Odele,
If the _at_1au suffix is left off, I think we should definitely have the
distance of the reference surface provided as a coordinate variable as
Jonathan suggested. That would provide the most flexible definition for
future use, so we don't have to add yet another standard name if someone
comes along that wants to have a reference surface at 1 light year or 2
solar radii, etc.
Grace and peace,
Jim
On 5/15/15 11:30 AM, Odele Coddington wrote:
> Hi all,
> I had hesitated to chime in so late in the email exchange. But, as the
> keeper of the CDR, here?s my take on it.
>
> I would highly be in favor of Jim Biard?s suggested names (with or
> without the _at_1au suffix). As Judith mentioned, there?s no time
> like the present to educate people. I don?t see any compelling reason
> why the standard names of the CF group should differ from the standard
> names of constants, units and uncertainty by the National Institute of
> Standards and Technology (NIST), or the UK equivalent of NIST, with
> definitions supported by the International System of Units (SI). For
> that reason, and despite what the convention of usage is in the CF
> program, I can?t support the usage of ?radiative_flux? for irradiance,
> because the units are simply incorrect.
>
> I note that the SI system, which has an international governing
> authority, ?/modifies the SI as necessary //to reflect the latest
> advances in science and technology/?
> (http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/international.html).
> Surely, conventions can change since constants certainly have!
>
> Therefore, I support these name possibilities (with or without the
> _at_1au suffix, as this can be adequately explained in the
> definition). II highly favor the first pair:
>
> solar_irradiance
> solar_irradiance_per_unit_wavelength
>
> solar_radiative_flux_density
> solar_radiative_flux_density_per_unit_wavelength
>
> Best regards,
> Odele Coddington
>
> From: Judith Lean <judith.lean at nrl.navy.mil
> <mailto:judith.lean at nrl.navy.mil>>
> Date: Friday, May 15, 2015 at 9:00 AM
> To: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk
> <mailto:j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>>, Jim Biard <jbiard at cicsnc.org
> <mailto:jbiard at cicsnc.org>>
> Cc: "alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk <mailto:alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk>"
> <alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk <mailto:alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk>>,
> "cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu <mailto:cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>"
> <cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu <mailto:cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>>, Odele
> Coddington <odele.coddington at lasp.colorado.edu
> <mailto:odele.coddington at lasp.colorado.edu>>, Peter Pilewskie
> <Peter.Pilewskie at lasp.colorado.edu
> <mailto:Peter.Pilewskie at lasp.colorado.edu>>, Daniel Wunder - NOAA
> Affiliate <daniel.wunder at noaa.gov <mailto:daniel.wunder at noaa.gov>>,
> "philip.jones at noaa.gov <mailto:philip.jones at noaa.gov>"
> <philip.jones at noaa.gov <mailto:philip.jones at noaa.gov>>
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI
>
> Dear Jonathan and JIm,
>
> I guess the argument favoring Jonathan?s terminology is that the
> public/non-experts will understand solar radiative flux (density) more
> readily than they will know what irradiance means?
> I actually find this myself when speaking with reporters and giving
> public lectures, for example - they prefer not to use the word
> irradiance since they - nor their audience - are familiar with tit.
> Solar radiation or brightness conveys more meaning to them, and I do
> tend to use these words more than irradiance.
>
> Having said that - theres no time like the present to educate people.
> Hence, I am happy with either of these ?common? names. Thanks to you
> both for ?designing?them for us.
>
> Judith
> ps
> Odele - what do you think? ..you?re the keeper of the CDR!
> Dan and Phil- from a NOAA perspective do you have a preference?
>
>
>> On May 15, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Peter Pilewskie
>> <Peter.Pilewskie at lasp.colorado.edu
>> <mailto:Peter.Pilewskie at lasp.colorado.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> I prefer irradiance. This is the solar */irradiance/* climate data
>> record, after all!
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> On May 15, 2015, at 8:20 AM, "Jonathan Gregory"
>> <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk <mailto:j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Judith and Jim
>>>
>>> Thanks for sticking with this process, Judith, though it may be hard
>>> work.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your ideas, Jim. I largely agree with your arguments and
>>> so largely
>>> reach the same conclusions. There are two points on which we differ.
>>>
>>> * I prefer radiative_flux[_density] to irradiance because they mean
>>> the same,
>>> essentially, as far as I can see, so it's better to use a phrase we
>>> already
>>> have, for consistency. If we use a different one it might cause
>>> people to
>>> suppose it's a different quantity. We do have standard_names for
>>> spherical_
>>> irradiance, but that's not the same thing, and radiance is different
>>> too -
>>> it has different physical dimensions.
>>>
>>> * I didn't suggest _at_1au (or something like it) because it looks
>>> like a
>>> coordinate, and we don't put coordinates in standard names. But, now
>>> I say
>>> that, I wonder whether we should actually treat it as a coordinate.
>>> Could we
>>> not simply say, in the definition, that this quantity applies at a
>>> distance of
>>> one astronomical unit from the sun by default, but if a different
>>> distance is
>>> intended, a coordinate variable of distance_from_sun (for instance -
>>> we need a
>>> new standard name for it) should be supplied. That's a CF-like
>>> treatment.
>>>
>>> Best wishes
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>
--
CICS-NC <http://www.cicsnc.org/> Visit us on
Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/cicsnc> *Jim Biard*
*Research Scholar*
Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC <http://cicsnc.org/>
North Carolina State University <http://ncsu.edu/>
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information <http://ncdc.noaa.gov/>
/formerly NOAA?s National Climatic Data Center/
151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801
e: jbiard at cicsnc.org <mailto:jbiard at cicsnc.org>
o: +1 828 271 4900
/We will be updating our social media soon. Follow our current Facebook
(NOAA National Climatic Data Center
<https://www.facebook.com/NOAANationalClimaticDataCenter> and NOAA
National Oceanographic Data Center <https://www.facebook.com/noaa.nodc>)
and Twitter (_at_NOAANCDC <https://twitter.com/NOAANCDC> and @NOAAOceanData
<https://twitter.com/NOAAOceanData>) accounts for the latest information./
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20150518/f7add34a/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CicsLogoTiny.png
Type: image/png
Size: 15784 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20150518/f7add34a/attachment-0001.png>
Received on Mon May 18 2015 - 08:48:03 BST
