• crazy out today

    From Mark J cleary@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jul 29 12:54:44 2025
    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.
    --
    Deacon Mark

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Jul 29 14:07:48 2025
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before >sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Merriman@21:1/5 to Catrike Ryder on Tue Jul 29 19:43:53 2025
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren’t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30’s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?B?Y3ljbGludG9t?=@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jul 29 19:52:16 2025
    On Tue Jul 29 12:54:44 2025 Mark J cleary wrote:
    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.




    Here is was below normal temoperatures. I think that the entire Pacific coast is that way. Right now I have to tzke s hot hower to warm up enough to go to lunch.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to Roger Merriman on Tue Jul 29 17:23:16 2025
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before >>> sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out >>> to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything >>> but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren�t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30�s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) whose route >is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where >comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Merriman@21:1/5 to Catrike Ryder on Tue Jul 29 22:22:41 2025
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before >>>> sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out >>>> to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and >>>> feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything >>>> but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren’t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30’s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) whose route >> is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked temperatures much above 25c and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn’t the best cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure?

    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I suspected would be cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to Roger Merriman on Tue Jul 29 18:48:25 2025
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before >>>>> sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out >>>>> to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes. >>>>> Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the >>>>> stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and >>>>> feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything >>>>> but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools >>>> off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago, >>> when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) whose route >>> is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin shows a peak >>> of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at 10c as I left >>> at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I�ve never liked temperatures much above 25c >and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at 5:45am was >at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30�s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn�t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn�t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure?

    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I suspected would be >cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not
    done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low
    humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Catrike Ryder on Tue Jul 29 18:55:43 2025
    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before >>>>>> sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out >>>>>> to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes. >>>>>> Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the >>>>>> stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind >>>>>> mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and >>>>>> feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything >>>>>> but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy >>>>>> harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools >>>>> off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago, >>>> when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by >>>> 11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree >>>> cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin shows a peak >>>> of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at 10c as I left >>>> at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked temperatures much above 25c >> and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at 5:45am was >> at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn’t the best >> cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure?

    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I suspected would be >> cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not
    done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low
    humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to AMuzi on Wed Jul 30 03:12:05 2025
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes. >>>>>>> Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the >>>>>>> stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind >>>>>>> mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and >>>>>>> feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy >>>>>>> harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools >>>>>> off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago, >>>>> when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by >>>>> 11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree >>>>> cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin shows a peak >>>>> of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at 10c as I left >>>>> at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do >>>> that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I�ve never liked temperatures much above 25c >>> and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at 5:45am was >>> at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the >>> mid 30�s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn�t the best >>> cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn�t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure?

    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I suspected would be >>> cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not
    done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low
    humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't.

    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's
    80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to Catrike Ryder on Wed Jul 30 15:43:14 2025
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes. >>>>>>>> Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the >>>>>>>> stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind >>>>>>>> mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and >>>>>>>> feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy >>>>>>>> harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools >>>>>>> off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago, >>>>>> when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by >>>>>> 11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast)
    whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree >>>>>> cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where >>>>>> comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do >>>>> that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the >>>> night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the >>>> mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn’t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even at night? And I >>>> guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure?

    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not
    done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low
    humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't.

    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's
    80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10.

    96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has
    easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England
    over the past 25 years or so.

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Fri Aug 1 05:16:30 2025
    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes. >>>>>>>>> Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the >>>>>>>>> stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind >>>>>>>>> mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy >>>>>>>>> harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools >>>>>>>> off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by >>>>>>> 11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast)
    whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree >>>>>>> cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where >>>>>>> comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do >>>>>> that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the >>>>> night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the >>>>> mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn’t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even at night? And I >>>>> guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure?

    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not
    done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low
    humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't.

    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's
    80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10.

    96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has
    easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England
    over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this weather.I
    rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back yesterday
    afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said it was 93
    with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to zen cycle on Fri Aug 1 14:17:50 2025
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80
    minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon
    today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes. >>>>>>>>>> Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the >>>>>>>>>> stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind >>>>>>>>>> mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through
    about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy >>>>>>>>>> harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin
    shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at
    10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where >>>>>>>> comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do >>>>>>> that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the >>>>>> night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at
    5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the >>>>>> mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn’t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even at night? And I >>>>>> guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure?

    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I
    suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over >>>>> 70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not
    done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low
    humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't.

    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's
    80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10.
    96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has
    easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England
    over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back
    yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said
    it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.

    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that
    some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty depressing.

    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.

    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather.

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Fri Aug 1 14:27:41 2025
    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>
    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon
    today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind >>>>>>>>>>> mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy >>>>>>>>>>> harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at
    10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where >>>>>>>>> comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do >>>>>>>> that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the >>>>>>> night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn’t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure?

    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I
    suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over >>>>>> 70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not >>>>>> done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low
    humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't.

    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's
    80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10.
    96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has
    easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England
    over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back
    yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said
    it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.

    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that
    some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty depressing.

    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.

    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather.



    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also
    had a cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective: https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they
    were in the Midwest.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to AMuzi on Fri Aug 1 21:47:14 2025
    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>
    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon >>>>>>>>>>>> today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at >>>>>>>>>> 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where >>>>>>>>>> comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the >>>>>>>> night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn’t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure? >>>>>>>>
    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I
    suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over >>>>>>> 70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not >>>>>>> done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low
    humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't.

    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's >>>>> 80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10.
    96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has
    easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England >>>> over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back
    yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said
    it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.
    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass
    with
    temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that
    some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty
    depressing.
    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I
    don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.
    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi
    Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot
    weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather.



    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a
    cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective: https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the
    Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sat Aug 2 05:50:22 2025
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>
    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon >>>>>>>>>>>>> today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at >>>>>>>>>>> 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where >>>>>>>>>>> comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I�ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30�s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn�t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn�t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure? >>>>>>>>>
    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I
    suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over >>>>>>>> 70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not >>>>>>>> done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low >>>>>>>> humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't.

    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's >>>>>> 80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10.
    96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has >>>>> easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England >>>>> over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back
    yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said >>>> it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.
    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass
    with
    temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that
    some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty
    depressing.
    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I
    don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.
    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi
    Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot >>> weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather.



    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a
    cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher >than I would have guessed.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the
    Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Merriman@21:1/5 to Catrike Ryder on Sat Aug 2 11:07:45 2025
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>
    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon >>>>>>>>>>>>>> today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at >>>>>>>>>>>> 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn’t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure? >>>>>>>>>>
    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I
    suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over >>>>>>>>> 70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not >>>>>>>>> done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low >>>>>>>>> humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't. >>>>>>>
    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's >>>>>>> 80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10. >>>>>> 96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has >>>>>> easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England >>>>>> over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back
    yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said >>>>> it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.
    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass
    with
    temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that >>>> some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty >>>> depressing.
    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I
    don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.
    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi
    Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot >>>> weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather.



    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a
    cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher >> than I would have guessed.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the
    Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been seen recently: >>
    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?

    I believe will heat back up to mid 20’s next week, having a rest day today and weather permitting ie no thunderstorms will take the MTB to the Sandy woods, Sunday/Monday as the gravel bike is being built back up.

    Roger Merriman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sat Aug 2 15:33:31 2025
    On Sat, 02 Aug 2025 15:25:59 -0400, Catrike Ryder
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2 Aug 2025 11:07:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I?ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30?s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn?t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn?t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure? >>>>>>>>>>>>
    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I >>>>>>>>>>>> suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not >>>>>>>>>>> done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low >>>>>>>>>>> humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late >>>>>>>>>> afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't. >>>>>>>>>
    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's >>>>>>>>> 80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10. >>>>>>>> 96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has >>>>>>>> easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England
    over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back >>>>>>> yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said >>>>>>> it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.
    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass >>>>>> with
    temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that >>>>>> some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty >>>>>> depressing.
    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I
    don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.
    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi
    Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot >>>>>> weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather. >>>>>>


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a
    cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher >>>> than I would have guessed.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?

    I believe will heat back up to mid 20�s next week, having a rest day today >>and weather permitting ie no thunderstorms will take the MTB to the Sandy >>woods, Sunday/Monday as the gravel bike is being built back up.

    Roger Merriman

    The weather programs said the high today was 91f, and my Gammon said
    it was 96 riding on the hot asphalt. Lucky I had plenty of water along
    since I came across a couple of young hikers who had run out of water
    with two and a half miles to where they could get water. They flagged
    me down and asked if I had any spare water... and I did. They poured
    the contents of my full 24 oz bottle in their canteen. I still had a
    half bottle for my last two and a half miles. In this hot weather
    there's no such thing as too much water.

    Correction:
    "my Garmin"

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to Roger Merriman on Sat Aug 2 15:25:59 2025
    On 2 Aug 2025 11:07:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at >>>>>>>>>>>>> 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I?ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30?s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn?t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn?t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure? >>>>>>>>>>>
    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I >>>>>>>>>>> suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not >>>>>>>>>> done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low >>>>>>>>>> humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late
    afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't. >>>>>>>>
    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's >>>>>>>> 80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10. >>>>>>> 96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has >>>>>>> easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England >>>>>>> over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back
    yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said >>>>>> it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.
    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass
    with
    temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that >>>>> some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty >>>>> depressing.
    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I
    don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.
    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi
    Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot >>>>> weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather. >>>>>


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a
    cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher >>> than I would have guessed.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the
    Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?

    I believe will heat back up to mid 20�s next week, having a rest day today >and weather permitting ie no thunderstorms will take the MTB to the Sandy >woods, Sunday/Monday as the gravel bike is being built back up.

    Roger Merriman

    The weather programs said the high today was 91f, and my Gammon said
    it was 96 riding on the hot asphalt. Lucky I had plenty of water along
    since I came across a couple of young hikers who had run out of water
    with two and a half miles to where they could get water. They flagged
    me down and asked if I had any spare water... and I did. They poured
    the contents of my full 24 oz bottle in their canteen. I still had a
    half bottle for my last two and a half miles. In this hot weather
    there's no such thing as too much water.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mark J cleary@21:1/5 to Catrike Ryder on Sat Aug 2 18:47:18 2025
    On 8/2/2025 2:25 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 2 Aug 2025 11:07:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I?ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30?s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn?t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn?t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure? >>>>>>>>>>>>
    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I >>>>>>>>>>>> suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not >>>>>>>>>>> done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low >>>>>>>>>>> humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late >>>>>>>>>> afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't. >>>>>>>>>
    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's >>>>>>>>> 80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10. >>>>>>>> 96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has >>>>>>>> easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England
    over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back >>>>>>> yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said >>>>>>> it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.
    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass >>>>>> with
    temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that >>>>>> some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty >>>>>> depressing.
    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I
    don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.
    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi
    Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot >>>>>> weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather. >>>>>>


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a
    cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher >>>> than I would have guessed.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?

    I believe will heat back up to mid 20’s next week, having a rest day today >> and weather permitting ie no thunderstorms will take the MTB to the Sandy
    woods, Sunday/Monday as the gravel bike is being built back up.

    Roger Merriman

    The weather programs said the high today was 91f, and my Gammon said
    it was 96 riding on the hot asphalt. Lucky I had plenty of water along
    since I came across a couple of young hikers who had run out of water
    with two and a half miles to where they could get water. They flagged
    me down and asked if I had any spare water... and I did. They poured
    the contents of my full 24 oz bottle in their canteen. I still had a
    half bottle for my last two and a half miles. In this hot weather
    there's no such thing as too much water.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Catrike you are a man of God you have a thirsty person some cold water.
    Been to Florida nought to know it is dangerous without liquids.

    --
    Deacon Mark

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Aug 3 05:40:10 2025
    On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 18:47:18 -0500, Mark J cleary
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/2/2025 2:25 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 2 Aug 2025 11:07:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I?ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>>>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30?s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn?t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn?t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I >>>>>>>>>>>>> suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not
    done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low >>>>>>>>>>>> humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been >>>>>>>>>>> low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early. >>>>>>>>>>> And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late >>>>>>>>>>> afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't. >>>>>>>>>>
    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's
    80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10. >>>>>>>>> 96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has >>>>>>>>> easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England
    over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back >>>>>>>> yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said >>>>>>>> it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.
    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass >>>>>>> with
    temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that >>>>>>> some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty >>>>>>> depressing.
    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I >>>>>>> don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.
    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi
    Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot
    weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather. >>>>>>>


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a >>>>>> cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?

    I believe will heat back up to mid 20�s next week, having a rest day today >>> and weather permitting ie no thunderstorms will take the MTB to the Sandy >>> woods, Sunday/Monday as the gravel bike is being built back up.

    Roger Merriman

    The weather programs said the high today was 91f, and my Gammon said
    it was 96 riding on the hot asphalt. Lucky I had plenty of water along
    since I came across a couple of young hikers who had run out of water
    with two and a half miles to where they could get water. They flagged
    me down and asked if I had any spare water... and I did. They poured
    the contents of my full 24 oz bottle in their canteen. I still had a
    half bottle for my last two and a half miles. In this hot weather
    there's no such thing as too much water.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Catrike you are a man of God you have a thirsty person some cold water.
    Been to Florida nought to know it is dangerous without liquids.

    Nice young couple. They gave me a "God bless you," when I offered
    them the water. Made my day.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Tue Aug 5 08:32:46 2025
    On 8/3/2025 8:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Roger Merriman <[email protected]> writes:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a wee peak in the
    mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed but wasn’t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure? >>>>>>>>>>>>
    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I >>>>>>>>>>>> suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not >>>>>>>>>>> done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low >>>>>>>>>>> humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been
    low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early.
    And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late >>>>>>>>>> afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't. >>>>>>>>>
    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's >>>>>>>>> 80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10. >>>>>>>> 96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has >>>>>>>> easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England
    over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back >>>>>>> yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said >>>>>>> it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.
    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass >>>>>> with
    temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that >>>>>> some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty >>>>>> depressing.
    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I
    don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.
    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi
    Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot >>>>>> weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather. >>>>>>


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a
    cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    we had 13 consecutive weekends of rain this past spring - that was a record.


    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher >>>> than I would have guessed.

    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:

    "The 100-degree recording at Boston Logan International Airport smashed
    the previous July 24 record-high temp of 98 degrees set in 1933. The Hub reached 100 degrees for the first time since last June.

    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus degrees is the 10th
    longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded history. Before
    this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight 90-degree days
    was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/


    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?

    20C is 68F. 1 degree C is 9/5 degree F.

    The formula from celcius to farenheit is c*9/5 + 32 = f


    I believe will heat back up to mid 20’s next week, having a rest day today >> and weather permitting ie no thunderstorms will take the MTB to the Sandy
    woods, Sunday/Monday as the gravel bike is being built back up.

    Roger Merriman



    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to zen cycle on Tue Aug 5 11:58:52 2025
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/3/2025 8:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Roger Merriman <[email protected]> writes:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/1/2025 1:17 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 7/30/2025 3:43 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 18:55:43 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 7/29/2025 5:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 22:22:41 GMT, Roger Merriman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 29 Jul 2025 19:43:53 GMT, Roger Merriman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 12:54:44 -0500, Mark J cleary >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:

    Here in the Midwest it is nasty hot and humid. Started 80 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes before
    sunrise for a bike ride that was ok. However at 12 noon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today I went out
    to mow the grass. Not huge lawn sometimes I can do it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 25 minutes.
    Today it was 50 minutes of struggle. High temps and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lots of rain the
    stuff is thick and hard to get through a
    self-propelled walk behind
    mower. I think it is probably easier to ride a bike 3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> times longer and
    feel better.

    I don't what it is but riding I can generally get through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about anything
    but mowing a lawn I hate. I can do but it mentally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spends my energy
    harder than pushing a 50 mile ride.

    Mid 90s and high humidity in Florida all week. No >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rides until it cools
    off. Hopefully, next week.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Aren?t you a early riser? I did that to ride Stane >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Street few weeks ago,
    when temperatures where going to be in the mid 30?s got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the coast by
    11:30 but as Stane street (Roman road from london to the coast) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose route
    is a mix of paved roads and rooty gravel tracks, has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fairly decent tree
    cover this kept temperatures down.

    Only hot point was a cafe stop to get fluid where the Garmin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shows a peak
    of 36c most of the time was quite a bit cooler, starting at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10c as I left
    at dawn and was 25ish by the end, fortunately the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trains home where
    comfortably aircon.

    Roger Merriman

    My usual four hour rides would have me finish in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 90s. I used to do
    that, but the heat is harder on my these days.

    I absolutely get that, though I’ve never liked
    temperatures much above 25c
    and while UK or at least England gets the blips in the >>>>>>>>>>>>> 30-40 range the
    night temperatures remain normal, hence my ride which started at >>>>>>>>>>>>> 5:45am was
    at that point 10c only getting to 25c at the end. With a >>>>>>>>>>>>> wee peak in the
    mid 30’s at the cafe getting fluid, which was needed >>>>>>>>>>>>> but wasn’t the best
    cafe but it was on route!

    I assume that Florida doesn’t cool down that much even >>>>>>>>>>>>> at night? And I
    guess depending on the trails will depend on the sun exposure? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I did choose that route as it was interesting but also I >>>>>>>>>>>>> suspected would be
    cooler than other options.
    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    Roger Merriman

    The last several mornings it been mid 80s at 0800, with >>>>>>>>>>>> humidity over
    70%. We often go outside to have coffee in the moring, but have not
    done that since we got back from Colorado. Out there, with low >>>>>>>>>>>> humidity, mid 80s was comfortable.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    I've enjoyed a near perfect summer of cycling. It's been >>>>>>>>>>> low 90s in the afternoons but low 70s when I ride early. >>>>>>>>>>> And mild breeze without oppressive humidity so even in late >>>>>>>>>>> afternoon, with the doors open, the bike shop is quite
    comfortable. Haven't used the AC yet this year and likely won't. >>>>>>>>>>
    Our AC has been running almost contantly. This morning, at 0300, it's
    80 degrees outside with light rain. It's forecast to be 88 by 10. >>>>>>>>> 96F here in the afternoon, 62F dew point, so not that bad. This has >>>>>>>>> easily been the hottest and muggiest summer I have spent in New England
    over the past 25 years or so.


    I dunno, I think we've had worse. FWIW, I love riding in this
    weather.I rode the Salem rail trail from Tuscan to derry and back >>>>>>>> yesterday afternoon. When I started the ride at 5 PM Wunderground said >>>>>>>> it was 93 with 40% RH, Not quite Biloxi weather.....nice.
    I'm reasonably sure this year is the first one I have seen in Mass >>>>>>> with
    temperatures over 100F. Memory is unreliable, but it seems to me that >>>>>>> some years it has barely risen over 90F all summer, which I find pretty >>>>>>> depressing.
    I wasn't being sarcastic about a dewpoint of 62F being not bad, I >>>>>>> don't
    mind it. A dewpoint above 70F feels oppressive.
    The world record recorded dewpoint was 95F, in Dhahran, Saudi
    Arabia,
    which has to be life threatening even for those acclimatized to very hot
    weather. I have been to Dhahran in January, had good beach weather. >>>>>>>


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a >>>>>> cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    we had 13 consecutive weekends of rain this past spring - that was a record.

    Does anyone count consecutive Tuesdays with rain? I'll bet records
    could be found there.

    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:

    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    "The 100-degree recording at Boston Logan International Airport
    smashed the previous July 24 record-high temp of 98 degrees set in
    1933. The Hub reached 100 degrees for the first time since last June.

    I also don't pay much attention to the temperature at Logan airport, I
    care about where I am, and the temperature is almost never above 100F.
    One would think Logan would be comparatively cool, being right on the
    water, but I don't really know. Airports have a lot of hot tarmac.

    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus degrees is the 10th
    longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded history. Before
    this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight 90-degree days
    was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/

    Which story tells a person that Boston just does not get a lot of hot
    weather. I spent a number of years in Austin, Texas, where it really is
    hot and humid. I believe their record is over 30 days of consecutive
    100F+ days, which is pretty warm.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been
    seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?
    20C is 68F. 1 degree C is 9/5 degree F.

    The formula from celcius to farenheit is c*9/5 + 32 = f

    Something a person could look up, (look up "Celsius" and "Fahrenheit")
    but not that convenient for approximate conversion. For temperatures
    near room temperature, remember that 68F = 20C, and adding 9 degrees F
    is equivalent to adding 5 degrees C: 77F = 25C, 59F = 15C, 86F = 30C ...

    If it's cold, 32F = 0C is a good place to start. If it's wicked cold,
    -40F = -40C.

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Wed Aug 6 09:55:29 2025
    On 8/5/2025 11:58 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/3/2025 8:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Roger Merriman <[email protected]> writes:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a >>>>>>> cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    we had 13 consecutive weekends of rain this past spring - that was a record.

    Does anyone count consecutive Tuesdays with rain? I'll bet records
    could be found there.

    yup, they're called meteorologists. Weekend weather is of particular
    interest to the vast majority of people over the weather in a tueday,
    given that the vast majority of people count on decent weekend weather
    for outdoor activities (such as cycling). When you're in the office or
    school on a tuesday the weather may be of interest but generally not of
    any consequence (and yes, major storms notwithstanding)


    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:

    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.


    "The 100-degree recording at Boston Logan International Airport
    smashed the previous July 24 record-high temp of 98 degrees set in
    1933. The Hub reached 100 degrees for the first time since last June.

    I also don't pay much attention to the temperature at Logan airport, I
    care about where I am, and the temperature is almost never above 100F.
    One would think Logan would be comparatively cool, being right on the
    water, but I don't really know. Airports have a lot of hot tarmac.

    yes, it's generally warmer inland in the summer, When Boston measures
    100, you can be pretty confident that locations ~ 30 miles inland (such
    as you and I both are) will be warmer.


    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus degrees is the 10th
    longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded history. Before
    this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight 90-degree days
    was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/

    Which story tells a person that Boston just does not get a lot of hot weather. I spent a number of years in Austin, Texas, where it really is
    hot and humid. I believe their record is over 30 days of consecutive
    100F+ days, which is pretty warm.

    That was all a response to your statement "I'm reasonably sure this year
    is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over 100F"

    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.


    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been
    seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?
    20C is 68F. 1 degree C is 9/5 degree F.

    The formula from celcius to farenheit is c*9/5 + 32 = f

    Something a person could look up, (look up "Celsius" and "Fahrenheit")
    but not that convenient for approximate conversion. For temperatures
    near room temperature, remember that 68F = 20C, and adding 9 degrees F
    is equivalent to adding 5 degrees C: 77F = 25C, 59F = 15C, 86F = 30C ...

    If it's cold, 32F = 0C is a good place to start. If it's wicked cold,
    -40F = -40C.


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to zen cycle on Thu Aug 7 16:05:42 2025
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/5/2025 11:58 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/3/2025 8:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Roger Merriman <[email protected]> writes:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a >>>>>>>> cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    we had 13 consecutive weekends of rain this past spring - that was a record.
    Does anyone count consecutive Tuesdays with rain? I'll bet records
    could be found there.

    yup, they're called meteorologists. Weekend weather is of particular
    interest to the vast majority of people over the weather in a tueday,
    given that the vast majority of people count on decent weekend weather
    for outdoor activities (such as cycling). When you're in the office or
    school on a tuesday the weather may be of interest but generally not
    of any consequence (and yes, major storms notwithstanding)


    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a
    bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.

    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it
    really means.

    "The 100-degree recording at Boston Logan International Airport
    smashed the previous July 24 record-high temp of 98 degrees set in
    1933. The Hub reached 100 degrees for the first time since last June.
    I also don't pay much attention to the temperature at Logan airport,
    I
    care about where I am, and the temperature is almost never above 100F.
    One would think Logan would be comparatively cool, being right on the
    water, but I don't really know. Airports have a lot of hot tarmac.

    yes, it's generally warmer inland in the summer, When Boston measures
    100, you can be pretty confident that locations ~ 30 miles inland
    (such as you and I both are) will be warmer.


    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus degrees is the 10th
    longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded history. Before >>> this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight 90-degree days
    was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/
    Which story tells a person that Boston just does not get a lot of
    hot
    weather. I spent a number of years in Austin, Texas, where it really is
    hot and humid. I believe their record is over 30 days of consecutive
    100F+ days, which is pretty warm.

    That was all a response to your statement "I'm reasonably sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over 100F"

    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.

    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been
    seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today. >>>>>> High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?
    20C is 68F. 1 degree C is 9/5 degree F.

    The formula from celcius to farenheit is c*9/5 + 32 = f
    Something a person could look up, (look up "Celsius" and
    "Fahrenheit")
    but not that convenient for approximate conversion. For temperatures
    near room temperature, remember that 68F = 20C, and adding 9 degrees F
    is equivalent to adding 5 degrees C: 77F = 25C, 59F = 15C, 86F = 30C ...
    If it's cold, 32F = 0C is a good place to start. If it's wicked
    cold,
    -40F = -40C.



    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Thu Aug 7 19:38:01 2025
    On 8/7/2025 3:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/5/2025 11:58 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/3/2025 8:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Roger Merriman <[email protected]> writes:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a >>>>>>>>> cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring. >>>>>>>>
    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    we had 13 consecutive weekends of rain this past spring - that was a record.
    Does anyone count consecutive Tuesdays with rain? I'll bet records
    could be found there.

    yup, they're called meteorologists. Weekend weather is of particular
    interest to the vast majority of people over the weather in a tueday,
    given that the vast majority of people count on decent weekend weather
    for outdoor activities (such as cycling). When you're in the office or
    school on a tuesday the weather may be of interest but generally not
    of any consequence (and yes, major storms notwithstanding)


    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a >>>>>>>> bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature over 100. >>>> On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 degrees. on >>>> june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.

    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it
    really means.

    "The 100-degree recording at Boston Logan International Airport
    smashed the previous July 24 record-high temp of 98 degrees set in
    1933. The Hub reached 100 degrees for the first time since last June.
    I also don't pay much attention to the temperature at Logan airport,
    I
    care about where I am, and the temperature is almost never above 100F.
    One would think Logan would be comparatively cool, being right on the
    water, but I don't really know. Airports have a lot of hot tarmac.

    yes, it's generally warmer inland in the summer, When Boston measures
    100, you can be pretty confident that locations ~ 30 miles inland
    (such as you and I both are) will be warmer.


    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus degrees is the 10th
    longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded history. Before >>>> this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight 90-degree days >>>> was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/
    Which story tells a person that Boston just does not get a lot of
    hot
    weather. I spent a number of years in Austin, Texas, where it really is >>> hot and humid. I believe their record is over 30 days of consecutive
    100F+ days, which is pretty warm.

    That was all a response to your statement "I'm reasonably sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over 100F"

    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.

    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>>>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been
    seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today. >>>>>>> High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?
    20C is 68F. 1 degree C is 9/5 degree F.

    The formula from celcius to farenheit is c*9/5 + 32 = f
    Something a person could look up, (look up "Celsius" and
    "Fahrenheit")
    but not that convenient for approximate conversion. For temperatures
    near room temperature, remember that 68F = 20C, and adding 9 degrees F
    is equivalent to adding 5 degrees C: 77F = 25C, 59F = 15C, 86F = 30C ... >>> If it's cold, 32F = 0C is a good place to start. If it's wicked
    cold,
    -40F = -40C.




    using 100F as an arbitrary marker, yes it happens, just not
    every year for people at our latitudes:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/streak-finder?city=madison&type=high&gt=gte&value=100&units=f

    I mentioned earlier that the 1930s were esecially warm in
    the Midwest.

    p.s There are many ways to quantify outliers:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/madison/yearly-days-of-100-degrees

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to AMuzi on Fri Aug 8 13:22:05 2025
    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 3:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/5/2025 11:58 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/3/2025 8:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Roger Merriman <[email protected]> writes:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a >>>>>>>>>> cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring. >>>>>>>>>
    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    we had 13 consecutive weekends of rain this past spring - that
    was a record.
    Does anyone count consecutive Tuesdays with rain? I'll bet records
    could be found there.

    yup, they're called meteorologists. Weekend weather is of particular
    interest to the vast majority of people over the weather in a tueday,
    given that the vast majority of people count on decent weekend weather
    for outdoor activities (such as cycling). When you're in the office or
    school on a tuesday the weather may be of interest but generally not
    of any consequence (and yes, major storms notwithstanding)


    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a >>>>>>>>> bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature over 100. >>>>> On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 degrees. on >>>>> june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it
    really means.

    "The 100-degree recording at Boston Logan International Airport
    smashed the previous July 24 record-high temp of 98 degrees set in
    1933. The Hub reached 100 degrees for the first time since last June. >>>> I also don't pay much attention to the temperature at Logan airport,
    I
    care about where I am, and the temperature is almost never above 100F. >>>> One would think Logan would be comparatively cool, being right on the
    water, but I don't really know. Airports have a lot of hot tarmac.

    yes, it's generally warmer inland in the summer, When Boston measures
    100, you can be pretty confident that locations ~ 30 miles inland
    (such as you and I both are) will be warmer.


    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus degrees is the 10th >>>>> longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded history. Before >>>>> this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight 90-degree days >>>>> was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/
    Which story tells a person that Boston just does not get a lot of
    hot
    weather. I spent a number of years in Austin, Texas, where it really is >>>> hot and humid. I believe their record is over 30 days of consecutive
    100F+ days, which is pretty warm.

    That was all a response to your statement "I'm reasonably sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over 100F"

    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>>>>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been >>>>>>>>> seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/ >>>>>>>>
    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today. >>>>>>>> High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?
    20C is 68F. 1 degree C is 9/5 degree F.

    The formula from celcius to farenheit is c*9/5 + 32 = f
    Something a person could look up, (look up "Celsius" and
    "Fahrenheit")
    but not that convenient for approximate conversion. For temperatures
    near room temperature, remember that 68F = 20C, and adding 9 degrees F >>>> is equivalent to adding 5 degrees C: 77F = 25C, 59F = 15C, 86F = 30C ... >>>> If it's cold, 32F = 0C is a good place to start. If it's wicked
    cold,
    -40F = -40C.




    using 100F as an arbitrary marker, yes it happens, just not every year
    for people at our latitudes:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/streak-finder?city=madison&type=high&gt=gte&value=100&units=f

    I mentioned earlier that the 1930s were esecially warm in the Midwest.

    p.s There are many ways to quantify outliers:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/madison/yearly-days-of-100-degrees

    Cool site. Does it do consecutive rainy Tuesdays?

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Sun Aug 10 06:55:49 2025
    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/5/2025 11:58 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/3/2025 8:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Roger Merriman <[email protected]> writes:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a >>>>>>>>> cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring. >>>>>>>>
    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    we had 13 consecutive weekends of rain this past spring - that was a record.
    Does anyone count consecutive Tuesdays with rain? I'll bet records
    could be found there.

    yup, they're called meteorologists. Weekend weather is of particular
    interest to the vast majority of people over the weather in a tueday,
    given that the vast majority of people count on decent weekend weather
    for outdoor activities (such as cycling). When you're in the office or
    school on a tuesday the weather may be of interest but generally not
    of any consequence (and yes, major storms notwithstanding)


    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a >>>>>>>> bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature over 100. >>>> On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 degrees. on >>>> june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.

    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it
    really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well understood...got it.



    "The 100-degree recording at Boston Logan International Airport
    smashed the previous July 24 record-high temp of 98 degrees set in
    1933. The Hub reached 100 degrees for the first time since last June.
    I also don't pay much attention to the temperature at Logan airport,
    I
    care about where I am, and the temperature is almost never above 100F.
    One would think Logan would be comparatively cool, being right on the
    water, but I don't really know. Airports have a lot of hot tarmac.

    yes, it's generally warmer inland in the summer, When Boston measures
    100, you can be pretty confident that locations ~ 30 miles inland
    (such as you and I both are) will be warmer.


    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus degrees is the 10th
    longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded history. Before >>>> this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight 90-degree days >>>> was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/
    Which story tells a person that Boston just does not get a lot of
    hot
    weather. I spent a number of years in Austin, Texas, where it really is >>> hot and humid. I believe their record is over 30 days of consecutive
    100F+ days, which is pretty warm.

    That was all a response to your statement "I'm reasonably sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over 100F"

    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.

    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in
    new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw includes
    the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this year was
    97 (aka dry bulb).

    The heat index matters, whether you agree with it, or understand it, or
    not.


    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting as they were in the >>>>>>>>> Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which have not been
    seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be cycling early today. >>>>>>> High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?
    20C is 68F. 1 degree C is 9/5 degree F.

    The formula from celcius to farenheit is c*9/5 + 32 = f
    Something a person could look up, (look up "Celsius" and
    "Fahrenheit")
    but not that convenient for approximate conversion. For temperatures
    near room temperature, remember that 68F = 20C, and adding 9 degrees F
    is equivalent to adding 5 degrees C: 77F = 25C, 59F = 15C, 86F = 30C ... >>> If it's cold, 32F = 0C is a good place to start. If it's wicked
    cold,
    -40F = -40C.




    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to zen cycle on Sun Aug 10 09:18:57 2025
    On 8/10/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/5/2025 11:58 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/3/2025 8:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Roger Merriman <[email protected]> writes:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as
    if you also had a
    cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell.  We did have a cool,
    wet spring.

    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-
    states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/
    MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    we had 13 consecutive weekends of rain this past spring
    - that was a record.
    Does anyone count consecutive Tuesdays with rain?  I'll
    bet records
    could be found there.

    yup, they're called meteorologists. Weekend weather is of
    particular
    interest to the vast majority of people over the weather
    in a tueday,
    given that the vast majority of people count on decent
    weekend weather
    for outdoor activities (such as cycling). When you're in
    the office or
    school  on a tuesday the weather may be of interest but
    generally not
    of any consequence (and yes, major storms notwithstanding)


    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those
    highs are a
    bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    We typically have a few days each summer with the
    temperature over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of
    108 degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers
    with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the
    science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.

    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading
    the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or
    what it
    really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.



    "The 100-degree recording at Boston Logan International
    Airport
    smashed the previous July 24 record-high temp of 98
    degrees set in
    1933. The Hub reached 100 degrees for the first time
    since last June.
    I also don't pay much attention to the temperature at
    Logan airport,
    I
    care about where I am, and the temperature is almost
    never above 100F.
    One would think Logan would be comparatively cool, being
    right on the
    water, but I don't really know.  Airports have a lot of
    hot tarmac.

    yes, it's generally warmer inland in the summer, When
    Boston measures
    100, you can be pretty confident that locations ~ 30
    miles inland
    (such as you and I both are) will be warmer.


    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus
    degrees is the 10th
    longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded
    history. Before
    this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight
    90-degree days
    was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-
    hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-
    drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/
    Which story tells a person that Boston just does not get
    a lot of
    hot
    weather.  I spent a number of years in Austin, Texas,
    where it really is
    hot and humid.  I believe their record is over 30 days
    of consecutive
    100F+ days, which is pretty warm.

    That was all a response to your statement "I'm reasonably
    sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with
    temperatures over 100F"

    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.

    I typically check the weather forecast several times a
    day, and this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast
    high over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose
    above 100F, but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins
    any days in new england over 100, including this year. The
    forcast you saw includes the heat index, take that out and
    the hottest day so far this year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The heat index matters, whether you agree with it, or
    understand it, or not.


    I notice that your 1930s were not record setting
    as they were in the
    Midwest.

    There was some heavy weather the likes of which
    have not been
    seen recently:

    https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-1938-
    hurricane/

    Humidity has eased off a bit here, so I'll be
    cycling early today.
    High is predicted to be ony 91.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    Barely 20 here which I guess would be 50/60 ish for you?
    20C is 68F. 1 degree C is 9/5 degree F.

    The formula from celcius to farenheit is c*9/5 + 32 = f
    Something a person could look up, (look up "Celsius" and
    "Fahrenheit")
    but not that convenient for approximate conversion.  For
    temperatures
    near room temperature, remember that 68F = 20C, and
    adding 9 degrees F
    is equivalent to adding 5 degrees C: 77F = 25C, 59F =
    15C, 86F = 30C ...
    If it's cold, 32F = 0C is a good place to start.  If
    it's wicked
    cold,
    -40F = -40C.





    Your last comment is crucially true. Locally, we've had a
    glorious summer- warm but not all that humid with light
    winds. And excellent riding, I might add. Specifically in
    the bike shop, doors open in a big stone building has been
    very pleasant; no AC.

    Looking forward to 80sF, sporadic rain, at or just under
    100% humidity for the next few days. That's quite different.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to zen cycle on Mon Aug 11 10:52:37 2025
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/5/2025 11:58 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/3/2025 8:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    Roger Merriman <[email protected]> writes:

    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri, 01 Aug 2025 21:47:14 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    AMuzi <[email protected]> writes:


    I don't know where you are in MA but it looks as if you also had a >>>>>>>>>> cool spring this year. See last chart on this page:

    Middlesex county near Lowell. We did have a cool, wet spring. >>>>>>>>>
    https://www.easeweather.com/north-america/united-states/massachusetts/suffolk-county/boston/past

    Historical perspective:
    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/MA/Boston/extreme-annual-boston-high-temperature.php

    we had 13 consecutive weekends of rain this past spring - that
    was a record.
    Does anyone count consecutive Tuesdays with rain? I'll bet records
    could be found there.

    yup, they're called meteorologists. Weekend weather is of particular
    interest to the vast majority of people over the weather in a tueday,
    given that the vast majority of people count on decent weekend weather
    for outdoor activities (such as cycling). When you're in the office or
    school on a tuesday the weather may be of interest but generally not
    of any consequence (and yes, major storms notwithstanding)


    My memory is not a reliable guide to climate, those highs are a >>>>>>>>> bit higher
    than I would have guessed.

    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature over 100. >>>>> On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 degrees. on >>>>> june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it
    really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us? I went down the rathole
    last time wind chill temperatures came up, and concluded that the only
    purpose of that measurement was to spice up tv weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation. It's for the rubes.

    "The 100-degree recording at Boston Logan International Airport
    smashed the previous July 24 record-high temp of 98 degrees set in
    1933. The Hub reached 100 degrees for the first time since last June. >>>> I also don't pay much attention to the temperature at Logan airport,
    I
    care about where I am, and the temperature is almost never above 100F. >>>> One would think Logan would be comparatively cool, being right on the
    water, but I don't really know. Airports have a lot of hot tarmac.

    yes, it's generally warmer inland in the summer, When Boston measures
    100, you can be pretty confident that locations ~ 30 miles inland
    (such as you and I both are) will be warmer.


    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus degrees is the 10th >>>>> longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded history. Before >>>>> this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight 90-degree days >>>>> was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/
    Which story tells a person that Boston just does not get a lot of
    hot
    weather. I spent a number of years in Austin, Texas, where it really is >>>> hot and humid. I believe their record is over 30 days of consecutive
    100F+ days, which is pretty warm.

    That was all a response to your statement "I'm reasonably sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over 100F"

    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in
    new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this
    year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must),
    and faux temperature. I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at
    actual temperature and dew point.

    From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025. Actual temperature.

    The heat index matters, whether you agree with it, or understand it,
    or not.

    The heat index is bunk. Just look at the dew point.


    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Wed Aug 13 06:43:39 2025
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature over 100. >>>>>> On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 degrees. on >>>>>> june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has >>>> been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it
    really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?

    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held (absorbed)
    into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air, it makes it
    more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the evaporation of
    water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning the process
    absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack of endothermic
    process is directly quantifiable as heat index. IOW, when its humid,
    your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels hotter. This is sometimes
    called "real feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-like-temperature-mean/


    I went down the rathole
    last time wind chill temperatures came up, and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice up tv weather reports.

    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on two
    nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different - see
    which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me there's no difference.


    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation. It's for the rubes.

    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to
    transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not for
    rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand the laws
    of physics.




    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high over 100F. >>> That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, but it >>> is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in
    new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this
    year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must),
    and faux temperature. I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at actual temperature and dew point.

    From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025. Actual temperature.

    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not, and

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/date/2025-6-25

    Shows a high of 92. There may also be Urban Heat Zone influences in the 'extreme' data. Beside that....

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/yearly-days-of-100-degrees year rank # of days
    2025 7 1
    2024 14 0
    2023 14 0
    2022 14 0
    2021 14 0
    2020 14 0
    2019 14 0
    2018 14 0
    2017 14 0
    2016 14 0
    2015 14 0
    2014 14 0
    2013 14 0
    2012 14 0
    2011 7 1
    2010 14 0
    2009 14 0
    2008 7 1
    2007 7 1
    2006 14 0
    2005 14 0
    2004 14 0
    2003 14 0
    2002 5 2
    2001 14 0
    2000 14 0

    Rank is the placing with the highest number of days in any given year.
    Anything with a 0 is tied for 14th place. The complete table shows no
    days over 100 before 1948. Since the year 2000, there have been 6 days
    in lowell with the temp over 100

    6\25*365 = ~.00066 or .066%

    I reiterate: If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to find
    any days in new england over 100,


    The heat index matters, whether you agree with it, or understand it,
    or not.

    The heat index is bunk. Just look at the dew point.

    The dew point is only relevant at the noted temperature. Dew point is
    based on relative humidity, with is directly correlated to heat index.




    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to zen cycle on Wed Aug 13 07:03:30 2025
    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature
    over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108
    degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has >>>>> been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it
    really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?

    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held (absorbed)
    into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air, it makes it
    more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the evaporation of
    water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning the process
    absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.  IOW, when its humid,
    your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels hotter. This is sometimes
    called "real feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels- like-temperature-mean/


    I went down the rathole
    last time wind chill temperatures came up, and concluded that the only
    purpose of that measurement was to spice up tv weather reports.

    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on two
    nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different - see
    which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me there's no difference.


    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.

    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to
    transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand the laws
    of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's
    products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect
    airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change is
    reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and the
    system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance
    (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance





    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high over
    100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F,
    but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in
    new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this
    year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must),
    and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at
    actual temperature and dew point.

     From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.

    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not, and

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/ date/2025-6-25

    Shows a high of 92. There may also be Urban Heat Zone influences in the 'extreme' data. Beside that....

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/yearly-days-of-100-
    degrees
    year    rank    # of days
    2025     7     1
    2024     14     0
    2023     14     0
    2022     14     0
    2021     14     0
    2020     14     0
    2019     14     0
    2018     14     0
    2017     14     0
    2016     14     0
    2015     14     0
    2014     14     0
    2013     14     0
    2012     14     0
    2011     7     1
    2010     14     0
    2009     14     0
    2008     7     1
    2007     7     1
    2006     14     0
    2005     14     0
    2004     14     0
    2003     14     0
    2002     5     2
    2001     14     0
    2000     14     0

    Rank is the placing with the highest number of days in any given year. Anything with a 0 is tied for 14th place. The complete table shows no
    days over 100 before 1948. Since the year 2000, there have been 6 days
    in lowell with the temp over 100

    6\25*365 = ~.00066 or .066%

    I reiterate:  If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to find
    any days in new england over 100,


    The heat index matters, whether you agree with it, or understand it,
    or not.

    The heat index is bunk.  Just look at the dew point.

    The dew point is only relevant at the noted temperature. Dew point is
    based on relative humidity, with is directly correlated to heat index.





    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to zen cycle on Thu Aug 14 16:08:02 2025
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature
    over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108
    degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has >>>>>> been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it
    really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air,
    it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning
    the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack
    of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.  IOW,
    when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat. My point is that "real feel" is not a well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and
    just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into computing
    "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is dimensionally consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for
    the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature,
    or anything useful except this:

    However, this measurement doesn’t follow one universal formula or
    method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services use
    their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast accuracy for
    ‘feels like’ temp.

    Pretty much says it all. I can read a weather report from 100 or 150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement
    were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today.

    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up,
    and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice
    up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different
    - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived heat
    during hot weather as well. Riding your bicycle when it's hot and humid
    always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the same conditions. People have cooled themselves with fans of various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they made
    hot weather a lot more bearable. When outside in hot muggy weather even
    a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water. If the temperature is near
    or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss. Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is closely analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow),
    and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport. So it's not surprising
    that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy all
    day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel. Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade. Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover? The
    answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature. Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel" isn't
    there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is
    hotter out there than the thermometer claims. Spices up those teevee
    weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to
    transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not
    for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand
    the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change
    is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and
    the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance
    (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance

    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature T
    and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference. The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient. h isn't a constant, it depends on air flow conditions. If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on. It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures. The temperature of the
    air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things
    we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together. For many
    practical applications this approach works well.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything
    clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity. Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside the building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature. The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective resistance,
    and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and
    inversely proportional to the thermal resistance. Using this model we
    can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and
    outs temperatures remain the same.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient temperature. Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F. Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to compute
    or explain anything that way. Except teevee weather presenters.


    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this >>>>> year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high
    over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F,
    but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in >>>> new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this >>>> year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must), >>> and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at >>> actual temperature and dew point.

     From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not,
    and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/
    date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says "Actual:"
    right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown. Probably wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts. This is not
    that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are rare in
    New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one. Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass. Still can't figure out
    what you find to disagree with in that statement.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Fri Aug 15 12:25:21 2025
    On 8/14/2025 3:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature >>>>>>>>> over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108
    degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a >>>>>>>> well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has >>>>>>> been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather >>>>>> report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it >>>>>> really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air,
    it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning
    the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack
    of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.  IOW,
    when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat. My point is that "real feel" is not a well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and
    just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into computing "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is dimensionally consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for
    the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature,
    or anything useful except this:

    However, this measurement doesn’t follow one universal formula or
    method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services use
    their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast accuracy for
    ‘feels like’ temp.

    Pretty much says it all. I can read a weather report from 100 or 150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement
    were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today.

    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up,
    and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice
    up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different
    - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived heat during hot weather as well. Riding your bicycle when it's hot and humid always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the same conditions. People have cooled themselves with fans of various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they made
    hot weather a lot more bearable. When outside in hot muggy weather even
    a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water. If the temperature is near
    or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss. Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is closely analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow),
    and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport. So it's not surprising
    that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy all
    day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel. Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade. Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover? The answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature. Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel" isn't there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is hotter out there than the thermometer claims. Spices up those teevee
    weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to
    transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not
    for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand
    the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's
    products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect
    airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change
    is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and
    the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance
    (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance

    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature T
    and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference. The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient. h isn't a constant, it depends on air flow conditions. If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on. It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures. The temperature of the
    air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things
    we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together. For many practical applications this approach works well.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity. Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside the building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature. The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective resistance,
    and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and inversely proportional to the thermal resistance. Using this model we
    can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and
    outs temperatures remain the same.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient temperature. Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F. Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to compute
    or explain anything that way. Except teevee weather presenters.


    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this >>>>>> year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high
    over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F,
    but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in >>>>> new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this >>>>> year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must), >>>> and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at >>>> actual temperature and dew point.

     From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not,
    and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/
    date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says "Actual:"
    right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown. Probably wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts. This is not
    that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are rare in
    New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one. Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass. Still can't figure out
    what you find to disagree with in that statement.


    Thanks for that; a good overview.
    This from today's paper:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/meteorology/feeling-especially-hot-and-sticky-this-summer-now-there-s-a-metric-for-that/ar-AA1Kw8Nv

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mark J cleary@21:1/5 to Catrike Ryder on Fri Aug 15 13:42:44 2025
    On 8/15/2025 1:18 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 12:25:21 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/14/2025 3:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature >>>>>>>>>>> over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 >>>>>>>>>>> degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a >>>>>>>>>> well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather >>>>>>>> report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it >>>>>>>> really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air, >>>>> it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning >>>>> the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack
    of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.  IOW, >>>>> when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat. My point is that "real feel" is not a >>> well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and
    just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into computing >>> "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is dimensionally >>> consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for
    the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature,
    or anything useful except this:

    However, this measurement doesn’t follow one universal formula or >>> method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services use >>> their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast accuracy for
    ‘feels like’ temp.

    Pretty much says it all. I can read a weather report from 100 or 150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement
    were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today.

    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up, >>>>>> and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice >>>>>> up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different >>>>> - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived heat
    during hot weather as well. Riding your bicycle when it's hot and humid >>> always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the same >>> conditions. People have cooled themselves with fans of various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they made >>> hot weather a lot more bearable. When outside in hot muggy weather even >>> a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water. If the temperature is near >>> or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss.
    Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is closely >>> analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow),
    and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport. So it's not surprising
    that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy all
    day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel. Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade. Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover? The
    answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature. Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel" isn't >>> there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is
    hotter out there than the thermometer claims. Spices up those teevee
    weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an >>>>>> empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to >>>>> transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not >>>>> for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand
    the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's
    products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect >>>> airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change
    is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and
    the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance
    (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance >>>
    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature T
    and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference. The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient. h isn't a constant, it >>> depends on air flow conditions. If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on. It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures. The temperature of the >>> air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things
    we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together. For many
    practical applications this approach works well.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything
    clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity. Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside the >>> building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being
    careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature. The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective resistance, >>> and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and
    inversely proportional to the thermal resistance. Using this model we
    can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and
    outs temperatures remain the same.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient
    temperature. Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F. Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to compute >>> or explain anything that way. Except teevee weather presenters.


    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this >>>>>>>> year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high
    over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, >>>>>>>> but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in >>>>>>> new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this >>>>>>> year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must), >>>>>> and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at
    actual temperature and dew point.

     From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not,
    and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/ >>>>> date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says "Actual:"
    right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown. Probably
    wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts. This is not >>> that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are rare in >>> New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one. Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass. Still can't figure out
    what you find to disagree with in that statement.


    Thanks for that; a good overview.
    This from today's paper:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/meteorology/feeling-especially-hot-and-sticky-this-summer-now-there-s-a-metric-for-that/ar-AA1Kw8Nv

    The heat and the humidity turned me around on my ride today. I was
    ready to ride at 0830, but the Catrike wasn't. The left tire went flat sometime between when I put it in the truck yesterday afternoon and
    this morning. Turns out the Presta valve insert had to be replaced
    before it would hold air... then, out on the trail, I stopped several
    times trying to get the new rear shift cable working just right. At
    1000, with two bottles of water already gone, I turned around and
    headed home. The temperature was 91 F, but the "feels like" temp was
    98.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman
    Massively hot and the frustration beforehand would me enough to bag it I
    am sure.

    --
    Deacon Mark

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to AMuzi on Fri Aug 15 14:18:19 2025
    On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 12:25:21 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/14/2025 3:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature >>>>>>>>>> over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 >>>>>>>>>> degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a >>>>>>>>> well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has >>>>>>>> been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather >>>>>>> report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it >>>>>>> really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air,
    it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning
    the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack
    of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.� IOW,
    when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat. My point is that "real feel" is not a
    well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and
    just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into computing
    "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is dimensionally
    consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for
    the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature,
    or anything useful except this:

    However, this measurement doesn�t follow one universal formula or
    method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services use
    their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast accuracy for >> �feels like� temp.

    Pretty much says it all. I can read a weather report from 100 or 150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement
    were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today.

    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up,
    and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice >>>>> up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different
    - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived heat
    during hot weather as well. Riding your bicycle when it's hot and humid
    always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the same
    conditions. People have cooled themselves with fans of various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they made
    hot weather a lot more bearable. When outside in hot muggy weather even
    a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water. If the temperature is near
    or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss.
    Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is closely
    analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow),
    and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport. So it's not surprising
    that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy all
    day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel. Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade. Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover? The
    answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature. Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel" isn't
    there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is
    hotter out there than the thermometer claims. Spices up those teevee
    weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation.� It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to
    transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not
    for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand
    the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's
    products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect
    airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change
    is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and
    the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance
    (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance

    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature T
    and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference. The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient. h isn't a constant, it
    depends on air flow conditions. If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on. It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures. The temperature of the
    air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things
    we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together. For many
    practical applications this approach works well.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything
    clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity. Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside the
    building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being
    careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature. The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective resistance,
    and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and
    inversely proportional to the thermal resistance. Using this model we
    can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and
    outs temperatures remain the same.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient
    temperature. Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F. Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to compute
    or explain anything that way. Except teevee weather presenters.


    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this >>>>>>> year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high
    over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, >>>>>>> but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in >>>>>> new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this >>>>>> year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must), >>>>> and faux temperature.� I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at >>>>> actual temperature and dew point.

    �From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.� Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not,
    and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/
    date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says "Actual:"
    right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown. Probably
    wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts. This is not
    that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are rare in
    New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one. Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass. Still can't figure out
    what you find to disagree with in that statement.


    Thanks for that; a good overview.
    This from today's paper:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/meteorology/feeling-especially-hot-and-sticky-this-summer-now-there-s-a-metric-for-that/ar-AA1Kw8Nv

    The heat and the humidity turned me around on my ride today. I was
    ready to ride at 0830, but the Catrike wasn't. The left tire went flat
    sometime between when I put it in the truck yesterday afternoon and
    this morning. Turns out the Presta valve insert had to be replaced
    before it would hold air... then, out on the trail, I stopped several
    times trying to get the new rear shift cable working just right. At
    1000, with two bottles of water already gone, I turned around and
    headed home. The temperature was 91 F, but the "feels like" temp was
    98.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Catrike Ryder on Fri Aug 15 13:44:05 2025
    On 8/15/2025 1:18 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 12:25:21 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/14/2025 3:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature >>>>>>>>>>> over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 >>>>>>>>>>> degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a >>>>>>>>>> well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather >>>>>>>> report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it >>>>>>>> really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air, >>>>> it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning >>>>> the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack
    of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.  IOW, >>>>> when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat. My point is that "real feel" is not a >>> well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and
    just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into computing >>> "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is dimensionally >>> consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for
    the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature,
    or anything useful except this:

    However, this measurement doesn’t follow one universal formula or >>> method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services use >>> their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast accuracy for
    ‘feels like’ temp.

    Pretty much says it all. I can read a weather report from 100 or 150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement
    were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today.

    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up, >>>>>> and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice >>>>>> up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different >>>>> - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived heat
    during hot weather as well. Riding your bicycle when it's hot and humid >>> always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the same >>> conditions. People have cooled themselves with fans of various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they made >>> hot weather a lot more bearable. When outside in hot muggy weather even >>> a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water. If the temperature is near >>> or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss.
    Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is closely >>> analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow),
    and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport. So it's not surprising
    that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy all
    day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel. Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade. Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover? The
    answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature. Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel" isn't >>> there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is
    hotter out there than the thermometer claims. Spices up those teevee
    weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an >>>>>> empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to >>>>> transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not >>>>> for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand
    the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's
    products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect >>>> airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change
    is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and
    the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance
    (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance >>>
    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature T
    and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference. The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient. h isn't a constant, it >>> depends on air flow conditions. If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on. It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures. The temperature of the >>> air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things
    we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together. For many
    practical applications this approach works well.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything
    clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity. Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside the >>> building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being
    careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature. The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective resistance, >>> and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and
    inversely proportional to the thermal resistance. Using this model we
    can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and
    outs temperatures remain the same.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient
    temperature. Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F. Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to compute >>> or explain anything that way. Except teevee weather presenters.


    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this >>>>>>>> year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high
    over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, >>>>>>>> but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in >>>>>>> new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this >>>>>>> year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must), >>>>>> and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at
    actual temperature and dew point.

     From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not,
    and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/ >>>>> date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says "Actual:"
    right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown. Probably
    wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts. This is not >>> that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are rare in >>> New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one. Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass. Still can't figure out
    what you find to disagree with in that statement.


    Thanks for that; a good overview.
    This from today's paper:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/meteorology/feeling-especially-hot-and-sticky-this-summer-now-there-s-a-metric-for-that/ar-AA1Kw8Nv

    The heat and the humidity turned me around on my ride today. I was
    ready to ride at 0830, but the Catrike wasn't. The left tire went flat sometime between when I put it in the truck yesterday afternoon and
    this morning. Turns out the Presta valve insert had to be replaced
    before it would hold air... then, out on the trail, I stopped several
    times trying to get the new rear shift cable working just right. At
    1000, with two bottles of water already gone, I turned around and
    headed home. The temperature was 91 F, but the "feels like" temp was
    98.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    My ride today was quite pleasant again just after dawn. This
    year has been just wonderful after our pathetic chilly spring.

    Right now it's 84 here, 58% Rel Hum and with both doors open
    to an 8mph breeze, quite nice. I've been wetsanding with
    interruptions for bicycle repair and not hot at all.

    Nearby in Madison, which is a swamp, people are carping
    about the ambient unpleasantness and in Chicago, which is a
    big swamp, moreso.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mark J cleary@21:1/5 to AMuzi on Fri Aug 15 14:13:15 2025
    On 8/15/2025 1:44 PM, AMuzi wrote:
    On 8/15/2025 1:18 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 12:25:21 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/14/2025 3:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature >>>>>>>>>>>> over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 >>>>>>>>>>>> degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a >>>>>>>>>>> well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on >>>>>>>>>> that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the
    weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it >>>>>>>>> really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air, >>>>>> it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning >>>>>> the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack >>>>>> of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.  IOW, >>>>>> when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat.  My point is that "real feel" is
    not a
    well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and >>>> just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into
    computing
    "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is
    dimensionally
    consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for >>>> the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature, >>>> or anything useful except this:

         However, this measurement doesn’t follow one universal formula or
         method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services >>>> use
         their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast
    accuracy for
         ‘feels like’ temp.

    Pretty much says it all.  I can read a weather report from 100 or 150 >>>> years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement >>>> were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today. >>>>
    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up, >>>>>>> and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice >>>>>>> up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different >>>>>> - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived heat >>>> during hot weather as well.  Riding your bicycle when it's hot and
    humid
    always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the
    same
    conditions.  People have cooled themselves with fans of various types >>>> since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they
    made
    hot weather a lot more bearable.  When outside in hot muggy weather
    even
    a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water.  If the temperature is
    near
    or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss.
    Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is
    closely
    analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow), >>>> and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport.  So it's not surprising >>>> that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy all >>>> day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel.  Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot >>>> warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade.  Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover?  The >>>> answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature.  Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel"
    isn't
    there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is >>>> hotter out there than the thermometer claims.  Spices up those teevee >>>> weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an >>>>>>> empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to >>>>>> transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not >>>>>> for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand >>>>>> the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's >>>>> products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case >>>>> it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect >>>>> airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change >>>>> is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and >>>>> the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance >>>>>    (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the
    resistance

    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature T >>>> and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference.  The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient.  h isn't a
    constant, it
    depends on air flow conditions.  If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on.  It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures.  The temperature of
    the
    air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things >>>> we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together.  For many >>>> practical applications this approach works well.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything >>>> clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity.  Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside
    the
    building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being >>>> careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature.  The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective
    resistance,
    and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and
    inversely proportional to the thermal resistance.  Using this model we >>>> can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and >>>> outs temperatures remain the same.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient
    temperature.  Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F.  Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to
    compute
    or explain anything that way.  Except teevee weather presenters.


    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and >>>>>>>>> this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high >>>>>>>>> over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, >>>>>>>>> but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any >>>>>>>> days in
    new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw >>>>>>>> includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so
    far this
    year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you >>>>>>> must),
    and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux temperature, I >>>>>>> look at
    actual temperature and dew point.

       From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not, >>>>>> and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/ >>>>>> date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/
    date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says "Actual:" >>>> right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown.  Probably
    wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts.  This is
    not
    that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are
    rare in
    New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one.  Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass.  Still can't figure out >>>> what you find to disagree with in that statement.


    Thanks for that; a good overview.
    This from today's paper:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/meteorology/feeling-especially-hot-
    and-sticky-this-summer-now-there-s-a-metric-for-that/ar-AA1Kw8Nv

    The heat and the humidity turned me around on my ride today. I was
    ready to ride at 0830, but the Catrike wasn't. The left tire went flat
    sometime between when I put it in the truck yesterday afternoon and
    this morning. Turns out the Presta valve insert had to be replaced
    before it would hold air...  then, out on the trail, I stopped several
    times trying to get the new rear shift cable working just right. At
    1000, with two bottles of water already gone, I turned around and
    headed home. The temperature was 91 F, but the "feels like" temp was
    98.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    My ride today was quite pleasant again just after dawn. This year has
    been just wonderful after our pathetic chilly spring.

    Right now it's 84 here, 58% Rel Hum and with both doors open to an 8mph breeze, quite nice. I've been wetsanding with interruptions for bicycle repair and not hot at all.

    Nearby in Madison, which is a swamp, people are carping about the
    ambient unpleasantness and in Chicago, which is a big swamp, moreso.

    How far do your ride Andrew? My guess is you are quite sane about distance.

    --
    Deacon Mark

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Catrike Ryder@21:1/5 to AMuzi on Fri Aug 15 15:59:16 2025
    On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 13:44:05 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/15/2025 1:18 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 12:25:21 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/14/2025 3:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature >>>>>>>>>>>> over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 >>>>>>>>>>>> degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a >>>>>>>>>>> well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather >>>>>>>>> report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it >>>>>>>>> really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air, >>>>>> it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning >>>>>> the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack >>>>>> of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.� IOW, >>>>>> when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat. My point is that "real feel" is not a >>>> well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and >>>> just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into computing >>>> "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is dimensionally >>>> consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for >>>> the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature, >>>> or anything useful except this:

    However, this measurement doesn�t follow one universal formula or >>>> method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services use >>>> their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast accuracy for
    �feels like� temp.

    Pretty much says it all. I can read a weather report from 100 or 150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement >>>> were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today. >>>>
    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up, >>>>>>> and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice >>>>>>> up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different >>>>>> - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived heat >>>> during hot weather as well. Riding your bicycle when it's hot and humid >>>> always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the same >>>> conditions. People have cooled themselves with fans of various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they made >>>> hot weather a lot more bearable. When outside in hot muggy weather even >>>> a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water. If the temperature is near >>>> or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss.
    Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is closely >>>> analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow), >>>> and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport. So it's not surprising >>>> that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy all >>>> day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel. Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade. Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover? The >>>> answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature. Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel" isn't >>>> there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is >>>> hotter out there than the thermometer claims. Spices up those teevee
    weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an >>>>>>> empirical heat transfer equation.� It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to >>>>>> transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not >>>>>> for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand >>>>>> the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's >>>>> products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case >>>>> it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect >>>>> airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change >>>>> is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and >>>>> the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance >>>>> (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance >>>>
    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature T >>>> and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference. The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient. h isn't a constant, it >>>> depends on air flow conditions. If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on. It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures. The temperature of the >>>> air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things >>>> we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together. For many
    practical applications this approach works well.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything >>>> clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity. Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside the >>>> building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being >>>> careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature. The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective resistance, >>>> and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and
    inversely proportional to the thermal resistance. Using this model we >>>> can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and >>>> outs temperatures remain the same.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient
    temperature. Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F. Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to compute >>>> or explain anything that way. Except teevee weather presenters.


    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this >>>>>>>>> year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high >>>>>>>>> over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, >>>>>>>>> but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in >>>>>>>> new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw >>>>>>>> includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this >>>>>>>> year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must),
    and faux temperature.� I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at
    actual temperature and dew point.

    �From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.� Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not, >>>>>> and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/ >>>>>> date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says "Actual:" >>>> right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown. Probably
    wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts. This is not >>>> that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are rare in >>>> New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one. Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass. Still can't figure out >>>> what you find to disagree with in that statement.


    Thanks for that; a good overview.
    This from today's paper:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/meteorology/feeling-especially-hot-and-sticky-this-summer-now-there-s-a-metric-for-that/ar-AA1Kw8Nv

    The heat and the humidity turned me around on my ride today. I was
    ready to ride at 0830, but the Catrike wasn't. The left tire went flat
    sometime between when I put it in the truck yesterday afternoon and
    this morning. Turns out the Presta valve insert had to be replaced
    before it would hold air... then, out on the trail, I stopped several
    times trying to get the new rear shift cable working just right. At
    1000, with two bottles of water already gone, I turned around and
    headed home. The temperature was 91 F, but the "feels like" temp was
    98.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    My ride today was quite pleasant again just after dawn. This
    year has been just wonderful after our pathetic chilly spring.

    Right now it's 84 here, 58% Rel Hum and with both doors open
    to an 8mph breeze, quite nice. I've been wetsanding with
    interruptions for bicycle repair and not hot at all.

    Nearby in Madison, which is a swamp, people are carping
    about the ambient unpleasantness and in Chicago, which is a
    big swamp, moreso.

    Days like today I miss Wisconsin, but my Neuropathy doesn't like the
    Winters. The week we spent in Colorado was wonderful, weather wise,
    but I could never live there, either.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Mark J cleary on Fri Aug 15 15:36:04 2025
    On 8/15/2025 2:13 PM, Mark J cleary wrote:
    On 8/15/2025 1:44 PM, AMuzi wrote:
    On 8/15/2025 1:18 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 12:25:21 -0500, AMuzi
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/14/2025 3:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with
    the temperature
    over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat
    index of 108
    degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer
    numbers with a
    well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest
    the science on that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand
    reading the weather
    report has any idea how heat index might be
    calculated, or what it
    really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't
    well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of
    moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of
    moisture in the air,
    it makes it more difficult for your sweat to
    evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction
    (endothermic meaning
    the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as
    well. The lack
    of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as
    heat index.  IOW,
    when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it
    feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity
    doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat.  My point is that
    "real feel" is not a
    well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or
    understanding, and
    just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually
    go into computing
    "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it
    is dimensionally
    consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are
    necessary in order for
    the actual temperature to really feel like the "real
    feel" temperature,
    or anything useful except this:

         However, this measurement doesn’t follow one
    universal formula or
         method. Rather, weather forecasting and
    meteorological services use
         their own approach, creating some discrepancies in
    forecast accuracy for
         ‘feels like’ temp.

    Pretty much says it all.  I can read a weather report
    from 100 or 150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint
    or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and
    methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing
    the measurement
    were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to
    measure today.

    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have
    no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill
    temperatures came up,
    and concluded that the only purpose of that
    measurement was to spice
    up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside
    with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is
    quite different
    - see which one you last longer at, then report back
    and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference
    in perceived heat
    during hot weather as well.  Riding your bicycle when
    it's hot and humid
    always feels cooler than doing the same work on a
    trainer under the same
    conditions.  People have cooled themselves with fans of
    various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became
    available they made
    hot weather a lot more bearable.  When outside in hot
    muggy weather even
    a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we
    reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water.  If the
    temperature is near
    or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal
    gain, not loss.
    Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor
    can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water
    through air) is closely
    analogous to transport of heat, or transport of
    momentum (fluid flow),
    and all three can sometimes be covered using the same
    empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport.  So it's
    not surprising
    that increased wind speed results in significantly
    better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are
    not cloudy all
    day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also
    has a large
    effect on how hot you feel.  Being outdoors in direct
    sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade.  Of
    course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or
    cloud cover?  The
    answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than
    the actual
    temperature.  Not for any physical reason, but because
    "real feel" isn't
    there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes
    that it really is
    hotter out there than the thermometer claims.  Spices
    up those teevee
    weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method
    of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between
    the ability to
    transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air
    flow. It's not
    for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire
    to understand
    the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One
    of my company's
    products is a sensor that is little more than a
    thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current
    creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage
    since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to
    heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One
    application is to detect
    airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow,
    the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the
    resistance change
    is reduced below the hysteresis point of the
    measurement circuit, and
    the system interprets this as airflow above a certain
    CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a
    variable resistance
       (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation
    to the resistance

    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a
    body temperature T
    and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q
    away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference.
    The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient.  h
    isn't a constant, it
    depends on air flow conditions.  If you have laminar
    air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent
    flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product
    depens on.  It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures.  The
    temperature of the
    air and of the body actually vary with position, but to
    simplify things
    we average or "lump" all the related temperatures
    together.  For many
    practical applications this approach works well.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely
    bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just
    wouldn't make anything
    clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation
    in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal
    resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity.  Heat
    transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R
    times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the
    other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we
    again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the
    wall or inside the
    building, we lump the inside temperatures together,
    and, if we're being
    careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like
    the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature.  The overall
    resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive
    resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the
    convective resistance,
    and assume that heat loss is proportional to
    temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient
    temperatur, and
    inversely proportional to the thermal resistance.
    Using this model we
    can say that doubling the R value should halve heat
    loss, if inside and
    outs temperatures remain the same.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and
    compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like"
    outside ambient
    temperature.  Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's
    0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated
    house would be
    35F.  Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person
    would try to compute
    or explain anything that way.  Except teevee weather
    presenters.


    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several
    times a day, and this
    year was the first time that I have ever seen a
    forecast high
    over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never
    rose above 100F,
    but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed
    to fins any days in
    new england over 100, including this year. The
    forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the
    hottest day so far this
    year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature
    (dry bulb if you must),
    and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux
    temperature, I look at
    actual temperature and dew point.

       From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/
    year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry
    bulb or not,
    and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/
    lowell/KMALOWEL100/
    date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-
    andover/KBED/ date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/
    KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully
    says "Actual:"
    right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not
    shown.  Probably
    wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates
    weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more
    localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local
    forecasts.  This is not
    that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple
    times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and
    above are rare in
    New England, in fact I said that this year was the
    first time I could
    recall experiencing one.  Which is one of the reasons I
    claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass.  Still
    can't figure out
    what you find to disagree with in that statement.


    Thanks for that; a good overview.
    This from today's paper:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/meteorology/feeling-
    especially-hot- and-sticky-this-summer-now-there-s-a-
    metric-for-that/ar-AA1Kw8Nv

    The heat and the humidity turned me around on my ride
    today. I was
    ready to ride at 0830, but the Catrike wasn't. The left
    tire went flat
    sometime between when I put it in the truck yesterday
    afternoon and
    this morning. Turns out the Presta valve insert had to be
    replaced
    before it would hold air...  then, out on the trail, I
    stopped several
    times trying to get the new rear shift cable working just
    right. At
    1000, with two bottles of water already gone, I turned
    around and
    headed home. The temperature was 91 F, but the "feels
    like" temp was
    98.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman


    My ride today was quite pleasant again just after dawn.
    This year has been just wonderful after our pathetic
    chilly spring.

    Right now it's 84 here, 58% Rel Hum and with both doors
    open to an 8mph breeze, quite nice. I've been wetsanding
    with interruptions for bicycle repair and not hot at all.

    Nearby in Madison, which is a swamp, people are carping
    about the ambient unpleasantness and in Chicago, which is
    a big swamp, moreso.

    How far do your ride Andrew? My guess is you are quite sane
    about distance.


    Sane? More like wimpy. But it's my morning ritual and makes
    all the rest of the day better.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to AMuzi on Sat Aug 16 10:35:49 2025
    On 8/15/2025 1:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
    On 8/14/2025 3:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature >>>>>>>>>> over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 >>>>>>>>>> degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a >>>>>>>>> well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on
    that has
    been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather >>>>>>> report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it >>>>>>> really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air,
    it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning
    the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack
    of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.  IOW,
    when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat.  My point is that "real feel" is not a
    well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and
    just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into computing
    "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is dimensionally
    consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for
    the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature,
    or anything useful except this:

        However, this measurement doesn’t follow one universal formula or >>     method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services use >>     their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast
    accuracy for
        ‘feels like’ temp.

    Pretty much says it all.  I can read a weather report from 100 or 150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement
    were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today.

    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up,
    and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice >>>>> up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different
    - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived heat
    during hot weather as well.  Riding your bicycle when it's hot and humid
    always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the same
    conditions.  People have cooled themselves with fans of various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they made
    hot weather a lot more bearable.  When outside in hot muggy weather even
    a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water.  If the temperature is near
    or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss.
    Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is closely
    analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow),
    and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport.  So it's not surprising
    that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy all
    day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel.  Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade.  Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover?  The
    answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature.  Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel" isn't
    there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is
    hotter out there than the thermometer claims.  Spices up those teevee
    weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to
    transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not
    for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand
    the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's
    products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect
    airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change
    is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and
    the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance
      (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance

    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature T
    and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference.  The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient.  h isn't a constant, it
    depends on air flow conditions.  If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on.  It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures.  The temperature of the
    air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things
    we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together.  For many
    practical applications this approach works well.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything
    clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity.  Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside the
    building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being
    careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature.  The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective resistance,
    and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and
    inversely proportional to the thermal resistance.  Using this model we
    can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and
    outs temperatures remain the same.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient
    temperature.  Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F.  Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to compute
    or explain anything that way.  Except teevee weather presenters.


    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this >>>>>>> year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high
    over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, >>>>>>> but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any
    days in
    new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far
    this
    year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you
    must),
    and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux temperature, I
    look at
    actual temperature and dew point.

      From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not,
    and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/
    date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/
    date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says "Actual:"
    right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown.  Probably
    wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts.  This is not
    that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are rare in
    New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one.  Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass.  Still can't figure out
    what you find to disagree with in that statement.


    Thanks for that; a good overview.
    This from today's paper:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/meteorology/feeling-especially-hot- and-sticky-this-summer-now-there-s-a-metric-for-that/ar-AA1Kw8Nv


    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Sat Aug 16 10:33:42 2025
    On 8/14/2025 4:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature >>>>>>>>> over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108
    degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a >>>>>>>> well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has >>>>>>> been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather >>>>>> report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it >>>>>> really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air,
    it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning
    the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack
    of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.  IOW,
    when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/

    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat. My point is that "real feel" is not a well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and
    just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.

    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into computing "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is dimensionally consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for
    the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature,
    or anything useful except this:

    However, this measurement doesn’t follow one universal formula or
    method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services use
    their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast accuracy for
    ‘feels like’ temp.

    Pretty much says it all. I can read a weather report from 100 or 150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement
    were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today.

    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    ok, so let's glom onto "real feel" instead of heat index (yes, I brought
    it up as an example of an application of the heat index calculation - a quantifiable metric. No,it wasn't intended to be an example of a
    quantifiable metric in and of itself).


    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up,
    and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice
    up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different
    - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.

    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived heat during hot weather as well. Riding your bicycle when it's hot and humid always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the same conditions. People have cooled themselves with fans of various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they made
    hot weather a lot more bearable. When outside in hot muggy weather even
    a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.

    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water. If the temperature is near
    or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss. Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.

    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is closely analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow),
    and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport. So it's not surprising
    that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.

    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy all
    day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel. Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade. Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.

    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover?

    It actually does, and I regularly hear meterologists make reference to
    solar warming and wind cooling (e.g. "cooler at the coast with the
    seabreeze")

    The
    answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature. Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel" isn't there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is hotter out there than the thermometer claims. Spices up those teevee
    weather reports.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to
    transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not
    for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand
    the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's
    products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect
    airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change
    is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and
    the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance
    (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance

    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature T
    and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference. The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient. h isn't a constant, it depends on air flow conditions. If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    true, but irrelevant to the conversation. FWIW, the test fixture for
    that sensor uses a delamination segment (which I would have mentioned if
    it were relevant).


    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on.

    No, really?

    It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures. The temperature of the
    air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things
    we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together. For many practical applications this approach works well.

    Placement of the sensor in the duct work to avoid laminar flow issues is
    well documented in the product literature, thank you.


    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    yes, there is, it's called heat index, a quantifiable metric, translated
    for general consumption as 'real feel'.


    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity. Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside the building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature. The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.

    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective resistance,
    and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and inversely proportional to the thermal resistance. Using this model we
    can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and
    outs temperatures remain the same.

    Thanks for fundamental shallow dive into thermodynamics, but again,
    irrelevent.


    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient temperature. Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F.

    nice straw man ya got there....

    Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to compute
    or explain anything that way. Except teevee weather presenters.

    oh, right, I hear meteorologists saying "but if your house has R33 it
    will only feel like 35 instead of 0" all the time.

    <eyeroll>

    wow.




    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this >>>>>> year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high
    over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F,
    but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in >>>>> new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this >>>>> year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must), >>>> and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at >>>> actual temperature and dew point.

     From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not,
    and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/
    date/2025-6-25

    See the previous day:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/date/2025-6-24

    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.

    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says "Actual:"
    right above.

    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown. Probably wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts. This is not
    that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.

    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are rare in
    New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one. Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass. Still can't figure out
    what you find to disagree with in that statement.

    Your claim that I took issue with was "I'm reasonably sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over 100F",
    which is demonstrably false. If you have written "that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass" at any point up until now
    in this exchange, i've missed it.




    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeff Liebermann@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sat Aug 16 10:46:54 2025
    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather: <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of
    how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a
    large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day
    also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index " <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index " <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index " <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.


    --
    Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
    PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
    Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Jeff Liebermann on Sun Aug 17 08:33:32 2025
    On 8/16/2025 1:46 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather: <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of
    how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a
    large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day
    also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index" <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index" <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index" <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.



    Exactly, but just to be clear, RealFeel® is legally distinct from "real
    feel".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to Jeff Liebermann on Mon Aug 18 21:15:01 2025
    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather: <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of
    how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a
    large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day
    also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index " <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index " <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index " <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.

    Thanks for looking that up. I wonder if anyone has considered licensing
    those patents?


    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeff Liebermann@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Aug 18 21:07:43 2025
    On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 21:15:01 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of
    how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a
    large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day
    also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.

    Thanks for looking that up. I wonder if anyone has considered licensing >those patents?

    I doubt that anyone would license it. It's much easier to invent a
    new and unique way to measure temperature. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_temperature> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_comfort>

    The real question is what problem are they trying to solve by
    inventing yet another (secret) standard for measuring comfort instead
    of temperature? I suspect it provides "product differentiation". <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation>
    Apparent temperatures, calculated by different algorithms, do not need
    to be superior, more accurate or more useful than other methods. They
    only need to be different so that companies can attach their
    trademarks to the measurement, measuring device, advertising, etc.
    This works very well for producing sales, especially when the typical
    consumer has no idea what they're actually getting along with the
    impressive sounding technology and buzzwords.

    Incidentally, when I look at the NWS forecast for my area, I have it
    plot temperature and heat index (among other things). For example: <https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?w0=t&w1=td&w2=hi&w3u=1&w6=rh&w10u=1&w11u=1&AheadHour=0&Submit=Submit&FcstType=graphical&textField1=37.0813&textField2=-122.093&site=all&unit=0&dd=&bw=>
    The red line is the temperature. The brown line is the heat index.
    You'll need to look at the graph carefully to see any difference
    between the two lines. For tomorrows temperature peak at about 2pm,
    the difference between temperature and heat index is about 1F. Unless
    we get some really radical weather, it's like that for most of the
    year.

    Accuweather knows that temperature and heat index are mostly
    identical. That allows them to offer only RealFeel on their weather
    forecasts. For example: <https://www.accuweather.com/en/us/ben-lomond/95005/hourly-weather-forecast/2154513>
    Notice that each days forecast only shows RealFeel and sometimes
    RealFeel Shade (yet another registered trademark).

    Apparently RealFeel has worked well enough that Accuweather decided to
    contrive some additional weather related metrics. <https://www.accuweather.com/en/press/accuweather-introduces-first-of-its-kind-brightness-index/1594355>

    Seems like turning science back into witchcraft. That's what happened
    to pro-audio when companies began to invent new ways to measure audio characteristics. While in college, I invented a device that would
    measure "ambience" and "presence" which are two such bogus
    measurements. I got as far as getting a product release published in
    one of the trade journals. For many years, I received mail asking for information about my bogus device.



    --
    Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
    PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
    Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Jeff Liebermann on Tue Aug 19 07:17:15 2025
    On 8/19/2025 12:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 21:15:01 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of
    how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a
    large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day
    also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.

    Thanks for looking that up. I wonder if anyone has considered licensing
    those patents?

    I doubt that anyone would license it. It's much easier to invent a
    new and unique way to measure temperature. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_temperature> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_comfort>

    The real question is what problem are they trying to solve by
    inventing yet another (secret) standard for measuring comfort instead
    of temperature? I suspect it provides "product differentiation". <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation>
    Apparent temperatures, calculated by different algorithms, do not need
    to be superior, more accurate or more useful than other methods. They
    only need to be different so that companies can attach their
    trademarks to the measurement, measuring device, advertising, etc.
    This works very well for producing sales, especially when the typical consumer has no idea what they're actually getting along with the
    impressive sounding technology and buzzwords.

    Incidentally, when I look at the NWS forecast for my area, I have it
    plot temperature and heat index (among other things). For example: <https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?w0=t&w1=td&w2=hi&w3u=1&w6=rh&w10u=1&w11u=1&AheadHour=0&Submit=Submit&FcstType=graphical&textField1=37.0813&textField2=-122.093&site=all&unit=0&dd=&bw=>
    The red line is the temperature. The brown line is the heat index.
    You'll need to look at the graph carefully to see any difference
    between the two lines. For tomorrows temperature peak at about 2pm,
    the difference between temperature and heat index is about 1F. Unless
    we get some really radical weather, it's like that for most of the
    year.

    That's because the dry-bulb temp and RH aren't high enough to affect the
    heat index in your area.>
    Accuweather knows that temperature and heat index are mostly
    identical.

    For you... Try Houston: https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?lat=29.7608&lon=-95.3695&unit=0&lg=english&FcstType=graphical


    That allows them to offer only RealFeel on their weather
    forecasts. For example: <https://www.accuweather.com/en/us/ben-lomond/95005/hourly-weather-forecast/2154513>
    Notice that each days forecast only shows RealFeel and sometimes
    RealFeel Shade (yet another registered trademark).

    Apparently RealFeel has worked well enough that Accuweather decided to contrive some additional weather related metrics. <https://www.accuweather.com/en/press/accuweather-introduces-first-of-its-kind-brightness-index/1594355>

    Seems like turning science back into witchcraft. That's what happened
    to pro-audio when companies began to invent new ways to measure audio characteristics. While in college, I invented a device that would
    measure "ambience" and "presence" which are two such bogus
    measurements. I got as far as getting a product release published in
    one of the trade journals. For many years, I received mail asking for information about my bogus device.




    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Merriman@21:1/5 to Jeff Liebermann on Tue Aug 19 16:38:37 2025
    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 21:15:01 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of
    how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a
    large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day
    also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.

    Thanks for looking that up. I wonder if anyone has considered licensing
    those patents?

    I doubt that anyone would license it. It's much easier to invent a
    new and unique way to measure temperature. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_temperature> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_comfort>

    The real question is what problem are they trying to solve by
    inventing yet another (secret) standard for measuring comfort instead
    of temperature? I suspect it provides "product differentiation". <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation>
    Apparent temperatures, calculated by different algorithms, do not need
    to be superior, more accurate or more useful than other methods. They
    only need to be different so that companies can attach their
    trademarks to the measurement, measuring device, advertising, etc.
    This works very well for producing sales, especially when the typical consumer has no idea what they're actually getting along with the
    impressive sounding technology and buzzwords.

    Incidentally, when I look at the NWS forecast for my area, I have it
    plot temperature and heat index (among other things). For example: <https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?w0=t&w1=td&w2=hi&w3u=1&w6=rh&w10u=1&w11u=1&AheadHour=0&Submit=Submit&FcstType=graphical&textField1=37.0813&textField2=-122.093&site=all&unit=0&dd=&bw=>
    The red line is the temperature. The brown line is the heat index.
    You'll need to look at the graph carefully to see any difference
    between the two lines. For tomorrows temperature peak at about 2pm,
    the difference between temperature and heat index is about 1F. Unless
    we get some really radical weather, it's like that for most of the
    year.

    Accuweather knows that temperature and heat index are mostly
    identical. That allows them to offer only RealFeel on their weather forecasts. For example: <https://www.accuweather.com/en/us/ben-lomond/95005/hourly-weather-forecast/2154513>
    Notice that each days forecast only shows RealFeel and sometimes
    RealFeel Shade (yet another registered trademark).

    Apparently RealFeel has worked well enough that Accuweather decided to contrive some additional weather related metrics. <https://www.accuweather.com/en/press/accuweather-introduces-first-of-its-kind-brightness-index/1594355>

    Seems like turning science back into witchcraft. That's what happened
    to pro-audio when companies began to invent new ways to measure audio characteristics. While in college, I invented a device that would
    measure "ambience" and "presence" which are two such bogus
    measurements. I got as far as getting a product release published in
    one of the trade journals. For many years, I received mail asking for information about my bogus device.



    Indeed, the uk Met Office App does have tab that will display temperature
    as “feels like” which today is no different.

    On the whole kinda up to folks to use a bit of common sense, london is mid
    to low 20’s and has been last few days, my folks place is the same temperature but will feel a touch cooler and fresher, plus the weather
    models and apps tend to suck once your in the hills.

    Where the weather is shaped by the land, less so in the summer than winter
    but definitely noticeable, ie turn a corner into areas that don’t see the
    sun or the reverse areas that are always in the sun, during one of the heatwaves my dad walking the dog got to one these areas that was like the
    event horizon and both him and the old dog hesitated and reversed course!

    Roger Merriman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeff Liebermann@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Aug 19 10:25:07 2025
    On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 07:17:15 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/19/2025 12:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 21:15:01 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of
    how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a
    large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day >>>> also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.

    Thanks for looking that up. I wonder if anyone has considered licensing >>> those patents?

    I doubt that anyone would license it. It's much easier to invent a
    new and unique way to measure temperature.
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_temperature>
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_comfort>

    The real question is what problem are they trying to solve by
    inventing yet another (secret) standard for measuring comfort instead
    of temperature? I suspect it provides "product differentiation".
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation>
    Apparent temperatures, calculated by different algorithms, do not need
    to be superior, more accurate or more useful than other methods. They
    only need to be different so that companies can attach their
    trademarks to the measurement, measuring device, advertising, etc.
    This works very well for producing sales, especially when the typical
    consumer has no idea what they're actually getting along with the
    impressive sounding technology and buzzwords.

    Incidentally, when I look at the NWS forecast for my area, I have it
    plot temperature and heat index (among other things). For example:
    <https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?w0=t&w1=td&w2=hi&w3u=1&w6=rh&w10u=1&w11u=1&AheadHour=0&Submit=Submit&FcstType=graphical&textField1=37.0813&textField2=-122.093&site=all&unit=0&dd=&bw=>
    The red line is the temperature. The brown line is the heat index.
    You'll need to look at the graph carefully to see any difference
    between the two lines. For tomorrows temperature peak at about 2pm,
    the difference between temperature and heat index is about 1F. Unless
    we get some really radical weather, it's like that for most of the
    year.

    That's because the dry-bulb temp and RH aren't high enough to affect the
    heat index in your area.>

    True. That's also why I like it here on the US left coast. Since I
    don't want to see a mass migration to my area, please don't tell
    anyone I mentioned that.

    I stand corrected. I've never lived in a high humidity area, where
    the heat index would be important. (Yes, I'm spoiled). If I did, it
    probably would make sense to have some type of "comfort" index. I
    still attribute the multitude of such indexes as product
    differentiation. However, I have a potential solution. Instead of
    all the various "comfort indexes", I propose they are replaced by a
    single, standardized and hopefully easily computed "misery index", so
    that there's no doubt what the index is actually measuring. Patent
    pending.

    Accuweather knows that temperature and heat index are mostly
    identical.

    For you... Try Houston: >https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?lat=29.7608&lon=-95.3695&unit=0&lg=english&FcstType=graphical

    Do people really live in an area where it is simultaneously very hot,
    very humid, drizzling, and the sky is thundering and possibly throwing lightning bolts? Going forward 6 days, Houston seems to like that
    every day. Ok, I'm convinced.


    That allows them to offer only RealFeel on their weather
    forecasts. For example:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/us/ben-lomond/95005/hourly-weather-forecast/2154513>
    Notice that each days forecast only shows RealFeel and sometimes
    RealFeel Shade (yet another registered trademark).

    Apparently RealFeel has worked well enough that Accuweather decided to
    contrive some additional weather related metrics.
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/press/accuweather-introduces-first-of-its-kind-brightness-index/1594355>

    Seems like turning science back into witchcraft. That's what happened
    to pro-audio when companies began to invent new ways to measure audio
    characteristics. While in college, I invented a device that would
    measure "ambience" and "presence" which are two such bogus
    measurements. I got as far as getting a product release published in
    one of the trade journals. For many years, I received mail asking for
    information about my bogus device.



    --
    Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
    PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
    Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Jeff Liebermann on Tue Aug 19 13:45:49 2025
    On 8/19/2025 1:25 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 07:17:15 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/19/2025 12:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 21:15:01 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of >>>>> how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a >>>>> large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day >>>>> also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.

    Thanks for looking that up. I wonder if anyone has considered licensing >>>> those patents?

    I doubt that anyone would license it. It's much easier to invent a
    new and unique way to measure temperature.
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_temperature>
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_comfort>

    The real question is what problem are they trying to solve by
    inventing yet another (secret) standard for measuring comfort instead
    of temperature? I suspect it provides "product differentiation".
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation>
    Apparent temperatures, calculated by different algorithms, do not need
    to be superior, more accurate or more useful than other methods. They
    only need to be different so that companies can attach their
    trademarks to the measurement, measuring device, advertising, etc.
    This works very well for producing sales, especially when the typical
    consumer has no idea what they're actually getting along with the
    impressive sounding technology and buzzwords.

    Incidentally, when I look at the NWS forecast for my area, I have it
    plot temperature and heat index (among other things). For example:
    <https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?w0=t&w1=td&w2=hi&w3u=1&w6=rh&w10u=1&w11u=1&AheadHour=0&Submit=Submit&FcstType=graphical&textField1=37.0813&textField2=-122.093&site=all&unit=0&dd=&bw=>
    The red line is the temperature. The brown line is the heat index.
    You'll need to look at the graph carefully to see any difference
    between the two lines. For tomorrows temperature peak at about 2pm,
    the difference between temperature and heat index is about 1F. Unless
    we get some really radical weather, it's like that for most of the
    year.

    That's because the dry-bulb temp and RH aren't high enough to affect the
    heat index in your area.>

    True. That's also why I like it here on the US left coast. Since I
    don't want to see a mass migration to my area, please don't tell
    anyone I mentioned that.

    I stand corrected. I've never lived in a high humidity area, where
    the heat index would be important. (Yes, I'm spoiled).

    Southern New England is like that for a few weeks every year. And as Mr. Shouman points out, those periods are getting longer. Heat index in
    those days are generally 5 degrees F higher than dry-bulb, in some cases
    as much as ten degrees - still not like Houston.

    If I did, it
    probably would make sense to have some type of "comfort" index. I
    still attribute the multitude of such indexes as product
    differentiation. However, I have a potential solution. Instead of
    all the various "comfort indexes", I propose they are replaced by a
    single, standardized and hopefully easily computed "misery index", so
    that there's no doubt what the index is actually measuring. Patent
    pending.

    Methinks a simple inverse proportionality would be appropriate.


    Accuweather knows that temperature and heat index are mostly
    identical.

    For you... Try Houston:
    https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?lat=29.7608&lon=-95.3695&unit=0&lg=english&FcstType=graphical

    Do people really live in an area where it is simultaneously very hot,
    very humid, drizzling, and the sky is thundering and possibly throwing lightning bolts? Going forward 6 days, Houston seems to like that
    every day. Ok, I'm convinced.

    The entire gulf coast is like that.



    That allows them to offer only RealFeel on their weather
    forecasts. For example:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/us/ben-lomond/95005/hourly-weather-forecast/2154513>
    Notice that each days forecast only shows RealFeel and sometimes
    RealFeel Shade (yet another registered trademark).

    Apparently RealFeel has worked well enough that Accuweather decided to
    contrive some additional weather related metrics.
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/press/accuweather-introduces-first-of-its-kind-brightness-index/1594355>

    Seems like turning science back into witchcraft. That's what happened
    to pro-audio when companies began to invent new ways to measure audio
    characteristics. While in college, I invented a device that would
    measure "ambience" and "presence" which are two such bogus
    measurements. I got as far as getting a product release published in
    one of the trade journals. For many years, I received mail asking for
    information about my bogus device.




    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Jeff Liebermann on Tue Aug 19 12:54:04 2025
    On 8/19/2025 12:25 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 07:17:15 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/19/2025 12:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 21:15:01 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of >>>>> how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a >>>>> large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day >>>>> also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.

    Thanks for looking that up. I wonder if anyone has considered licensing >>>> those patents?

    I doubt that anyone would license it. It's much easier to invent a
    new and unique way to measure temperature.
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_temperature>
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_comfort>

    The real question is what problem are they trying to solve by
    inventing yet another (secret) standard for measuring comfort instead
    of temperature? I suspect it provides "product differentiation".
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation>
    Apparent temperatures, calculated by different algorithms, do not need
    to be superior, more accurate or more useful than other methods. They
    only need to be different so that companies can attach their
    trademarks to the measurement, measuring device, advertising, etc.
    This works very well for producing sales, especially when the typical
    consumer has no idea what they're actually getting along with the
    impressive sounding technology and buzzwords.

    Incidentally, when I look at the NWS forecast for my area, I have it
    plot temperature and heat index (among other things). For example:
    <https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?w0=t&w1=td&w2=hi&w3u=1&w6=rh&w10u=1&w11u=1&AheadHour=0&Submit=Submit&FcstType=graphical&textField1=37.0813&textField2=-122.093&site=all&unit=0&dd=&bw=>
    The red line is the temperature. The brown line is the heat index.
    You'll need to look at the graph carefully to see any difference
    between the two lines. For tomorrows temperature peak at about 2pm,
    the difference between temperature and heat index is about 1F. Unless
    we get some really radical weather, it's like that for most of the
    year.

    That's because the dry-bulb temp and RH aren't high enough to affect the
    heat index in your area.>

    True. That's also why I like it here on the US left coast. Since I
    don't want to see a mass migration to my area, please don't tell
    anyone I mentioned that.

    I stand corrected. I've never lived in a high humidity area, where
    the heat index would be important. (Yes, I'm spoiled). If I did, it probably would make sense to have some type of "comfort" index. I
    still attribute the multitude of such indexes as product
    differentiation. However, I have a potential solution. Instead of
    all the various "comfort indexes", I propose they are replaced by a
    single, standardized and hopefully easily computed "misery index", so
    that there's no doubt what the index is actually measuring. Patent
    pending.

    Accuweather knows that temperature and heat index are mostly
    identical.

    For you... Try Houston:
    https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?lat=29.7608&lon=-95.3695&unit=0&lg=english&FcstType=graphical

    Do people really live in an area where it is simultaneously very hot,
    very humid, drizzling, and the sky is thundering and possibly throwing lightning bolts? Going forward 6 days, Houston seems to like that
    every day. Ok, I'm convinced.


    That allows them to offer only RealFeel on their weather
    forecasts. For example:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/us/ben-lomond/95005/hourly-weather-forecast/2154513>
    Notice that each days forecast only shows RealFeel and sometimes
    RealFeel Shade (yet another registered trademark).

    Apparently RealFeel has worked well enough that Accuweather decided to
    contrive some additional weather related metrics.
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/press/accuweather-introduces-first-of-its-kind-brightness-index/1594355>

    Seems like turning science back into witchcraft. That's what happened
    to pro-audio when companies began to invent new ways to measure audio
    characteristics. While in college, I invented a device that would
    measure "ambience" and "presence" which are two such bogus
    measurements. I got as far as getting a product release published in
    one of the trade journals. For many years, I received mail asking for
    information about my bogus device.




    That's been done, sorta:

    https://www.wunderground.com/article/storms/winter/news/2025-01-24-winter-misery-index-extreme-winter-season-2025

    is an attempt to put numbers on a subjective evaluation for
    winter weather.

    "This is determined by three main factors: the intensity and
    persistence of cold weather, the frequency and amount of
    snowfall and the amount and persistence of snow on the
    ground. The index uses five categories – mild, moderate,
    average, severe and extreme – to rate the severity of winter
    weather in cities across the U.S. over an entire cold
    season. The higher the index, the more persistent snow
    and/or cold you've experienced."

    Then again this oddly dated (34 December, 1956? really?) item:

    https://www.worldgreenbridge.org/page61.html

    makes another attempt, "This shows what the air temperature
    "feels like" by combining the heat index and wind chill on
    one map. "

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeff Liebermann@21:1/5 to AMuzi on Tue Aug 19 12:58:28 2025
    On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 12:54:04 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    That's been done, sorta:

    Thanks. I should have checked if someone had already created a
    "misery index" web page.

    https://www.wunderground.com/article/storms/winter/news/2025-01-24-winter-misery-index-extreme-winter-season-2025

    is an attempt to put numbers on a subjective evaluation for
    winter weather.

    "This is determined by three main factors: the intensity and
    persistence of cold weather, the frequency and amount of
    snowfall and the amount and persistence of snow on the
    ground. The index uses five categories � mild, moderate,
    average, severe and extreme � to rate the severity of winter
    weather in cities across the U.S. over an entire cold
    season. The higher the index, the more persistent snow
    and/or cold you've experienced."

    Well, the "misery index" page was last updated on 6/1/2025 08:20 CDT. <https://mrcc.purdue.edu/research/awssi>
    Either someone forgot to wind up the clock, someone graduated from
    Purdue and abandoned the project, or the government withdrew their
    funding. I couldn't find the AWSSI project on the MRCC home page: <https://mrcc.purdue.edu>
    Fortunately, the other weather pages appear to be updating normally. I
    didn't check every item.

    Incidentally, here's the history for Houston: <https://mrcc.purdue.edu/research/AWSSI/chart?stn=IAHthr>
    which suggests that from mid December through at least June 01,
    Houston is not a good place to be.

    Then again this oddly dated (34 December, 1956? really?) item:

    https://www.worldgreenbridge.org/page61.html

    makes another attempt, "This shows what the air temperature
    "feels like" by combining the heat index and wind chill on
    one map. "

    Same problem as MRCC. I get a date/time of:
    Mon 12/34/56 4:00
    and a blank black box instead of a chart. Methinks it's dead.
    However, the page does provide an interesting list of weather
    parameters that might be useful to others attempting to create their
    own "misery index" chart.

    --
    Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
    PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
    Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to zen cycle on Fri Aug 22 15:58:10 2025
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/14/2025 4:08 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/13/2025 6:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 8/11/2025 10:52 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/7/2025 4:05 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:


    We typically have a few days each summer with the temperature >>>>>>>>>> over 100.
    On June 19, 2024, Boston recorded a high heat index of 108 >>>>>>>>>> degrees. on
    june 24 of 2023 it hit 102. Then in 2022:
    I don't care much about the heat index, I prefer numbers with a >>>>>>>>> well understood physical meaning.

    Heat index is not well-understood? I'd suggest the science on that has >>>>>>>> been pretty well settled for some time now.
    I doubt that more than 1 person in ten thousand reading the weather >>>>>>> report has any idea how heat index might be calculated, or what it >>>>>>> really means.

    Ah, so that you don't understand it means it isn't well
    understood...got it.

    Perhaps you would like to explain it for us?
    Sure. The heat index is based on the amount of moisture held
    (absorbed) into the air. When there is a lot of moisture in the air,
    it makes it more difficult for your sweat to evaporate. Since the
    evaporation of water is an endothermic reaction (endothermic meaning
    the process absorbs heat), your body doesn't cool as well. The lack
    of endothermic process is directly quantifiable as heat index.  IOW,
    when its humid, your sweat doesn't evaporate, so it feels
    hotter. This is sometimes called "real
    feel". https://tempest.earth/resources/what-does-feels-
    like-temperature-mean/
    Neither I nor anyone here has said that humidity doesn't affect heat
    stress or the perception of heat. My point is that "real feel" is not a
    well-defined quantity, does not aid communication or understanding, and
    just makes everyone that uses it a little bit dumber.
    Your site does not explain what physical data actually go into
    computing
    "real feel", or the form of the computation, whether it is dimensionally
    consistent, or, what hypothetical conditions are necessary in order for
    the actual temperature to really feel like the "real feel" temperature,
    or anything useful except this:
    However, this measurement doesn’t follow one universal formula
    or
    method. Rather, weather forecasting and meteorological services use
    their own approach, creating some discrepancies in forecast accuracy for >> ‘feels like’ temp.
    Pretty much says it all. I can read a weather report from 100 or
    150
    years ago, and know that when temperature or dewpoint or barometric
    pressure is reported that, although instruments and methods may be a
    little different from modern practice, the people doing the measurement
    were trying to measure exactly the same thing we try to measure today.
    If I read a "real feel" report from last week I'll have no
    confidence
    that I understand what the person reporting it means.

    ok, so let's glom onto "real feel" instead of heat index (yes, I
    brought it up as an example of an application of the heat index
    calculation - a quantifiable metric. No,it wasn't intended to be an
    example of a quantifiable metric in and of itself).

    I can't tell what point you're trying to make here. You never gave a
    heat index calculation either, or even the barest indication of how to
    do it.

    I went down the rathole last time wind chill temperatures came up,
    and concluded that the only purpose of that measurement was to spice >>>>> up tv weather reports.
    Right, because wind chill and heat index are the same
    thing....<eyeroll>. This winter try going outside with no coat on
    two nights when the temp is the same but the wind is quite different
    - see which one you last longer at, then report back and tell me
    there's no difference.
    Funny thing is that wind speed makes a big difference in perceived
    heat
    during hot weather as well. Riding your bicycle when it's hot and humid
    always feels cooler than doing the same work on a trainer under the same
    conditions. People have cooled themselves with fans of various types
    since time immemorial, and when electric fans became available they made
    hot weather a lot more bearable. When outside in hot muggy weather even
    a slight breeze makes a person feel cooler.
    The reason is simple -- in hot weather, as you say, we reject heat
    almost entirely by the evaporation of water. If the temperature is near
    or above 37C then heat convection gives a net thermal gain, not loss.
    Evaporation is limited by the rate at which water vapor can be
    transported away from the body.
    Under forced convection transport of mass (water through air) is
    closely
    analogous to transport of heat, or transport of momentum (fluid flow),
    and all three can sometimes be covered using the same empirical
    correlations developed for momentum transport. So it's not surprising
    that increased wind speed results in significantly better cooling.
    If you have ever spent any time out where the skies are not cloudy
    all
    day, you'll know that heat transport by radiation also has a large
    effect on how hot you feel. Being outdoors in direct sun feels a lot
    warmer than being under a cloud, or in the shade. Of course this is
    true in the winter as well.
    So, why doesn't "real feel" correct for wind speed or cloud cover?

    It actually does, and I regularly hear meterologists make reference to
    solar warming and wind cooling (e.g. "cooler at the coast with the seabreeze")

    Do they quantify it using RealFeel? Do they say, because of that
    refreshing sea breeze RealFeel is down 2 degrees today? It's possible
    they do, I haven't listened to one in a while.

    The
    answer is simple -- "real feel" has to be higher than the actual
    temperature. Not for any physical reason, but because "real feel" isn't
    there to inform, it's there to tell the weather rubes that it really is
    hotter out there than the thermometer claims. Spices up those teevee
    weather reports.

    I take (a little bit of) that back. This morning the actual local
    temperature according to wunderground.com was 76F, which "felt like"
    75F.

    "Adjusting" the temperature is not a normal method of developing an
    empirical heat transfer equation.  It's for the rubes.
    Actually it is. There is a direct correlation between the ability to
    transfer heat based on both relative humidity and air flow. It's not
    for rubes, it's for people that have an actual desire to understand
    the laws of physics.

    I'll give a real-world quantifiable application - One of my company's
    products is a sensor that is little more than a thermistor which is
    driven by a pulsed current source. This pulsed current creates some
    self-heating which is measurable in terms of voltage since the
    resistance of a thermistor changes with respect to heat* (in out case
    it's a negative temperature coefficient). One application is to detect
    airflow in HVAC systems. When there is enough airflow, the heat
    generated by the thermistor is dissipated such the resistance change
    is reduced below the hysteresis point of the measurement circuit, and
    the system interprets this as airflow above a certain CFM. This is
    real-world quantifiable wind chill.

    *Ohms law, V=IR: given a steady current (I) and a variable resistance
    (R), the voltage will change in direct correlation to the resistance
    *Newton's law of cooling, q = h * (T - Ta): Given a body temperature
    T
    and a far-field ambient temperature Ta the heat flux q away from the
    body is proportional to the temperature difference. The factor h is
    called the convective heat transfer coefficient. h isn't a constant, it
    depends on air flow conditions. If you have laminar air flow it's
    roughly proportional to velocity, if you have turbulent flow it's
    roughly proportional to the square of velocity.

    true, but irrelevant to the conversation. FWIW, the test fixture for
    that sensor uses a delamination segment (which I would have mentioned
    if it were relevant).

    This is the heat transfer relation that your product depens on.

    No, really?

    It
    does have some slightly fictitions temperatures. The temperature of the
    air and of the body actually vary with position, but to simplify things
    we average or "lump" all the related temperatures together. For many
    practical applications this approach works well.

    Placement of the sensor in the duct work to avoid laminar flow issues
    is well documented in the product literature, thank you.

    There isn't anything like a "real feel" completely bogus temperature
    anywhere in the thermal model, because that just wouldn't make anything
    clearer or simpler or more accurate.

    yes, there is, it's called heat index, a quantifiable metric,
    translated for general consumption as 'real feel'.

    About which you haven't quantified a thing, and certainly haven't
    logically connected with the product you brought up.

    To give another example of a thermal model: insulation in a
    building.
    This is specified in terms of R value, R is thermal resistance or
    insulation thickness divided by conductivity. Heat transfer by
    conduction through a wall is roughly proportional to R times the
    temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.
    In order to apply this model to an entire building we again have to
    neglect temperature variation with position along the wall or inside the
    building, we lump the inside temperatures together, and, if we're being
    careful, apply a a convective heat transfer model like the one above
    using the lumped ambient air temperature. The overall resistance is
    just the sum of the convective and conductive resistances in series.
    If we're not being so careful we just neglect the convective
    resistance,
    and assume that heat loss is proportional to temperature difference
    between the building interior and the outside ambient temperatur, and
    inversely proportional to the thermal resistance. Using this model we
    can say that doubling the R value should halve heat loss, if inside and
    outs temperatures remain the same.

    Thanks for fundamental shallow dive into thermodynamics, but again, irrelevent.

    I didn't say a word about thermodynamics, just heat and mass transport.
    If you can't make the distinction you probably don't know much about
    either one.

    What we *don't* do is define a "standard house", and compare it to a
    house with doubled R-value by defining a "feels like" outside ambient
    temperature. Suppose inside it's 70F and outside it's 0F, then the
    "real feel" outside temperatue for the well-insulated house would be
    35F.

    nice straw man ya got there....

    It's as silly as RealFeel, but no sillier. Actual thermal calculations
    are never done using RealFeel-like concepts.

    Obviously that's nonsense, and no sane person would try to compute
    or explain anything that way. Except teevee weather presenters.

    oh, right, I hear meteorologists saying "but if your house has R33 it
    will only feel like 35 instead of 0" all the time.

    <eyeroll>

    wow.




    We usually get at least one day every year over 100.
    I typically check the weather forecast several times a day, and this >>>>>>> year was the first time that I have ever seen a forecast high
    over 100F.
    That does not mean that actual temperature never rose above 100F, >>>>>>> but it
    is an indication that it seldom does.

    If you ignore the heat index you'd be hard pressed to fins any days in >>>>>> new england over 100, including this year. The forcast you saw
    includes the heat index, take that out and the hottest day so far this >>>>>> year was 97 (aka dry bulb).

    The forecast I check has both actual temperature (dry bulb if you must), >>>>> and faux temperature.  I pay no attention to faux temperature, I look at >>>>> actual temperature and dew point.

     From the site Mr. Muzi recently cited:

    https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/lowell/year-2025

    103F on 25 June 2025.  Actual temperature.
    first off, that site doesn't say whether that was dry bulb or not,
    and
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/lowell/KMALOWEL100/
    date/2025-6-25
    See the previous day:
    https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ma/north-andover/KBED/date/2025-6-24
    It clearly shows a max temperature of 100F.
    Here is the month of forecasts for Hanscom Field:
    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6
    The forecast high for 24 June is 100F, and it helpfully says
    "Actual:"
    right above.
    I recalled a forecast high above 100F, which is not shown. Probably
    wunderground.com somehow interpolates/extrapolates weather service
    forecasts like the one for Hanscom field to get more localized
    forecasts, but does not archive all of the local forecasts. This is not
    that surprising, the forecasts are changed multiple times per day,
    almost surely automatically.
    I agree that days with actual temperatures of 100F and above are
    rare in
    New England, in fact I said that this year was the first time I could
    recall experiencing one. Which is one of the reasons I claimed that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass. Still can't figure out
    what you find to disagree with in that statement.

    Your claim that I took issue with was "I'm reasonably sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over
    100F", which is demonstrably false. If you have written "that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass" at any point up until
    now in this exchange, i've missed it.

    Can't recall what was said in a conversation where you are by far the
    loudest one? That must be kinda scary. Look on the bright side, you
    probably just reflexively disagreed without reading.

    I said initially, during a discussion of this summer's weather around
    the northern hemisphere, that this summer *was* unusually hot and muggy
    in Mass.

    When you disagred with that, I said this was the first year in a quarter century spent in Yankee-land that I had seen a forecast of a high over
    100F. The statement was one of what I had seen, I did not claim that
    the actual temperature over the last 25 years had never been above 100F;
    I really don't know.

    At that point you said that Boston Logan had quite a number of high temperatures over 100F recently. I found that quite surprising, and
    doubted my memory. Eventually, after much huffing and squawking it
    developed that you meant that Boston Logan had quite a number of
    *RealFeel* temperatures over 100F, and said that it hardly ever got to
    100F in New England, and that I must have been reading RealFeel instead.

    I think that by now we have agreed that a temperature of 100F was
    reached this summer at Hanscom Field. That seems to have been much more difficult than it should have been. In my opinion it just goes to show
    that RealFeel is not useful; it interferes with communication, it clouds understanding, and it has no redeeming features. In sum, it stands in
    relation to temperature as yellowed trans fatty acids stand to pure
    creamery butter. It is much better avoided.

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to Jeff Liebermann on Fri Aug 22 16:20:03 2025
    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 21:15:01 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of
    how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a
    large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day
    also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.

    Thanks for looking that up. I wonder if anyone has considered licensing >>those patents?

    I doubt that anyone would license it. It's much easier to invent a
    new and unique way to measure temperature. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_temperature> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_comfort>

    The real question is what problem are they trying to solve by
    inventing yet another (secret) standard for measuring comfort instead
    of temperature? I suspect it provides "product differentiation". <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation>
    Apparent temperatures, calculated by different algorithms, do not need
    to be superior, more accurate or more useful than other methods. They
    only need to be different so that companies can attach their
    trademarks to the measurement, measuring device, advertising, etc.
    This works very well for producing sales, especially when the typical consumer has no idea what they're actually getting along with the
    impressive sounding technology and buzzwords.

    That's a reasonable question. I have lived in muggy, humid conditions
    and in dry deserts. In either case it wasn't that hard to connect
    temperature to how hot it felt, although the correlation was a bit
    different for the two. If you live in Houston, you can be fairly sure
    that 100F yesterday will feel a lot like 100F today, RealFeel or no.

    Maybe it's intended for those who live in El Paso, might run over to
    Houston for the weekend, and need to know whether or not to pack the
    tweeds? Or maybe it's for those who live in Salt Lake City, and are
    watching the forecasts because they're thinking of moving to Houston and
    want to know how hot it really is?

    In actual fact humid, muggy heat does not feel like dry, dehydrating
    heat at any set of corresponding temperatures. If you were dropped
    blindfolded into either summertime Houston or El Paso you would have no
    trouble telling the difference, even if the RealFeels happened to be the
    same.

    We live in a wonderful time, when a few dollars will buy anyone an
    accurate thermometer, and a few dollars more will buy a home weather
    station that will tell you the temperature, humidity, barometric
    pressure, wind speed, and phase of the moon. But it can't tell you
    RealFeel, because that's patented, and a license fee of more than $0.01
    per unit would be completely untenable. Actually, of course, one can't
    patent a mathematical expression or an arithmetic computation, but one
    can patent any device that uses a particular computation for a set of
    specified purposes.

    So RealFeel is something you can get from a weather report, but not from
    a device you can run. I guess you could look up the patent disclosures
    and compute it yourself, but who would do that? It also allows people
    in Houston to feel a bit superior to those in El Paso, because their
    RealFeel is higher, even if their temperature is not.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Radey Shouman on Fri Aug 22 16:47:22 2025
    On 8/22/2025 3:58 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    Your claim that I took issue with was "I'm reasonably sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over
    100F", which is demonstrably false. If you have written "that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass" at any point up until
    now in this exchange, i've missed it.

    Can't recall what was said in a conversation where you are by far the
    loudest one?

    IOW - you can't be bothered to read back what you wrote, you simply took
    issue with someone who disagreed with you...got it.

    That must be kinda scary.

    Pointing out someones mistake is scary to you?

    Look on the bright side, you
    probably just reflexively disagreed without reading.

    Sure, that's why I copy pasted exactly what you wrote that was wrong and responded to it.


    I said initially, during a discussion of this summer's weather around
    the northern hemisphere, that this summer *was* unusually hot and muggy
    in Mass.

    When you disagred with that, I said this was the first year in a quarter century spent in Yankee-land that I had seen a forecast of a high over
    100F.

    You have that exactly backwards. The internet never forgets, go do your
    own homework if you don't believe me.


    The statement was one of what I had seen, I did not claim that
    the actual temperature over the last 25 years had never been above 100F;

    True, and I merely pointed out that there _were_ 100 degree days in the
    past 25 years.

    I really don't know.

    You do now.


    At that point you said that Boston Logan had quite a number of high temperatures over 100F recently. I found that quite surprising, and
    doubted my memory. Eventually, after much huffing and squawking it
    developed that you meant that Boston Logan had quite a number of
    *RealFeel* temperatures over 100F, and said that it hardly ever got to
    100F in New England, and that I must have been reading RealFeel instead.

    I think that by now we have agreed that a temperature of 100F was
    reached this summer at Hanscom Field. That seems to have been much more difficult than it should have been. In my opinion it just goes to show
    that RealFeel is not useful; it interferes with communication, it clouds understanding, and it has no redeeming features. In sum, it stands in relation to temperature as yellowed trans fatty acids stand to pure
    creamery butter. It is much better avoided.


    Whatever....feel free to ignore the laws of physics at your own peril

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John B.@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Fri Aug 22 17:53:01 2025
    On Fri, 22 Aug 2025 16:20:03 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 21:15:01 -0400, Radey Shouman
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> writes:

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:35:49 -0400, zen cycle
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    (chomp)

    oh, gee, a quantifiable metric for real feel? who woulda thunk it?

    RealFeel is patented by Accuweather:
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/what-is-the-accuweather-realfeel-temperature/156655>
    <https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/how-we-calculate-real-feel-temperatures/189005>
    "The RealFeel Temperature is protected by two patents which ensure
    that no other index can include temperature and more than one other
    factor, it is the only index which can provide an accurate measure of
    how the weather really feels."

    "Some of the components that are used in the equation are humidity,
    cloud cover, winds, sun intensity and angle of the sun. Humidity is a
    large contributor to determining the RealFeel, but the time of the day >>>> also is important, due to the angle of the sun."


    Accuweather realfeel patents:

    "Determining a REALFEEL seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11402541B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US11397281B2/en>

    "Determining a realfeel seasonal index "
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200333507A1/en>

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor"
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US6768945B2/en> (expired)

    "Method, system, and software for calculating a multi factor
    temperature index"
    <https://patents.google.com/patent/US7251579B2/en> (expired)

    Note that the calculations are different between Summer and Winter.

    Thanks for looking that up. I wonder if anyone has considered licensing >>>those patents?

    I doubt that anyone would license it. It's much easier to invent a
    new and unique way to measure temperature.
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_temperature>
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_comfort>

    The real question is what problem are they trying to solve by
    inventing yet another (secret) standard for measuring comfort instead
    of temperature? I suspect it provides "product differentiation".
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation>
    Apparent temperatures, calculated by different algorithms, do not need
    to be superior, more accurate or more useful than other methods. They
    only need to be different so that companies can attach their
    trademarks to the measurement, measuring device, advertising, etc.
    This works very well for producing sales, especially when the typical
    consumer has no idea what they're actually getting along with the
    impressive sounding technology and buzzwords.

    That's a reasonable question. I have lived in muggy, humid conditions
    and in dry deserts. In either case it wasn't that hard to connect >temperature to how hot it felt, although the correlation was a bit
    different for the two. If you live in Houston, you can be fairly sure
    that 100F yesterday will feel a lot like 100F today, RealFeel or no.

    Maybe it's intended for those who live in El Paso, might run over to
    Houston for the weekend, and need to know whether or not to pack the
    tweeds? Or maybe it's for those who live in Salt Lake City, and are
    watching the forecasts because they're thinking of moving to Houston and
    want to know how hot it really is?

    In actual fact humid, muggy heat does not feel like dry, dehydrating
    heat at any set of corresponding temperatures. If you were dropped >blindfolded into either summertime Houston or El Paso you would have no >trouble telling the difference, even if the RealFeels happened to be the >same.

    We live in a wonderful time, when a few dollars will buy anyone an
    accurate thermometer, and a few dollars more will buy a home weather
    station that will tell you the temperature, humidity, barometric
    pressure, wind speed, and phase of the moon. But it can't tell you
    RealFeel, because that's patented, and a license fee of more than $0.01
    per unit would be completely untenable. Actually, of course, one can't >patent a mathematical expression or an arithmetic computation, but one
    can patent any device that uses a particular computation for a set of >specified purposes.

    So RealFeel is something you can get from a weather report, but not from
    a device you can run. I guess you could look up the patent disclosures
    and compute it yourself, but who would do that? It also allows people
    in Houston to feel a bit superior to those in El Paso, because their
    RealFeel is higher, even if their temperature is not.

    Tell me, do all these amazing tempreture sensing devices take into
    allowence the fact that "Americans" are fat? https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/overweight-obesity
    Nearly 1 in 3 adults (30.7%) are overweight.2
    More than 2 in 5 adults (42.4%) have obesity.2
    About 1 in 11 adults (9.2%) have severe obesity.2

    About 1 in 6 children and adolescents ages 2 to 19 (16.1%) are
    overweight.3
    Almost 1 in 5 children and adolescents ages 2 to 19 (19.3%) have
    obesity.3
    About 1 in 16 children and adolescents ages 2 to 19 (6.1%) have severe
    obesity.

    --
    cheers,

    John B.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Radey Shouman@21:1/5 to zen cycle on Thu Aug 28 20:30:46 2025
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/22/2025 3:58 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
    zen cycle <[email protected]> writes:

    Your claim that I took issue with was "I'm reasonably sure this
    year is the first one I have seen in Mass with temperatures over
    100F", which is demonstrably false. If you have written "that
    this year was unusually hot and muggy in Mass" at any point up until
    now in this exchange, i've missed it.
    Can't recall what was said in a conversation where you are by far
    the
    loudest one?

    IOW - you can't be bothered to read back what you wrote, you simply
    took issue with someone who disagreed with you...got it.

    That must be kinda scary.

    Pointing out someones mistake is scary to you?

    Look on the bright side, you
    probably just reflexively disagreed without reading.

    Sure, that's why I copy pasted exactly what you wrote that was wrong
    and responded to it.

    I said initially, during a discussion of this summer's weather
    around
    the northern hemisphere, that this summer *was* unusually hot and muggy
    in Mass.
    When you disagred with that, I said this was the first year in a
    quarter
    century spent in Yankee-land that I had seen a forecast of a high over
    100F.

    You have that exactly backwards. The internet never forgets, go do
    your own homework if you don't believe me.


    The statement was one of what I had seen, I did not claim that
    the actual temperature over the last 25 years had never been above 100F;

    True, and I merely pointed out that there _were_ 100 degree days in
    the past 25 years.

    I really don't know.

    You do now.

    Here is the link you posted:

    The heat wave of six consecutive days of 90-plus degrees is the 10th
    longest stretch of 90-degree days in Boston’s recorded history. Before
    this last week, the most recent stretch of six straight 90-degree days
    was in the July of 2016."

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/07/24/boston-hits-100-degrees-smashes-record-high-as-heat-wave-drags-on-severe-weather-threat-on-tap/

    In fact it's bogus, the maximum recorded temperature at Logan airport in
    July of 2022 was 99F. There actually were six days above 90F:

    https://www.wunderground.com/calendar/us/ma/east-boston/KBOS/date/2022-7

    Must have been that RealFeel inflation.

    I checked back to 2000 at Hanscom Field, eg:

    https://www.wunderground.com/history/monthly/us/ma/bedford/KBED/date/2025-6

    There were exactly two days >= 100F before this year, in 2010 and 2011.
    Maybe I was on vacation then, or maybe I just forgot. In any case I do
    not recall them, which was all that I claimed.

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)