Posted on 01/11/2016 1:33:56 PM PST by Citizen Zed
The Yellowstone supercomputer in Wyoming currently ranks among the 60 fastest in the world. The new supercomputer, to be named Cheyenne, will be at least 2 1/2 times more powerful ...
Amazing what the mind of a liberal can conceive! A shinny new very expensive computer bought on the public dime able to reach the same erroneous conclusions twice as fast. I'm very impressed!
GIGO.
Garbage In, Garbage Out.
One of the oldest principles of computing.
That computational monster probably sucks enough power by itself to contribute to global warming.
you must be hitch hiking..
They can omit and forge data, and publish bogus forecasts 100,000 times faster than on their regular desktop computers.
So it can crank out the crap 100,000 times faster than your ordinary garbage disposal.
“A computer whose merest operational parameters I am not worthy to calculate—and yet I will design it for you. A computer which can calculate the Question to the Ultimate Answer, a computer of such infinite and subtle complexity that organic life itself shall form part of its operational matrix. And you yourselves shall take on new forms and go down into the computer to navigate its ten-million-year program! Yes! I shall design this computer for you. And I shall name it also unto you. And it shall be called... the Earth.”
Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
Yeah, you know, I find it very interesting to compare weather modeling with climate modeling, because weather modeling really is amazing. We had a February blizzard several years ago that was predicted about 4 days in advance, before the storm even existed! It was predicted to form over Texas somewhere, swing up the Mississippi valley, and land right on Chicago, which it did. 2 feet of snow.
It seems to me that climate is average weather, but I don’t think you can scientifically model average conditions. I’ve wondered what happens if you just run a weather model for weeks or months. Does it flatten out, or will it keep going with some sort of reasonable looking weather, which is simply increasingly inaccurate? I suspect the former, but I don’t know if this question has been pursued.
I would note, though, that on general considerations we might readily conclude that the extension of weather modeling accuracy is logarithmic in the detail and precision of the compuation. That is, maybe it has to be 100 times as precise to get an extra day, so that getting a month of predictions is not even on the horizon.
I suppose there’s an answer to this, but I think it’s a thought provoking contrast.
X = 5252
But, will it run Windoze XP?
Hmmmmm?
That’s a lot of computer to dedicate to lying and hoaxes.
I’ve got my towel right here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.