this field, I am curious about how much of a divide there is between camps now that more recent supercomputer models, particularly the work of Leigh Orf, seem to be showing that it isn't the downdraft but a feature called the streamwise vorticity current (SVC), which comes from the cold pool, that is actually behind tornadogenesis and that the RFD is more of a symptom than a cause. This video is a bit dated but I would love to hear more about how evenly divided (or not) the scientific community is about these two hypotheses.
I agree!
Thank you very much for uploading this. I was a storm spotter at one time.
Rfd? Liegh Orf has entered the chat
I’d love to hear Him and Orf duke it out about the role of rfd in tornado genesis. If Orf’s simulations are spot on, it shows that an rfd may not be needed for tornado genesis.
Interesting stuff.... RFD? Or Stream wise vorticity current vortices continuously adding to the main updraft? Interesting stuff
You still have to have a mesocyclone before the initial spin up of the tornado vortex
IAMRANNDIZZLE Well yes. If you see his simulations he talks about that same pressure perturbation that comes before the stretching vortices. His theory is that the strreamwise vorticity current provides longevity to the mesocyclone and tornadoes as well as genisis.
I just made a similar comment then saw yours... I am curious to hear how since the making of this video the scientific community has responded to Orf's hypotheses.
Excellent description of vorticity. We can think of it as an entity that conserves wind shear. It points to an undiscovered physical principle: what maintains the vorticity?
This is an interesting, but fairly technical video. The audience seems to be folks who have college-level meteorology training. That doesn't mean people who are out-of-field won't find it interesting (my degree is in government). But it would be nice if some of the technical jargon were explained a little bit better. For example, toward the end there is a discussion of "LCL" as a factor in assessing whether vortices in the the rear-flank downdraft can be stretched into a tornado; I had to Google what "LCL" means (it's "lifted condensation level"). While I am probably butchering this, I think this probably means that RFD areas with low cloud bases (i.e. point where air condenses into cloud stuff) are more likely to generate a tornado. I assume this probably corresponds to "wall clouds" (a term that amateur weather nerds understand) although that may be stretching the original point too thin. But if that's basically what Mr. Thompson means, it would be helpful for him to just say it to illustrate the point. Just my two cents. :)
If we can “see” the speed of wind towards and away from the radar why can we not measure updraft and downdraft speeds?
because WSR-88d doppler radars can only measure winds moving toward or away from them. If you are scanning a storm 100 miles away, you are seeing it from the side, so updrafts and downdrafts are not going have much of a vector toward or away from the radar site.
The vortice begins in the tropopause.
I don't know if anyone can understand this but why is a violent tornado, the entire thing being a part of the mesocyclone itself? I mean, one comes from the other, trying to understand that.
ah yes vorticity perturbation