Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Education Science

NASA Releases Free Global Climate Model Software 224

Posted by samzenpus from the hurricane-in-the-classroom dept.
ink_polaroid writes "NASA has released its Educational Global Climate Model (EdGCM) for high school and university desktop computers. The software incorporates a 3-D climate model developed at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), New York. It wraps complex computer modeling programs with a graphical interface familiar to most PC users."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NASA Releases Free Global Climate Model Software More

NASA Releases Free Global Climate Model Software

Comments Filter:

  • Simulated doomsday? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sjrstory ( 839289 ) * on Thursday January 13, 2005 @01:31AM (#11345805) Homepage
    It would be pretty cool to simulate enviromental doomsday scenarios such as the one seen in the movie The Day after Tomorrow. [thedayaftertomorrow.com]
  • And it does what exactly?

    • Re:And... (Score:3, Funny)

      by Skidge ( 316075 )
      I think it allows your average high school student to control the weather, evil genius style, but with an easy PC interface.
  • Is there a mac version?
    • Yes. Check the links, please.
    • Thanks! Downloading it now!
    • perhaps you should try checking out the site instead of scrambling to get the first post? The software is eviudently primarily for OSX, with a Windows port as an afterthought - sorry, no linux version
    • Yes, there seems to be a Mac version. But does it compile OK on Linux? What about FreeBSD? Solaris?

      There are enough "popular" Unix-alikes out there now, that it ought to be easy enough to create a "one size fits all" tar.gz file. All it needs then is a configure script that picks up on the differences and generates an appropriate Makefile. Bandwidth and HDD space are cheap enough nowadays that the "extra" bits you might have to download won't really matter, and there's nothing to stop diehard fan ty

  • Nice, if the curriculum allowed for it... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 2advanced.net ( 849238 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @01:34AM (#11345826) Homepage

    EdGCM permits teachers and students to explore the fundamentals of climate science utilizing tools identical to those used in major climate research programs. Many simple climate experiments are possible (e.g. How does the sun warm the planet?), but, it is also possible to conduct in-depth investigations of current events, in near real-time, as they are being studied by climate scientists

    That's great. One of my favorite software packages in the world is Nasa's World Wind, but when I tried to show it to my parents (both high school science teachers), the reaction was the same: we don't have time or computers to use this.

    The state of public education (at least in California) is so poor that this is going to be great for college-level students, but much of the target audience will be left out due to budgets and a testing-centric curriculum.

    • Re:Nice, if the curriculum allowed for it... (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I'm sure that no matter how many thousand poor schools there may be, there're a pile of private schools across the globe with rooms full of P4 3.2GHz Dells with Radeon card upgrades who'd be happy to use this to convince the parents of the greatness of their school with the program's flashy graphics.
    • This program looks awesome. I think it just convinced me to take Geophysical Fluid Dynamics (the mathematical study of such things as this) next year even though its a ridiculously rigorous course. So even if NASA doesn't bring technology to market (and they do all the time) they stimulate a desire to learn in people who otherwise would not. And thats gotta be worth something. Maybe they should demand some Department of Education funds for taking over some of their duties (promoting education).
    • That's great. One of my favorite software packages in the world is Nasa's World Wind, but when I tried to show it to my parents (both high school science teachers), the reaction was the same: we don't have time or computers to use this.

      That's sad. If they took the time and found a computer I think their students would be better off. But them I'm a little biased as a developer for World Wind. We should have real time weather from NOAA in the next version.

  • It wraps complex computer modeling programs... (Score:5, Funny)

    by DeVilla ( 4563 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @01:37AM (#11345848)
    ... with a graphical interface familiar to most PC users.

    Is it fsp or rts? Is it multi-player and/or single player? And is there a God mode?

  • Hmm (Score:2)

    by bigberk ( 547360 )
    It wraps complex computer modeling programs with a graphical interface familiar to most PC users.
    This one? [atozed.com]

  • This is great... (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I mean we all have a few unused exaflops of processing power lying around for this kind of thing. And now, with a PC interface!

  • Damn slashdot effect: (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Perdo ( 151843 )
    Post a 65 mb file to slashdot without a .torrent?!?!
  • "Hydrogen Buses In Iceland [slashdot.org]", "Climate Change Doubles Drought Stricken Area [slashdot.org]", this story... WTF? Are you trying to get Slashdotters to take over researcher's jobs, or what?

    "News for Nerds". Okay, I know there is considerable overlap between 'green tech' and /. subjects (and people interested in them), but 1 or 2 of these stories a day is enough, don't you think? Nerd != environmentalist (would be nice, though).

    • Re:Wow - slow down here! (Score:4, Funny)

      by node 3 ( 115640 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @02:17AM (#11346063)
      They are science related topics, which fits the "News for Nerds" part of the masthead.

      For example:

      NASA (space) Releases (verb) Free (adjective) Global Climate Model (science) Software (computers)

      How can that possibly not be appropriate for slashdot?

  • Fossil fuels PREVENT global warming (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Latest science says fossil fuels are good and protect against global warming.
    Here is the story which just hit the wire: [yahoo.com]

    LONDON (Reuters) - Cutting down on fossil fuel pollution could accelerate global warming and help turn parts of Europe into desert by 2100, according to research to be aired on British television on Thursday. "Global Dimming," a BBC Horizon documentary, will describe research suggesting fossil fuel by-products like sulfur dioxide particles reflect the sun's rays, "dimming" temperatures

    • Re:Fossil fuels PREVENT global warming (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Yokaze ( 70883 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @05:27AM (#11346769)
      > Latest science says fossil fuels are good and protect against global warming.

      No, it says the emission of fossil fuel by-products limit the effects of CO2-emissions. Stopping the emission of those by-products will release the full effect of the CO2 emission.

      So, does that mean fossil fuels are good and protect us from global warming, like you concluded?

      No, it means that some by-products are good and momentarily soften the effect of the consumption of fossil fuel.

      It's like saying taking crack is good, because it prevents the signs of withdrawal.

    • Dr Peter Cox (Score:2, Insightful)

      by TapeCutter ( 624760 )
      Dr Cox probably has something to do with this software. This article [nature.com] in Nature seems to fit the overal description of the model the software uses. Some people have used this model to suggest that trees should be cleared so as to stop them becoming a source of CO2 others have used it to suggest he is a stooge. I don't know much about Dr. Cox but it seems he is attacked by the fringe from both sides of Climate politics, normally a sign that someone is at least honest. Your quote directly relates to the "tree"
    • The problem we have is two-fold:
      People can't accept the fact that our environment is not static. Temperature and other climatic effects has varied throughout the centuries way before humans started burning fossile fuel. These historic changes were not subtile either, some being quicker than we see today.

      The other factor is financial. Most governments have their economy very much rooted around taxes and levys on fossile fuels. If the CO2-factor went away, it would be harder to justify taxation, and there wo
    • having seen the effects of acid rain. I direct by product of sulfur dioxcide. I have to disagree with you. I wouldnt' be suprised if this studdy wasn't funded by some big mining operation. bottom line is people generally like the earth with less smog, less lead, and less pollutants over all.
    • Firstly the masking effect of pollution on the suns rays is not new. It was a big concern in the 1970s when some in the press believed science was predicting a new ice age.

      The important part is this sentence:

      " Take away fossil fuel by-products like sulfur dioxide without tackling greenhouse gas emissions"

      But if the source of both is fossil fuels then taking away one will tend to reduce the other.
    • "science" psssh Theory. T h e o r y. This is not science, it is a guess in a field we have hardly begun to understand. People should stop looking for theories that meet their needs and start searching for the truth.

  • self prophecising (Score:5, Funny)

    by zenst ( 558964 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @02:03AM (#11345974) Homepage Journal
    In further news today: 1000's of computer's around the World today began running climate modeling software.

    The Combined heat output from all this extra computer processing is expected to bring most model predictions forward by several years due to the extra heat expended.

    --

    SETI - The project were you can look for life on another planet whilst help kill off the current one quicker. I mean would an `intelligent` form of life be chucking out loads of extra signals wasting resources; Search for dead planets maybe, but intelligent life, HA.
    • I mean would an `intelligent` form of life be chucking out loads of extra signals wasting resources

      Notice how when you speak to someone, people around you can hear. Are you, as an 'intelligent' form of life, actively trying to prevent that "waste of resources"? Same thing with radio waves; it's sometimes easier and more efficent to hit everything than try and direct it exactly where it needs to go.
  • I wish it had the source.

    • Re:FOSS (Score:2, Insightful)

      by TheoMurpse ( 729043 )
      I wonder if you could get the source. NASA part of the US government, right? Well, anything created by the US government is, by law, in the public domain. Wouldn't that include the source code? Also, as long as it's not classified, it should be available under the Freedom of Information Act of 1997 (1997?).

  • I used it! (Score:5, Funny)

    by _ph1ux_ ( 216706 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @02:17AM (#11346058)
    We ARE ALL DoooooooMED!!!
    • The beauty of modeling chaotic systems is that you can get any answer you want. If you are being paid to study global warming, you set it up with variables and parameters about how global warming is supposed to work and let er rip. If you don't get the results you expect, you adjust the model until it works properly.

      The whole nature of chaotic systems is that iterative models cannot be used to predict future events. You can create models that demonstrates a theory, but the model is of little use in pre

      • > The beauty of modeling chaotic systems is that you can get any answer you want.

        The ugliness of chaotic systems is, that people think they hear the word and now think they now everything about it.

        A river is a chaotic system, nonetheless even without a degree in Mathematics, you will be able to estimate quite correctly that a leaf on a river will flow downwards (most of the time) and no butterfly in Australia will change that.

        Yes, chaotic system put some limitations on the predictability, but strangel
    • I'm Quaking in my boots!

  • Not really free (Score:3, Informative)

    by AnuradhaRatnaweera ( 757812 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @02:20AM (#11346081) Homepage
    Would be nice if they had a Linux port. Or if the source code is made freely [gnu.org] available, someone would have written a clone [or hopefully nicer ;-)] UI!
  • Phew! I read "climax control software" first.

  • Kewl! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gordgekko ( 574109 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @02:35AM (#11346136) Homepage
    Use the same inaccurate software global warming hoaxers use to make their claims! Ignore the fact that the software isn't even able to predict cloud cover!

    • Re:Kewl! (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Flaming Foobar ( 597181 )
      Ignore the fact that the software isn't even able to predict cloud cover!

      For the umpteenth time: climate != weather.

      • Re:Kewl! (Score:2)

        by ajs ( 35943 )
        Correct. Weather is only one aspect of our planet's climate. What's interesting about the grandparent's point is that the climate as a whole is a vastly more complex system, so if we can't solve for cloud-cover....

        • Re:Kewl! (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Flaming Foobar ( 597181 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @08:19AM (#11347476)
          Correct. Weather is only one aspect of our planet's climate. What's interesting about the grandparent's point is that the climate as a whole is a vastly more complex system, so if we can't solve for cloud-cover....

          In fact, it's much easier to look at the system as a whole than try to go for extreme detail such as cloud-cover on a very small area, such as a city. We can forecast cloud-covers in a larger scale very accurately. As an analogy, neither do we need to know where every strain of sand is in order to draw a map.

          "Climate is what we expect, wheather is what we get."

          • By analogy.... (Score:5, Insightful)

            by DarkMan ( 32280 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @10:10AM (#11348452) Journal
            To back up the parent poster, consider the following:

            We are unable to predict the electron density at a specific point in a a metal wire, at a given time.

            Yet, we _are_ able to predict the total behaviour of electricty in a wire. Given that electricity is motion of electrons, how does this arise?

            Well, this is a common situation, where models of behaviour at different scales are related only through a very small number of parameters.

            For example, we can predict the magnetic behaviour of a system from just two parameters (for an binary antiferromagnet), yet to calculate the behaviour of the electrons (which cause said magnetism) takes of the order of 100 or so (and about 15 orders of magnitude longer).

            So for practical calculations on magnatic things, you don't need to do the quantum mechanical calculations, just the much simpler ones.

            Sure, technically these are inaccurate. In my experience, we're off by 0.001%, and by about 3-5% in the second derivative. That's so accurate, that there are very many additional cases where the calculations show two possible results, and the experiments arn't accurate enough to tell these apart. Or, in plain terms, good enough.

            I use magnetism and electricity as examples here, because if these agrregate models didn't work, then the computer that you are using to read these works also wouldn't work. That's a pretty solid argument for the usefulness of these types of models.

            Brining this back to weather and climate, the weather researchers call 'weather' individual and specific data points, like cloud cover, rainfall on a day, and so on. 'Climate' is things like total rainfall per year, average temperature in a month - much broader, less specific information.

          • Re:Kewl! (Score:2)

            by ajs ( 35943 )
            This is news to me, and if true, I'm glad to see we've made such strides forward. I admit I'm not in the field, so I could be very wrong, but last time I was aware we were only able to come up with models that predicted rather grandious climate changes in the past, and the strongest evidence yet for human-induced global warming is that in the mid-60s those models' prediction of temperature (again, a side-effect of climate as you rightly pointed out) break down.

            Now, of course we could take those models and
      • I'm well aware that climate != weather. Perhaps you should have emailed that comment to those in the media. Maybe even CCed it to environmentalists. They get confused rather easily as well.

        My point is that the best modeling software in the world is not able to model the simplist features of climate. That makes the software worthless.

    • >Use the same inaccurate software global warming hoaxers use to make their claims! Ignore the fact that the software isn't even able to predict cloud cover!

      The only hoax being perpetrated is by those few delusional Limbots and fringe right-wingers who have yet to look at the actual data. The Arctic ice cap is thinning, the Antarctic ice cap is breaking up and melting where it is over water, sea temperatures are rising, and if you want to see glaciers in the US's Glacier National Park, you'd better go

  • For those who are interested... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by StarfishOne ( 756076 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @03:07AM (#11346242)

    You might also want to check out the following (Distributed Computing) project:

    ClimatePrediction.net [climateprediction.net]

  • Wow, OS X (Score:3, Informative)

    by fsterman ( 519061 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @03:37AM (#11346343) Homepage
    Hey, there is more OS X stuff there than Win32! No linux version, but hey, it still feels fucking cool.

    Although everyone needs to stop copying the brushed metal and aqua buttons. If you are going to do it, don't make it look like shit.
  • Has anybody gotten this working in Wine or WineX? Whenever I try to run it wine just immediately executes, reporting that the program exited with a successful status.

  • A real CASE of global WARMING (Score:3, Funny)

    by tod_miller ( 792541 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @05:45AM (#11346820) Journal
    "We recommend that you NOT leave the GCM running on a Windows laptop unattended. We have found that some Pentium laptops have difficulty dissipating heat and may shutdown (hibernate) without warning causing the climate model to crash. This does not appear to harm the laptop, but can corrupt GCM output files."

    You heard it here first, laptop heat can cause infertility and crash the planet!
  • Seriously, they should open source all this :)
    Also, they should make the stuff at http://www.nas.nasa.gov/Research/Software/ Open Source too (like binaudit, deszip, lsu, mftp, noshell etc)
    For some wierd reason you gotta jump through hoops to download anything good from NASA :(
    • For some wierd reason you gotta jump through hoops to download anything good from NASA.

      That's because each NASA laboratory and department within each lab does things their own way. It's usually easy getting hold of NASA software when you know where to look, but it's that "knowing where to look" that's a real bitch.

  • mirrors (Score:2, Informative)

    by calyptos ( 752073 )
    If you're having trouble downloading it, you can get it here [illhostit.com].

  • Expect the climate discussions to improve (Score:3, Interesting)

    by LucidBeast ( 601749 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @06:38AM (#11347006)
    Well, now that we all have a climate simulation software on our computers we can all backup our claims what will happen to earth with good simulation data.
  • 100,000 armchair climatologists fiddling with their own simulations, proving their theories to themselves.

  • At last my plans to dominate the world are complete. With this software I will be able to
    place my chaos butterflies with precision and inflict devastating storms on my enemies!!!!!
  • The SW is attractive partly for 4D visualizations of climate data in the NASA rendering model on desktops outside the Agency. It also includes a feature to generate a report from the data, within the model, and export it back to the NASA server, presumably retrievable by other people on the "extranet". But it's unclear how "trustworthy" the distributed models can be. Not that the NASA model is inaccurate (though it might be, perhaps as proven by such distributed experiments). But is there a way to crack the

  • Carl Sagan's nuclear winter software (Score:3, Interesting)

    by peter303 ( 12292 ) on Thursday January 13, 2005 @11:02AM (#11348661)
    Be careful of the quality of software. In the 80s there was a lot of hype about climate modeling based on a simple planetary weather program. The software represented the atmosphere as a single vertical profile of physical conditions. When modelers plugged in the post-nuclear dust clouds it prodicted huge temperature drops. However, more sophisticated "3D" models thta inorporated oceans and continents and wind currents found much smaller effects. These defects didnt really slow down biased scientists who kept on promoting their political agendas nonetheless.
  • If this is of interest to you, you might want to check out www.climateprediction.net, the BOINC based screen saver project that's like SETI, runs on your system in it's spare time.
  • Can I set up a climate that makes Greenland hospitable, run it forward 700 years, and find that the Hudson River freezes hard enough to haul cannons across?

    If, given historical conditions, it can't predict the more recent past, then it's nothing but a propaganda tool. It's pretty simple to set up a model that doesn't work (ie its predictions don't match known conditions and outcomes) but either confirms or denies global warming. It's so simple I'll prove it:

    f(x)=68 (Look! this model predicts that the aver
  • If you want to see a dramatic display of just how much we've changed our environment over the last 200 years, just look at this [alexrosen.net] chart.
  • We know what the climate for the Earth was over the last few hundred years.

    Can you model it with this program, using only historical data? That is, can you successfully model the climate on, say, 23 October 1859, using only data from before that date?

    Can you model TODAY'S climate, using only data collected up to yesterday?

    If you can't do this, what might this suggest about the program's actual ability to predict climate in the future?

    For extra credit: Can you run the model backwards? Knowing today's c

Slashdot Top Deals

Genius is ten percent inspiration and fifty percent capital gains.

Close