Re: mjo

Thanks. But I still feel a bit puzzled about it. So, if the sign of the EOF
is arbitrary, does it mean that we cannot tell from the sign that where is
the positive and negative OLR anomalies? If yes, how can i modify the code
so that negative OLR anomalies can be distinguished from the positvie OLR
anomalies? Thanks.

2010/1/4 <shea@ucar.edu>

> The sign of the EOF is arbitrary.
>
> Good luck
>
> > Hi everyone,
> > I have a problem concerning with the mjo. I have used the example
> > mjoclivar_12.ncl<
> http://www.ncl.ucar.edu/Applications/Scripts/mjoclivar_12.ncl>
> > to
> > compute the univariate eof for 20-100 day band-pass filtered olr data
> > from
> > 1987-2007, but the result seems to be different from that of the typical
> > one. The conventional EOF1 exhibits negative OLR anomalies (strong
> > convection) in the tropical Indian Ocean and positive anomalies in the
> > western pacific (see figure 1 in
> >
> http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1175%2F2007JCLI1493.1
> ),
> > but the result of mine is just the opposite. Do anyone know the reason?
> > The
> > code can be seen in the attachment. Thanks.
> > shinn
> > _______________________________________________
> > ncl-talk mailing list
> > List instructions, subscriber options, unsubscribe:
> > http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/ncl-talk
> >
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
ncl-talk mailing list
List instructions, subscriber options, unsubscribe:
http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/ncl-talk
Received on Sun Jan 3 21:58:59 2010