I have enjoyed considering eddies over the years and used the word in a poem a few years back.
However, I only recently learned that eddies are generally circular. Why so? My own visualization of eddies hadn't been of circular ones.
And a second definition that is just great:
"a contrary or circular current (as of thought or policy) " MW
A contrary thought! Contrary thoughts! Contrary policies! Wow! Why haven't I read this word used this way constantly?
what kind of eddies have you seen that aren't generally circular?
realizing that that sentence is leaving things wide open...
why are eddies (and gyres, for that matter) circular?
mostly because the earth rotates.
this effects prevailing winds, winds act on water currents, and since the oceans are 'closed loops (ie, most of the water in the Atlantic ocean stays in the atlantic ocean, and doesn't flow-- river like--into the pacific ocean or the indian ocean!), when water is moved by the wind NORTH AND EAST by the winds, it can't just flow(somewhere else!) , but a must move in a circular 'path' back to the south and west.
if you have water in a bath tub, you can set up a circular currnent. it isn't self sustaining. earths currents are more or less self sustaining by wind action.
eddies are often located were there are conflicting currents adjecnt to each other, and the eddies are almost like small bearing that take the presure of equalizing the two conflicting flows.
(for reason i don't fully understand,) High tide in the bronx (north end of 'EAST RIVER') is not at the same time as hightide in manhatan (south end of EAST RIVER)--(obviously the east river isn't really a river but a straight!)
Hell Gate is were the two conflicting tides 'meet' --it is marked by strong currents, whirlpools and eddies. the uneven levels of the tidal waters are 'evened out'--messily!
Well, when traveling on the St. Johns River back in about 1971, we stopped to look into some blue pools that line the St. Johns like little blue arms. We saw eddies of water--water moving back against the general flow of the water--linear rivulets caused by heaven-only-knows-what. Contrary motion. Yes, that's how I think of eddies. But I just hadn't realized that eddies are generally circular. Today I've learned that my own immediate experience of eddies' moving in contrary motion to the general flow had been atypical and that, in fact, eddies are most often circular. I haven't ever seen a circular eddy although I have seen whirlpools caused by drops in water in streams. Are those eddies, too? I doubt it.
huh. I think of eddies as always moving contrari-wise, even if the eddy itself is moving with the flow. and perhaps there's another name for a more linear contrary flow as you've experienced?
I think of eddies as always moving contrari-wise, even if the eddy itself is moving with the flow.
That would be Eddie Haskell.
Eddie certainly was contrary. Wonder whether that was why he was so named.
Wonder whether that was why he was so named.
Eddie's full name, on the program, was Edward Clark Haskell. The actor, Ken Osmond, went on to become a motorcycle patrol officer for the Los Angeles Police Department.
Well, tsuwm, those were certainly eddyfying. The second one wasn't a new release, was it?
I haven't ever seen a circular eddy
That's why when you do see one, Wordwind, it's very eddifying. For me, as well.
A circular argument is no longer eddifying. What is contrary is often eddifying because it turns against the flow.
There's nothing wrong with the mainstream, of course. But it only flows in one direction.
More directions are no harm to the mainstream. If nothing else, they allow for some aimless excursions which might carry back crustaceans and such nestled in the silt of some dead-end rivulet.
These tasty morsels may help to feed the fish flowing in the mainstream.
Reminds me of a line from a little poem my father always enjoyed reciting to me when I was a kid [especially when I got into trouble]:
"Only the game fish swims upstream, the sensible fish swims down."
It's a good thing most fish are sensible enough to swim in schools. But there's a case to be made for fish who like to play hookey as well.
(sorry to those of you who read in the threaded mode.. this is out of order..)
one poster comments:
There's nothing wrong with the mainstream, of course. But it only flows in one direction.
yes, well maybe.. i guess.. but..
i live in NYC. We have a river, The Hudson
(well, technical it is a fjord, and technically in NYC (but not in NYS its called the North river, but these quibbles aside)
it is a large river. (well over 1 mile wide in NYC area)
It is a long and deep river (NYC/harbor does silt up, but just a few miles north of the city, where there is less silting, the river bed is over 250 feet deep)
the river has a 'backflow'--that is the ocean and tides flow upstream-- over 50 miles. (at high tide, the backflow current is much stronger than the downstream current, and the river flows 'upstream'!)
Most east coast rivers have water falls and the falls stop tidal backflows, (and since the falls are often less than 50 miles from the mouth of the rivers.. the back flow is limited) --the first falls on the Bronx river is less than 10 miles from mouth of the river, for example.
but tidal backflow is not unique to the Hudson.
and backflow is not only caused by tides.
several tributaries to the mississippi river creat backflow.
The mainstream, even when you talk about rivers, is differentiated because there are frequently (if not always) contrary flows.
I would argue the term mainstream evolved to clarify the predominant flow of water, but that there are backflows and contrary currents in almost every river (and eddies, form and collapse to deal with the backflows.)
--the same situation exist 'socially' --A mainstream idea (or behavior) might be the more common one, but there are always contrary ideas and behaviors going on.
Rereading, and trying to clarify, i recognize is the BUT in the second sentence that is bothering me.
There's nothing wrong with the mainstream, of course. But it only flows in one direction.(EA)
the but negates the whole first sentence. it implies there is something wrong. and then goes onto tell you what is wrong, (it only flows in one direction)
its like saying I agree with you totally, BUT for one point--well if you don't agree on 1 point, you don't agree totally.
So it seem the mainstream (ie, the predominant flow ) has 'nothing wrong' --Except it flows in one (predominant) direction (that is, it is the main stream.)
mmm.... i agree total with the person who posted the comment, BUT--
mmm.... i agree total with the person who posted the comment, BUT--
I agree totally with the person who posted the comment, BUT -- [This argument is becoming circular. :) ]
Thanks for playin' along with my eddy, Of Troy. :)
Circ-LE-ar
[ smile ] Sorry: it was there; I had to take it. I try, but sometimes I just can’t help kicking that ‘nucular’ dog, wherever it may appear to me. [ /smile ]
Eddies occur where there is water flowing in one main direction. Sooner or later there will be an obstruction near the edge of the current and some of the water can't continue downstream so gets redirected upstream, it can't go in a contrary direction for ever and is eventually caught up again by the current and heads back down again. Thus the contrary flow has become circular, (actually it's usually oval.) Try looking where a log has fallen into the water at the edge of the stream.
Thus the contrary flow has become circular, (actually it's usually oval.) - This remark points to the cause of the present controversy: a circle is generally considered a geometrical figure, all points of which are at the same distance from the centre. The adjective circular however, is often used in a topological rather than geometrical sense: a circular path simply has no beginning nor end, and its shape is irrelevant and can be very involved. An eddy is a is a circular path of water molecules - or electrons. Which is the direction of the mainstream - does not matter for the eddy.
> Why circular?
>> An eddy is a circular path of water molecules - or electrons.
Like all planets, all stars, all atoms and all things in this universe, eddies are vaguely spherical.
God created the universe and said: 'Here, have a ball!'
Why does an expression like
vaguely spherical go down quite well, while
vaguely cubical would not
?
> vaguely cubical
Well, a cube is an abstract geometrical shape, whereas spheres and spirals are natural facts found everywhere. A sphere is a decidedly simple and highly efficient form, a box is not - unless you want something to *not roll anywhere:-)
Your comment illuminates the interesting interplay between two basic personality types though: the very boxy, prickly ones versus the well-rounded<g>, touchy-feely ones. The difference here is not one of varying view points of course, but a question of one's focus or resolution.
I like ‘vaguely cubical’. In fact, I think vaguely works well with just about any word, the more unexpected, the better – ‘vaguely pregnant’, for example, or ‘vaguely dead’, ‘vaguely on’, ‘vaguely off’, ‘vaguely adamant’, ‘vaguely specific’, ‘vaguely exact’, and so on. As with koans, and certain forms of humor, an unexpected association of words affords one a millisecond or so of confusion, and/or clarity, temporarily derailing one's thoughts and giving her or him a short break from an otherwise relatively predictable day.
So, just out of curiosity, does that put me in the ‘touchy-feely’ sphere, or the ‘prickly’ box?
>temporarily derailing one's thoughts
heaven forbid that any vaguely dyslexic people get near you!
>Well, a cube is an abstract geometrical shape
The sentiment above must be taken with a grain of salt.
I remember as a little human, looking at grains of salt (the store-bought, iodized kind) under a magnifying glass. If I recall correctly, each grain was a cube, or at least cuboid. So, take a sentiment about a cube with a cube!
(Looking at what I have written, it dawns on me that perhaps TEd intended to allude to the cuboid properties of salt, in a double-entendre sorta-kinda way?)
That would be our TEd's way, for sure, Dgeigh.
the ‘touchy-feely’ sphere, or the ‘prickly’ box? Ooh, prickly box, prickly box! "Vaguely pregnant"--I love it!
I've seen cushions that could be described as being 'vaguely cubical.'
Interesting to read here the various applications of 'vaguely'--but I don't supposed a person could be described as being 'vaguely vague'?
I don't supposed a person could be described as being 'vaguely vague'? Oh, go ahead: supposed!
> looking at grains of salt
"Salt actually comes in several different kinds of shapes. Refined salt, commonly called "table salt," is fairly regular in shape, because it has been through several machines before it was packaged, and in order to make it easy to pour or shake, the grains are sort of rounded. Then there is rock salt, which is in irregular chunks. We could hit a couple chunks of rock salt with a hammer, and get a more natural shape of granule. Kosher salt is sea salt, and the grains are somewhat squared."
Not far off 'vaguely cubical', hey!
By the way, the third part of the film thriller series which started with 'Cube', then 'Hypercube', is running in theatres. Its title? - Cube Zero
Recalls the old line about being 'a little bit pregnant'.
Also, can those of us currently on the frontline of pregnancy introduce a third option between touchy-feely and prickly box? Can we please please please be
pregnantly vague. (I love the connotation of something impending, but undefined...
)