Stefan,
For HSE it is up to the user to apply this "fine tuning" or not. This including
to include adding call of the HSE method in OEM iterations, to make sure that HSE is
maintained after an iteration. The VMR rescaling should also be included in the iteration
agenda, if the retrieval can c
Hej igen,
> Yes, this puts some weight on the user. Hydrostatic equilibrium (HSE) is a
> similar case. Input profiles do not always fulfil HSE (this is the case for
> Fascod, if not a mater of geopotential vs geometric altitudes?).
Could this for Fascod also be due to the VMR definition, perhap
Hi again,
Great that we agree on the problem. OK, let's keep the present
definition of VMR (that it refers to sum of all gases, not just
"constant" ones).
We should then for sure introduce a rescaling method (or maybe several).
I expressed myself poorly, I rather meant that introducing such
> It seems a bit weird to me to use this definition at the (low) level of the
> absorption routines. Perhaps one solutions would be to have an option for
> this behaviour when ingesting concentration profile data? Perhaps by >
> passing in a list of species that should be considered as not addin
Dear Stuart,
yes, exactly, thanks for pointing this out. :-) I had completely forgotten
about this.
This problem is related but slightly different: The VMR profile that we get as
input may be based on the convention that x = p_species/p_dry, rather than
p_species/p_total.
I just quickly check
Hej,
> With our present definition of VMRs, we agree on that having 78% N2, 21% O2
> and e.g. 3% H2O is unphysical? That with a lot of H2O (or any other non-fixed
> gas) the standard values of the fixed gases should be scaled downwards. In
> the example above, with 0.97. Do you agree?
Yes, I a
Hej,
No time for writing a lot. Right now just want to make a basic check of
our understanding.
With our present definition of VMRs, we agree on that having 78% N2, 21%
O2 and e.g. 3% H2O is unphysical? That with a lot of H2O (or any other
non-fixed gas) the standard values of the fixed gase
Patrick,
I think it doesn't make sense to switch to this in ARTS. In fact, I don't
think it makes sense to use it at at all unless you want a fixed
low-altitude model.
It does make a lot of sense to provide some level of automation to take
care of the adjustments for fixed low-altitude models, b
Hej Patrick!
It seems a bit weird to me to use this definition at the (low) level of the
absorption routines. Perhaps one solutions would be to have an option for this
behaviour when ingesting concentration profile data? Perhaps by passing in a
list of species that should be considered as not a
