User:Jhammy391/sandbox
 | This is a user sandbox of Jhammy391. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the sandbox where you should draft your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. To find the right sandbox for your assignment, visit your Dashboard course page and follow the Sandbox Draft link for your assigned article in the My Articles section. |
Evaluation of eddy diffusion:
copied from eddy diffusion
Eddy diffusion, eddy dispersion, multipath, or turbulent diffusion is any diffusion process by which substances are mixed in the atmosphere or in any fluid system due to eddy motion.[1][2] In another definition[3] it is mixing that is caused by eddies that can vary in size from the small Kolmogorov microscales to subtropical gyres.
Because the microscopic processes responsible for atmospheric mixing are too complex to model in detail, atmospheric modelers generally treat atmospheric mixing as a macroscopic "eddy" diffusion process. In this approach, the diffusion rate at each pressure level is parameterized by a quantity known as the eddy diffusion coefficient, K[4] (also sometimes called eddy diffusivity, with units of m2 s−1).
References
[edit]
I was slightly confused while reading the definition sentence. I don't know why they mentioned the atmosphere "Eddy diffusion, eddy dispersion, multipath, or turbulent diffusion is any diffusion process by which substances are mixed in the atmosphere or in any fluid system due to eddy motion". I think this could be cleared up by containing a succinct definition of a turbulent eddy.
I don't think the article is particularly biased, but it does appear to focus heavily on atmospheric eddy mixing rather than the eddy diffusion in general.
The first link is broken. The second came from "science world, wolframe" (perhaps a misspelling of wolfram) and contains no link. The third comes from an online meteorology link, and the third comes from a book written by Chamerlain and Hunten, but does not give the title. Overall, I am suspicious of these references.
This article falls in the Stub class category for quality assessment, where all "very-bad-quality" articles live.
I would suggest reworking the entire article, and giving little weight to the atmospheric eddy diffusion processes. Overall, this is a poor article and needs significant rewriting.
The article doesn't really offer any insight into eddy diffusion, and I am having trouble comparing it to what we did in class because of that.