Talk:Monin–Obukhov length

message: I think it is not correct to define the buoyancy flux as in the currently present form:
:
\overline {w^'\theta^'_v}=\overline {w^'\theta^'}+0.61\overline{T}\; \overline {w^'q^'}
I would like to discuss the following points:
* This equation is an approximation for the flux that involves Reynolds averaging and some neglections. It is not a definition.
* This approximation is not accurate (see "An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology" by Roland B. Stull, 1988).
* The actual temperature should be replaced by potential temperature.
* Hence, better use the following formulation:
:
\overline {w^'\theta^'_v}=\overline {w^'\theta^'}(1+0.61\overline{q})+0.61\overline{\theta}\; \overline {w^'q^'}
The above formulation is the "correct" result from the definition of virtual potential temperature, splitting into mean and turbulent state and subsequent Reynolds averaging - but the triple correlation
:
\overline{w^'\theta^'q^'} = 0
has been already neglected. The correction for humidity, however, should be considered.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.75.105.113 (talk) 13:50, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Buoyancy flux

message: * An important part of this article is a copy-paste from the book "Fundamentals of atmospheric modeling" by Mark Z. Jacobson without reference.
*: see http://books.google.ca/books?id=WPwEf-1f73wC&pg=PA242&lpg=PA242&dq=he+parameter++is+proportional+to++the+vertical+difference+in+potential+virtual+temperature.&source=bl&ots=iEsLu52Wmg&sig=rOYefDZf_TrSK41S9eDM33ING9Q&hl=fr&ei=LdVbSpCqMNDdlAel8pXyDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.20.199.57 (talk) 00:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio?

message: I'm preparing an article on Monin-Obukhov similarity theory as part of an UCLA class project (The Atmospheric Boundary Layer ), which will probably be more comprehensive than this one. I have gathered references and will draft in my sandbox. Let me know if you have any comments or feedback. Thank you. Geoalchimista (talk) 20:30, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related articles 

message: I suggest this page is merged with Monin-Obukhov similarity theory; both are marked as being too technical, and a page on the Obukhov length is inevitably going to be incomprehensible without the context of the similarity theory that it is applied to.  When I have time I could help trying to improve a merged page as I taught masters-level Boundary-Layer Meteorology for a number of years. This would also resolve the question of whether to call the page the Obukhov or Monin-Obukhov length (is is more common to call it the former). Rjhogan (talk) 09:16, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested merge 

message: The article now only seems to discuss the Monin-Obukhov length in the atmosphere (with the formula for specific humidity). Should it not also discuss the Monin-Obukhov length in the ocean upper layer (for instance such as described in chapter 14 of Introduction to Geophysical fluid dynamics by Cushman-Roisin, 2011)? Femkemilene (talk) 12:39, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, you are free to expand the article. Salih (talk) 17:08, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monin-Obukhov length