[expatpat]

Yes, rough order-of-magnitude is clearly better than a wild-assed-guess.

As a scientist who has often used modeling in research, I concur that models have to be regarded with great suspicion -- unless there is LOTS of broad empirical data to back it up. It reminds me of the old saying about Magnetohydrodynamics calculations:

"It takes a genius to get computational results from these equations -- and a fool to believe them."

[AFPhys]

As a scientist who has often used modeling in research, I concur that models have to be regarded with great suspicion -- unless there is LOTS of broad empirical data to back it up. It reminds me of the old saying about Magnetohydrodynamics calculations:

"It takes a genius to get computational results from these equations -- and a fool to believe them."
---<>---<>---<>---<>---<>---

And MHD of any earthborne system is child's play when compared with the vastly greater complexity of global climate/ weather. Even the Sun is more uniform and is probably more calculable than Earth, due to the Earth's continents and diverse terrain and diverse components.

By the way... is MHD of any use in describing auroras?

[MosesKnows]

Perhaps the scientist uses a ROM and the engineer uses a WAG.

The Difference Between an Engineer and a Scientist

---

An engineering student asked his professor the difference between an engineer and a scientist. The professor explained it this way.

Ask a scientist and an engineer the following question. Imagine you are on a bus and seated exactly nine feet away beckons a beautiful naked lady.

How many bus stops will it take you to reach the beautiful naked lady if the distance between you is decreased by exactly one-half at each bus stop?

The scientist quickly answered that an infinite number of stops would not permit you to reach the beautiful naked lady because the distance is only decreased by half at each stop.

The engineer answered that after about ten stops you will be close enough for all practical purposes