Talk:Eye (cyclone)

Woot

I got it up. I will be working on it periodically (mainly to fix wording and add small sections on polar and extratropical "eyes") but feel free to contribute anything you have. Runningonbrains 04:49, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Tornadoes

Tornadoes are also cyclones, and also have eyes. So what do we do? I don't think they should be covered by this article, but maybe it needs to be renamed to eye (tropical cyclone) (ugly as that is). — jdorje (talk) 03:02, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

*ugh* I think you may be right. I'm going to experiment a little and see if I could possibly make it work, but it just may need to be renamed. Runningonbrains 09:42, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Still Start??

IMHO, this is by far a B-class, and I am thinking of nominating it for GA status, after a little cleanup. Therefore, well, someone let me know if you think this needs more work. Runningonbrains 07:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

A reference in basic definitions would help, but otherwise, send it to WP:GAN. Titoxd^(?!?) 07:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

This is a Good Article

I'm promoting this article to GA status based on the qualifications. I've got some more specific comments coming soon, so stay tuned. Phidauex 15:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Recommendations for Improvement

Good article, guys! I've promoted the article to GA status, but I've got some more specific comments for further improvements:

• Consider a new 'top' picture, or a rearrangement of existing pictures. The current top picture just looks like clouds to me (until I read down and learned more about eyewalls). Maybe one of the space images of a storm's eye would be more distinctive as an initial image.
• More clarification in the 'unknown' section. At the moment, its a little odd, suggesting that we have no idea why eyes form, but that there are 'hundreds of theories'. Are there two or three of these formation theories that have the most support and would be worth summarizing?

Thats all for now. This article is in good shape. I appreciate the infographics and images, and jargon is well wikilinked and defined inline. The use of SI units is good. Typically, scientific articles are SI first, and any other unit system second, however, it may not be worth changing at the moment. Both units are listed, so anyone can understand the info. The article is well referenced, which is good.

Good job on the recent cleanups and improvements, folks. Keep up the good work! Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have a question or dispute, or want more clarification on my reasons for promotion. Phidauex 15:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Moats

I have a vague idea as to what this section is saying, but I need someone with meteorological education to put it into English. Runningonbrains 01:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

It's been puzzling my mind since i read that section. Any satellite images to refer it? Irfanfaiz 00:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

This'll explain it. →Cyclone1→ 20:58, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but whats all that stuff about strain-dominated flow and a rapid-filamentation zone? Runningonbrains 22:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind. Cleared it up, I think. -Runningonbrains 01:45, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Double-eyed Wilma

It looks like she's watching me. [1] Good kitty 14:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw them in an infrared image, both had well-defined eyewalls?. This is an absoutely rare event. Irfanfaiz 23:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

That's really bizarre. How did it come about? Did it have something to do with alpha? — jdorje (talk) 01:51, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

IMHO, it is just a small fragment of clouds which strayed over the ragged, oblong eye as the storm weakened. If you look, it's not even really an eye at this point; there's a huge dry slot on the north side. Without an animation, it's pretty hard to make a call. -Runningonbrains 02:21, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

It would be nice if someone could add some information on hurricanes with two eyes. I can remember that another storm besides Wilma experienced the same phenomenom, but I can't remember the name. I've been trying for hours to find information on this, but I've had no luck at all.Eganjt (talk) 17:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

After e-mailing the NHC asking for information on two-eyed stoms, they responded saying they'd never heard of one. I'm guessing it was just a dry spot like Runningonbrains suggested.Eganjt (talk) 14:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

FA?

What do you think, send this to FAC, or no? -Runningonbrains 01:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah... refer it to the assessment page first, though. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 04:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Copyedit needed

This paragraph needs a copyedit:

A common mistake, especially in areas where hurricanes are uncommon, is for residents to wander outside to inspect the damage while the eye passes over, thinking the storm is over. They are then caught completely by surprise by the violent winds in the opposite eyewall. The National Weather Service strongly discourages leaving shelter while the eye passes over.

This is too "essay-type" =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

"At the time"?

From the caption to the stadium eye pic: "At the time, Wilma was the strongest Atlantic hurricane in history..." Still is, isn't it? If I'm wrong about that, ignore the rest of this comment, but... that wording makes it look like it was, but no longer is. If it still is, then it should simply say "Wilma remains the most intense Atlantic hurricane in history" or something. The current wording looks uneasily as though it was chosen primarily to give editors less work should a more intense hurricane come along someday, and that makes me uneasy. 86.149.2.163 22:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, something like "As of 2007, Wilma remains..." would be okay too. The point is not to make it read as though it's been superseded. 86.149.2.163 22:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, the point is that it broke the record then; it is not making any statement about what the record is now. It could get a ", and which still hold as of 2007" modifier. I'm still not sure whether it needs it, though. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 01:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

"At the time" refers to the fact that the image was taken at the time the hurricane was at peak intensity...I have changed the wording to be clearer. -RunningOnBrains 19:44, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite of intro?

The overall article is in good shape, hence it being featured today, no doubt, but I find the intro text a bit troublesome, as it mentions the same thing (the eye being circular and surrounded by the eyewall) two (circular) or three (eyewall) times: "The eye of a storm is usually circular and (...) surrounded by the eyewall (...) Surrounded by the eyewall (...), the eye is a roughly-circular area (...) the eye is (...) surrounded on all sides by a towering, symmetric eyewall." Someone should really edit it (I won't, at least not while it is featured). Jalwikip 08:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

I just restored the page after someone blanked it completely. Darkmind1970 10:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Who knew an article on cyclones could inspire so much vandalism? BroMonque 19:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Protect featured articles

I thought someone would have at least semi-protected this article. 70.48.176.57 19:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• I've filed a request. UserDoe 19:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Featured articles are not usually protected. Eric Wester 20:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• But this one should be in my opinion, since it attracts a lot of anonymous vandals. UserDoe 21:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• My request has been declined, because it's the featured article. Well, then I suggest we keep on reverting. That's all we can do.UserDoe 21:40, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• Good luck! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.144.208 (talk) 21:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• Featured articles are not protected because they are a prime place to encourage new users to edit productively. While they also attract a lot of vandalism, there are usually many people watching today's featured article, so vandals are caught quickly. —dgies^t_c 05:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Replaced Nate with Katrina

Katrina had a more clearly formed eye than Nate did. M.^(er) 06:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Move of eye-like features from BWER to here

Eye features seen on microwave imagery over the past decade have somehow managed to escape academia. Have finally merged in information from the BWER article into this one, since it is unclear whether or not their dynamics are similar to eyes or BWERs. Thegreatdr (talk) 13:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly useful image for illustrating pinhole eye

I came across what might be a useful composite of two GOES satellite images of Hurricane Wilma for illustrating what a pinhole eye is - see the left-hand side. In my opinion the current (NASA) image makes this hard to see, despite the high resolution. The right-hand side of the composite image could also be used to illustrate the stadium effect as well, although it is perhaps not as clear as the NASA image already included for that. 65.3.199.82 (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Name change

I propose we change this articles name to Eye (weather) as it includes tornadoes, and is a weather phenomenon not just cyclone. Ctjf83Talk 17:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

To quote this article: Though only tropical cyclones have structures which are officially called "eyes", there are other storms which can exhibit eye-like structures. Plasticup ^T/C 17:30, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

That statement is also unsourced. Ctjf83Talk 17:34, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Here are a few reliable sites that use the word "eye of the tornado" or "tornado eye" this is from a US government site [2] [3] [4] [5] Ctjf83Talk 17:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of moving, but if it were to happen, it should be at Eye (meteorology), as it's more encyclopedic. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

If moved, I would prefer Eye (meteorology) as well, but I don't see the point in the move. Tornadoes are coincident with mesocyclones as well. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 18:39, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Eye (meteorology) would be fine with me, but as it is now, it looks like only cyclones have eyes. Ctjf83Talk 18:43, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

As Titoxd said, tornadoes are a form of mesocyclone, so technically they are cyclones. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 19:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Are dwarf planets technically planets? --Danorton (talk) 02:12, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Not sure about that Ctjf83Talk 01:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but I would say so. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone}

(unindent) Just check out the page cyclone. "In meteorology, a cyclone refers to an area of closed, circular fluid motion rotating in the same direction as the Earth[1][2]. This is usually characterized by inward spiraling winds that rotate counter clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere and clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere of the Earth." While technically some tornadoes would then be anticyclones, I think moving the whole page on account of a few possible exceptions is a little extreme.-RunningOnBrains 02:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

A tornado is a cyclone on the storm scale, therefore adding the info with the existing title would still be correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.143.176 (talk) 15:09, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Lowest pressure in the eye

How is it possible for the lowest pressure to be, first of all, in the calmest part of the storm, second of all, where there is sinking air? -- IRP (talk) 02:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The two statements are slightly related. There is sinking air, or subsidence, in the center of the storm because there is an area of high pressure high above the center of the storm, which is fed by the extremely strong updrafts in the eyewall. This pressure difference is enough to overcome the boyant force of the unstable air in the center of the storm, and so air sinks slowly. Because there is sinking air there, there is no rain, or convection.

There is no wind at the very center because the wind is caused by the huge pressure difference (see pressure gradient force) between the eye and the outer reaches of the storm. Within the eye itself, the pressure difference is relatively small. Also, there is an issue with cyclostrophic balance. If the winds increased all the way to the center, there would be a point where the wind was blowing 100+ mph in one direction a few meters from where it was blowing 100+ mph in the other direction. It isnt possible for pressure gradient and Coriolis forces to keep winds like this going in such a tight circle, so the wind maximum is a dozen or so miles away from the actual low pressure center.

I hope this helps! If you have any other questions, you can reach me on my talk page. -RunningOnBrains 13:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't sinking air mean higher pressure, not lower pressure? -- IRP (talk) 18:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Generally, yes. The way a typical high-pressure system works is that there is convergence aloft, forcing air downward towards the surface, and creating an area of high atmospheric pressure near the ground. However, this only applies to a large scale. In the eye, typically only a few (at most a few dozen) miles across, the sinking air is not nearly enough to fill the low pressure system. Right next to this sinking air, remember, there is a much larger area of thunderstorms associated with quickly rising air, which tend to reinforce the lower pressure. It's all about balancing forces...in the special case of a hurricane, the enormous power of the updrafts offsets the pressure gradient force which would typically cause the pressure to increase near the center of the storm. -RunningOnBrains 16:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

So, that would mean that the lowest pressure is in the eyewall, not the eye, am I right or wrong? -- IRP (talk) 20:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

No, the lowest pressure is at the center of the eye, or center of circulation in the less-organized storms. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

What about the more-organized storms, such as at least a category 1 hurricane? -- IRP (talk) 20:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

That's what I said; there is an eye in the well-organized storms, and that's where the lowest pressure is found. Keep in mind, though, that being a Category 1 or above does not make it inherently well-organized, and such hurricanes may still have a cloud-filled center. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I still find it difficult to understand. If there is updraft in the eyewall, with no downdraft to counteract it, I would assume that there would be the lowest pressure in the eyewall. However, even though it has extremely strong updraft surrounding it, it still has some downdraft slightly counteracting it. It would be nice if someone could draw an SVG diagram to explain it, because I don't understand. -- IRP (talk) 21:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't have the ability to create such a diagram, and I'm not sure how to explain this further. Maybe send an email to the NHC, or just do some general research? Hope you find it soon. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

(unindent)As I said before, I believe cyclostrophic balance is a very important concept to understand here. I think a better way to visualize the situation is this: Imagine for a second that the lowest pressure is beneath the eyewall. Since the air is still in the center of the eye, there are no real net forces acting on the air there. So suddenly there's a partial vaccuum in a ring around the eye, so the air in the eye will rush outward to the eyewall, making the whole eye/eyewall vicinity the same pressure.

Now imagine the opposite situation. The pressure is lower in the eye. Air is attempting to come from the eyewall to the center of the eye to fill it, but it has to overcome the centrifugal acceleration <rant>(yes, that force that they told you wasn't real in high-school physics. Fortunately, having a physics degree allows me to use it :P)</rant> which partially counters the pressure gradient force. So the pressure in the eye can continue to get lower, and can't be completely countered by the surrounding air.

One more thing that I wasn't clear on before. When you say there's high pressure at the top of the eye, that doesn't mean high compared to the surface, it means high pressure compared to the average pressure at that altitude. At 5500 m above the surface, due to the atmosphere being roughly in hydrostatic balance, the average pressure is around 500 mb. So when you say there's a low at the bottom of the eye (~950 mb), the "high" at the top of the storm is still much lower than the "low" at the surface.-RunningOnBrains 15:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Picture from inside the eye

How come there's no picture from inside the eye? Just doing a quick search, there are ones available, such as here [6] -M.Nelson (talk) 17:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it is necessary. I just looked at some on Google Images and there are some pretty spectacular images from inside the eye. A Word Of Advice From A Beast: Don't Be Silly, Wrap Your Willy! 22:35, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Hazards

I suggest that the Hazards section be moved on to eye (cyclone) since it talks mostly about the eye.76.124.224.179 (talk) 20:33, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Never Mind. Thought this was another article. 76.124.224.179 (talk) 20:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Eye (cyclone)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Just keep an eye on it. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 16:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 16:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:52, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Eyes

I keep finding eyes in strong tropical storms, like Tropical Storm Beryl. Is this usual or not?32ieww (talk) 04:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC) 32ieww (talk) 04:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

WP:URFA/2020

• Unsourced statement
• Some recent research that should be added (doesn't look like a lot) for eyes in general
• Reference inconsistencies
• Alt text needed
• Duplicate links

Leaving this as notes. CCI Check not done. Noah^Talk 00:55, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Ian eye.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)