maths

A very good overview of a complex subject. May be difficult to get through it in 1 session, a few minor typos, an observation and a comment included.

Attachment 2
1. Rubik’s cube

2. Yea could be yeah

7. but it was because they had more upper class
that had time on their hands to sit and ponder equations?

Perhaps society had evolved to where Maths actually was useful,subject of talk?, to some people at least.
Either is good

14. In the early days they used to write intangible numbers long hand, not intangible??
as this means untouchable
may be better to say unknown numbers?

14. an actual entity that arose in India in 6728 AD i.e. 1 – 1 = 0. 6728?

20. Eugenia Chang Infinity
has many answers. Infinity is not a normal positive number. Infinity + 1 still
equals infinity but if you take infinity from both sides of the equation then 1 =
0. So, infinity cannot be treated as a number. Infinity is more like a measure
just like many is a measure – if you take 1 from many you still have many.
Harry – Eugenia is wrong 1 is a separate entity to infinity in this equation and is not absorbed by it.
The two infinities must, by definition, equal each other completely [or one of them is not infinite] and therefore cancel completely
so the concept of the equation is wrong.

Will have a relook at it but it seems pretty good as is. H

Could give you a call Friday? H

Murchison

Covid 19 response in Shepparton and possible responses.
There are a number of possible scenarios to play out in Australia and Victoria with the Covid 19 virus.
One of the better ones would be both a weakening of the virulence and a subsidence in the infection rate.
Another would be the development of a vaccine.

But the other possibilities as winter worsens and the number of cases in Victoria increases
is that we may have our own little slice of a pandemic in Victoria that may affect the Goulburn Valley region.
Are we prepared as a region to cope with the implications and what level of preparedness do we need?
The Federal Government and the State Government have given conflicting and confusing advice
but do have plans in place which offer some guidelines.

Facts on Covid 19.
It is an RNA virus of a viral family that causes a large number of our common cold infections every year.
Most Corona virus infections are mild but annoying and the large majority of people get over them without ongoing problems.
Elderly people and people with severe medical conditions obviously are at higher risk of complications.
Covid 19 is an exception in that it has a component that causes a severe respiratory infection also known as SARS.
The new strain causes death in vulnerable elderly people but seems to spare most people under 60 without health issues.
In Wuhan where it broke out and Italy, the first heavily hit European country initial death rates were quite high,
up to 10% of cases ill enough to be admitted to hospital.
It also affected a lot of and killed some of the carers, Doctors, Nurses and Nursing Home staff
that were exposed to high levels of contact with it.
Since that early disastrous start we have learnt a lot more about it and its nature, infection styles, virulence and management.

The first good thing is that due to it being new testing was mot possible early on or at high levels a lottle later.
As testing kits became more available and testing rates including asymptomatic patients became more common place
we realise that there is a much larger number of younger people who are catching, carrying and giving the disease than was at first
able to be recognised.
The death rate per infection has gone down over 10 times from 10% to 0.6 % and may fall a lot lower to 0.1% which is 100 times better than first estimated.
The second thing is that not everybody gets infected or will get infected.
If the disease only infects 10% of the population per year per cold season the death rate for the population will be only 0.01% or 1 in a thousand.
The implication for Victoria would be 6000 mainly elderly people in a year or 18 times our annual road toll.
The bad news is that this would happen every year until a vaccine is developed.

A further issue is the virulence of the virus. In Australia to date we seem to have been lucky with a strain
that is 10 times weaker than that affecting the first groups overseas
This would translate to 600 deaths of elderly people extra a year.
But that is a best case scenario.

Lockdowns, social isolation and masks will always offer some chance of restricting spread at any time
during an actual spreading pandemic but cannot get rid of the virus at this stage.
The scenario to consider is what actions do we need to take as a Community if Covid once again comes to town
but in a more problematic way. There are three general groups to consider.

The most important are the children. Here we are very lucky as they will usually catch nothing more than a slight cold.
We know this on health advice as the Government is quite willing , prepared and determined to insist that schools remain open.
Despite children mixing extremely well and being likely to spread the illness quite quickly if it is around.
The people likely to catch it after other children are the parents and teachers most of whom are young and again at little risk.
The main risk groups are older teachers and grandparents or elderly friends who may be doing babysitting of the kids for the parents.
In the case of an epidemic outbreak good advice would be to put elderly teachers on paid leave and to not have grandparents or elderly friends be involved with the children.

The next group is the general public of working age. Again we have a lockdown plan which will be implemented
with essential services maintained and working from home. Not an issue.
The exception is those people with medical health issues who need to be identified ,
isolated a little more and be treated promptly if unwell with hospital review.
More attention needs to be paid to vulnerable Community groups in the Shepparton area
including Aboriginal and Immigrant groups who may have more individuals at risk.

Finally we have older people where the current Government plan does not fully address the issues.
Australia looks after a lot of it’s elderly people in Retirement and Nursing Home situations which
put a lot of elderly people in close proximity or under the same roof.
They also need extra social and nursing care whichmeans the people who look after them are more exposed to
personal infective risks and also more lokely to pass it on th others.
Current guidelines have aging in place provisions and an intention to either not admit elderly people
suffering from mild symptoms or even active Covid if they ar otherwise well.
The idea is to have them managed in their Nursing Home by a mixture of professional nurses and otherwise
Nursing home staff who have medical training but not enough to cope with the problems of managing people with a serious
and deadly infective disease.

As we have seen with Interstate Nursing Homes sending elderly people back to their nursing homes is not a good idea
as it spreads the disease to staff and patients and prevents well persons from seeing their families during the lockdown.
The Government has half addressed this issue with returning travelers by putting them up in hotels but
the people looking after them are guards not nursing staff.

A better approach would be to coordinate am effective response ahead of time or ready to go if the time arrives
with a set of local facilities and nursing staff. The priorities are to isolate but look after
all identified Covid patients in the Greater Shepparton area with nursing staff available for the elderly
until after 2 weeks they have recovered and can return to their normal place of residence.
This could be enacted by the health authorities with the help of local government and local medical and nursing staff.
To this end a number of potential buildings to house the patients with Community support and adequate numbers of staff need to be identified.
Potential sites need to be able to support a nursing station, Separate rooms for each patient and full provision with protective equipment.
Meals need to be provided and medical support available for those who develop symptoms or those who wish to be treated palliatively.
Options in Shepparton are lomited but not impossible, One of the local motels could be involved with enough support and post infection compensation.
An opportunity may exist in Murchison which had a functioning Nursing Home structure until recently and could be refurbished quickly
if the Community agreed [* a NIMBY problem].
Other options might be using one of the bigger current Nursing homes and moving the well patients to other Nursing Homes temporarily.
Acacia House at Tarcoola for example..

An important part of such planning would be to address this issue now by the Council
to involve Health officials from Melbourne and the Base Hospital.
A working group and Community consultation now is better than trying to do it in a rush in an actual emergency.

In regards to Murchison a case could also be made for reorganising it from a Rotary viewpoint as a standalone backup to the Hospital for elderly people needing a place to stay and recover for 1-3 moths pist medical issues like minor CVA’s and also complicated operation recovery.
This could only be done if the patiens were guaranteed to either go home or have a guaranteed admission date to one of the other longer term nursing homes around Shepparton.
This would take a lot of pressure off the GVBH and make transfers from Hospital to permanent Nursing care much less fraught with grief and pressure.

list

1. Obama targets Flynn, Biden provides the pretext (Logan Act)
2. Comey gleefully ambushes Flynn in the first days of the new administration
3. Strzok and Pientka don’t make it clear Flynn is a target
4. Strzok and Pientka apparently say Flynn didn’t lie
5. Lisa Page and one of her stable of lovers incl “First we F*ck Flynn” McCabe doctor Flynn’s 302
6. Weissmann, a pathetic thug pretending to be a lawyer, uses the 302 to threaten Flynn and his family in a continuation of the failed coup d’etat led by Mueller. Flynn – a patriot – refuses to roll over on POTUS
7. Flynn’s own attorneys – DC big wigs – betray Flynn
8. Brandon Van Grack, apparently Weissmann’s apprentice , never discloses exculpatory evidence and deceives the court about targeting Flynn’s son
8. Flynn pleads guilty before corrupt judge Contreras who has personal relationship with Strzok
9. Sullivan takes over the case and , in a 180 degree reversal from his oversight of the Ted Stevens case, becomes a formidable Flynn adversary and calls Flynn a traitor in open court.

Yeah, it’s a conspiracy.regitiger says:
June 25, 2020 at 6:42 pm

In the “spirit” of BOGEYFREE, I have roughly formed A LIST…of conspirators/co-conspirators.

I would invite anyone here to add to the list …I will call it the OBAMAGATE CRIMINALS. (OC)

The Coup manufactured against this president and his associates AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious criminal act in American history.

The following list of persons are likely conspirators directly involved in this coup or aided and enabled it by intentionally ignoring red flags and are thus named co-conspirators:
(there is no order priority in this list)

OBAMAGATE CRIMINALS (OC):

Bill Taylor
Eric Ciaramella
Rosenstein
Mueller/Team
Andrew Weissmann
Comey,
Christopher Wray
McCabe
Strozk
Page
Laycock
Kadzic
Yates
Baker
Bruce Ohr
Nellie Ohr
Priestap
Kortan
Campbell
Sir Richard Dearlove
Steele
Simpson
Joseph Mifsud
Alexander Downer
Stefan “The Walrus” Halper
Azra Turk
Kerry,
Hillary
Huma
Mills
Brennan
Gina Haspel
Clapper
Lerner
Farkas
Power
Lynch,
Rice
Jarrett
Holder
Brazile
Sessions (patsy?)
Nadler
Schiff
Pelosi
James E. Boasberg
SCJ Roberts
OBAMA

early version heat

The planet radiates the heat it receives back to space.
If it gets closer to the sun and hotter it radiates more back.
As it cools at night it radiates less as it’s temperature drops.
It is not a battery and it does not store heat in the oceans selectively
of its own accord.
It follows the rules of physics.

Where we run into problems is in how the energy moves and transfers between the 3 different layers of the earth, atmosphere, ocean and earth; gas, liquid and solid.
Each substance is penetrated to a certain degree and vary in the degree they heat up to and how they distribute the heat they receive brpefore sending it back to space, which it must do.

We have a TOA radiating temperature that is mutable only in that the atmosphere has GHG that temporarily absorb a tiny fraction of the energy when receiving sunlight in the daytime.
A very small amount and only as the sun rises overhead.

This gives the atmosphere the temperature as the GHG transfer some of that energy to the O2 and NO2.
– This process is incredibly quick and once established (Peaked) cannot keep taking energy energy out and storing it somewhere. In fact after maximum insulation and temp rise for the next 18 hours it is radiating that heat back to space commensurate to how high it went up in the first place.

With more CO2 in the air, and everything else being equal (practically it never is), the air temperature curve moves ever so slightly over to the new level of GHG.
A doubling of CO2 produces a 1C temperature rise overall.
The nights become a little warmer, the days a little warmer, but the amount of sunlight coming in and out overall does not change.

This may sound like heresy but either you follow the physics or you do not.
Either energy in equals energy out and this applies everywhere; to snowball earth, the moon , the planets, etc or it doesn’t.
Over any 24 hour period there cannot be any real TOA discrepancy at all.

The oceans did not invent lithium batteries to store it in.
There are no batteries.
The ocean is not a battery.
The atmosphere is not a battery.
TOA imbalance demands a battery, science denies a battery.

This misunderstanding needs to be corrected one person at a time.
Reply
angech
June 23, 2020 at 4:31 am

“With increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, there is an imbalance in energy flows in and out of the earth system at the top of the atmosphere (TOA): the greenhouse gases increasingly trap more radiation and hence create warming (Solomon et al. 2007; Trenberth et al. 2009). “

“model-based estimates of TOA energy imbalance [from the Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4)]“
Why do we have to use a model when we can easily measure it with satellites one may well ask rhetorically?
If, I repeat if, we can easily measure it with satellites we would not need to use models. Roy could just give us the monthly and yearly figures.
We use models because the satellite constraints mean the figures are extremely unreliable, large SD, hence we can use models and plug in just the right parameters to give an imbalance matching our imbalance theories.
“TOA measurements of radiation from space can track changes over time but lack absolute accuracy.“

But the models used are based on OHC.
and
“Most ocean-only OHC analyses extend to only 700-m depth, have large discrepancies among the rates of change of OHC, and do not resolve interannual variability adequately to capture ENSO and volcanic eruption effects,”

So there we have it, an unphysical idea that the earth can do something no other celestial body can do, store energy every day in a battery and warm up the whole world.
Even though it has been warmed and radiated that warmth every day for 4 billion years according to the rules of physics.
Adding extra GHG causes a constant storage of energy from the sun, which when humans add it Grows an arm and a leg and works as a thousand year battery.
No matter that the rest of the universe demands that energy back, earth resists.

The earth’s atmosphere gets hotter with GHG not because of storage batteries but simple physics. It absorbs (delays in transit) an extra small minute amount of energy for 6 hours a day as the sun heats it up. Then it radiates more than it receives back to space for 18 hours while the sun heats up the rest.
The ocean absorbs a little bit more as the air is a little bit warmer, not much and then radiates it back as well.
The planet sums it all up and sends it all back out equal to that in.
Apart from that little insulated house.
Reply

Are you looking for Causation or Blame?

I get the point that there are
Events caused by Anthropogenic effects
Events caused by Anthropogenic Climate Change
and that the general effect of the latter will cause more harm than the more localised effect of the former.

Attribution of either is complicated leading to a moral and scientific issue.
Are you looking for Causation or Blame?
One is a scientific approach and one a moral approach.

One can of course do both, find a cause and find blame in the same event.
This is helped by using story line approaches as they incorporate a moral lesson in their very definition.
“given that an event has occurred, how might climate change have influenced this event?”

“The claim is that in trying to separate the human influence from the natural variability of weather, extreme event attribution creates a new nature-culture divide.”
People have looked for causation in weather for ever. A rare event, did something I did cause that weather effect? People have always wanted to attribute causation and blame their actions or lack of them to explain misfortunes and occasionally good luck.
Once you attribute Blame or Causation to human action you open a divide between those who want to believe [naturalists] and those who want to understand [culture/science].

“The problem here is that extreme event attribution typically tries to understand how the event might be different because of anthropogenic-driven climate change,”
Even here what you are saying is that extreme events are natural and that in your view human causation might make it worse.
I say worse because if human causation ever made things better you would not feel concerned to investigate it further.
Hence the problem of trying to prove that rare extreme events are ever capable of offering proof of climate warming.
“if we don’t distinguish between natural and anthropogenic influences, how do you then avoid people simply concluding that it’s natural, or using this to argue that it’s natural?”
Hence the crux of the matter, do we tell them a story line to emphasis how bad we believe it may be and only choose, always, the bad side of that story line for emphasis?
– Or do we tell them the truth.

There will be a number of consequences that will become self evident in time.
We cannot prove this conclusively now but believe it to be so.
We are working on improving our attribution to everyone’s satisfaction.
We are not looking to blame or shame anyone.

Probability

angech says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
June 6, 2020 at 11:35 pm
ATTP are we reading this the same way?

“The key results are that for long-timescales (many decades) internal variability contributes little to the total uncertainty (essentially, it averages out).”

I do not see this as the key finding, rather a statement of the parameters being put in.
By definition internal variability is defined as fluctuations around some predetermined real value.
As time goes by the fluctuations balance out and the true value is revealed shed of dross. In other words it must always reduce to zero

Atomsk’s Sanakan @AtomsksSanakan. May 27
“Update thread citing published studies, along with comments debunking Judith Curry’s cherry-picking in the service of ideologically-motivated denialism on hydroxychloroquine:“

Missing in action. Why?
Lancelet study Chloroquine Debunked
New England Journal of medicine. Debunked same author

Most of the studies you quote have been extremely hastily put together with pal not peer review and rushed into print.
They all have massive flaws consequent.
As they fall apart, one by one, will you guarantee to return here and issue a mea culpa for your mudslinging?

The fact that you’re still willfully ignoring the fact that previously reputable Journals have thrown science out the window is expected from a committed ideologue.

How to redeem a scrap of integrity, if you ever wanted.
Be more skeptical in the right way.
Put up lists of both sides.
Just for fun and fairness.
There are papers out there for hydroxychloroquine.
Give their references too.

As an aside, Atom, I was extremely unbelieving at first based on my medical training. Chloroquine was an antimalarial drug. And a cramp treatment.
Viruses and bacteria or parasites are extremely different and require different mechanisms of treatment.
The medications being for totally different reasons would normally never treat both types of life forms.
My rationale for non belief was based on science, what I had been taught up until that moment.

That changed when I learnt of the mechanisms of interfering with viral RNA reproduction in cells. Scientifically proven.
Are you aware of that?
Of course you are, petal.
Research dating back to 2004 or earlier as an antiviral.
Are you aware of that?
If not, why not?

Why knock the study of it as a helpful treatment when we have precious little else?
You show a great interest in scientific topics.
You certainly have a skeptical mind, with blinkers on.

Ideology.
If the drug does work you would have to thank Trump for helping promote it.
Guess your attitude is best summed up by better millions die than Trump gets any credit, even if vicarious ( He did not invent it though he might take credit).
What a great and commendable attitude, man.

WordPress.com / Gravatar.com credentials can be used.

Arctic Ice


I find the the trend in sea ice age over the last ten years or so a conceptually difficult metric.
Ine of the problems as I have mentioned before is that the less ice you have to start with the less the percentage of multi year ice appears to be in a good recovery year.
Counter intuitively this means that years with low percentage multi year ice are actually making good recoveries.
This might help explain the contradiction between a 10 year pause in ice volumes, sought of a recovery in a way from the previous high falls and a downwards trend in multi year ice for 10 years which also fits in with recovering, not diminishing ice in the Arctic?

La Casa di Signore Mancini

La Casa di Signore Mancini
This may prove to be a seminal work.
I intend to build a memory castle out of ordinary pieces of bricks and mortar that anyone can use.
For purposes of education, memory training, entertainment and refreshment.
The house may yet change in it’s nature, a bit like the Japanese walking castle and different people
may end up with a different construct with different uses altogether.
I envisage that some will be able to use algorithms and machine learning to join human and artificial intelligence ideas together.
Grandiose ideas but as usual oaks are born from tiny acorns.
The name is fictional and related to my current study of Italian where I have used a very basic form to help people try to learn Italian.
It did not really work though the potential was there because the basic principles were to hard to install in 2 lessons.

So from scratch
English being my native language others will have to transfer it into their own styles but it should be possible and logically consistent.
The idea of a memory palace varies a little from being an artificial construct, in this case,
to a much more practical use of ones own houses, schools, workplaces and towns.
To marry the two is not possible but one can subsist in the other, the choice of which way you wish to do it is up to you.
Remember all doors have two sides and inside for one idea is outside for the other in a binary world at least.
Other worlds, parallel universes and time issues etc can all be investigated here later if you wish.
My preference, knowing as I said that it is really only a matter of perspective is to address it from a fixed point, Signor Mancini’s Casa.

An entrance, a lobby, receptionists and sit down computer log in screens and keyboards [or voice activated] await centrally.
An elevator shaft to floors above and below.
A circular construct with 24 doors.
Why 24.
Divides by 2,3,4.
Is large enough for most Western Languages to encompass most letters.
Provides enough sectors to cope with a large range of topics.
Now the tricky part, traveling from one room or one floor to another.
Recording where one has traveled.
The first is easy.
Enter the lobby and sit down at your desk.
One can either go and ask for help, at reception and use the elevators and aides there.
Or secondly, using Star Trek technology, on your desk select the location you wish,
press enter and the house will phase you to the right floor.

Lets try Italian again.
Italian floor.
Languages or regions.
Go to the language floor, for anglophones, English speakers.
Here the concierge is Signor Mancini.
Let’s get started.

Overview, product information, Instructions.
First rule you have to read the Instructions but after the first few times , on most floors you can skip this step.
For Italian there are several provisos.
No-one can speak Italian perfectly because there are thousands of dialects.
People in different regions do not even speak on the same tenses as in other areas.
Nonetheless in 1892 with the unification of Italy [see Italian History] a standardised written Italian was introduced
which most of the people use to communicate with each other.
Language is a multi dimensional skill which is not all verbal.
Italian uses a lot of gesturing to accompany and give meaning to what they are saying and can transform a seeming
compliment to a maladetto [rude word] in an instant.

As mentioned in the introduction everything has at least two sides.
Here a second side or outside inside concept is the English speaker, yourself, trying to learn.
English is a bastardised language which has led to great functionality.
All languages are constructs of previous languages and experiences.
Italian and English are not dissimilar in that respect.
Italian is a complete language however combining one basic root Latin.
Easy to speak but lacking the range of expressions available in a 4 culture language.
For people with a different perspective, Chines or Indian say the root language is missing.
Many more words and idioms have to be learnt to achieve proficiency.

One way to learn Os to totally reprogram the language part of the brain into the new language.
Learn it from scratch and only understand the comparisons later.
Repetition is the second way.
Practicing with a more fluent person in speaking is the third.
Unfortunately, in the house, there is only the room and what you can put in it.
A simulacrum is beyond most people at this stage.

Of the various course to learn I would approach Italian in this way.
The language is Latin Based composed of subject/object, verbs [actions]
The function of all language is to ask a question and get a response.
Cause and effect as the Merovingian would say.

Language is always best learnt from the past to the present to the future.
ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny Ernst Haeckel *. Meckel–Serres law.
We can only speak truly about actions that have happened in the past or thoughts that we have had in the past.
One represents a reality of what has happened and the other a reality of what we though had happened in the past.
The vast gap between thought and action, separated by only a spark of initiation,
drives all thought language and action.
The classic idea of what comes first, thought or action as exemplified in Avere and Essere by Erich Fromm.

Latin is a common root between English and Italian and must always be considered when study and understanding the two languages.
It enters the English Language in at least 4 different phases.
The Roman Invaders circa 55 BC.
Vallum Hadriani Proto-Germanic borrowing from Latin. Etymology
From vallus (“stake, palisade, point”), from Proto-Indo-European *wel- (“to turn, wind, roll”).

vallo Compound of imperative (tu form) of andare and lo.
Old Latin *moerus, *moiros, from Proto-Indo-European *mey- (“to strengthen”).
muro m (plural muros)
Gallic
wall (stone structure built for defense) Synonym: muralla wall (stone structure built for delimitation) Synonyms: valado, valo
Otherwise the masculine plural muri is used: I muri hanno orecchie. ? The walls have ears.
The feminine plural mura denotes the walls of a town, castle or similar, viewed collectively:
Le mura di Roma hanno dodici porte. ? Rome’s walls have twelve gates.
murare (transitive) to wall up (transitive) to embed into a wall
From *moiros, from Proto-Indo-European *mey- (“to fix, to build fortifications or fences”), see also Latin m?n?re (“to protect”), Old Norse -mæri (“border-land, boundary”), Old English mære (“landmark, border, boundary”). See also Sanskrit ???? (múr, “wall”), Sanskrit ??? (mura, “surrounding, encircling, enclosing”).

In defense of Roger Pielke jun

Atomsk,
I get the drift that the scenario itself is not the outcome
and that the scenario does not have to be real.
and that therefore, a scenario may not be a prediction, only a conditional prediction.

The problem is that you cannot usefully cleave [split] a scenario and a prediction in this way without losing the meaning of both words.

For your analogy I agree that one does not usually try to prove the precept is wrong to show that the outcome is wrong.
That is because a precept or scenario is not falsifiable, You determine the input.
If one uses a different input one would would have to put up a different output.
A scenario can only be a scenario if it is predicating [and hence predicting] a future outcome.

If the situation the scenario is attempting to mimic is shown by time to be different to the assumptions you used that is not a failure of the scenario.
Reality is a different scenario and you cannot falsify either by comparing the outcomes.

RP and I have never tried ” to claim a conditional projection failed, since they claim a predicted scenario didn’t occur.”
It is wrong to say that.
A more apt analogy would be that the child placed it’s hand on the hot stove and it did not burn.

In this case the fact that you claimed the stove was hot enough to burn the child’s hand is wrong.
You did not put enough wood in the fire [wrong assumptions] or did not light the match [check the starting conditions were as you said] or did not run it long enough [dodgy thermometers].

I do not mind people bagging my arguments but I do mind people bagging their opponents unjustly.
Fair enough with me, i make misunderstandings.
Roger Pielke is a true scientist, brought up in a scientific family and background and does not make basic misunderstandings of concepts.like scenario’s and it is just plain wrong to say that he does.

ATTP
“If there’s warming then I think you still need some kind of flux imbalance. My understanding is that quite soon after a perturbation (say, an increase in atmospheric CO2) the LW fluxes can return to balance, but the cloud feedback leads to an imbalance in the SW fluxes, which then dominates the subsequent warming.”
izen “The increase in surface temperature is a result in the greater thermalisation of OLR from the surface in the lower layers of the atmosphere, not in a imbalance in the energy flux for the whole system.”

“If there’s warming then I think you still need some kind of flux imbalance” This bit is very true but emphasises the problem raised by Izen.
If warming is occurring there must be a flux imbalance.
We see this every day when the sun comes up. The GHG concentration does not change **[much] but the atmosphere heats up and the radiating layer goes much further outward.
So some energy has been garnished from the sun and thermalised.

But what happens when the heat input stabilizes say just after midday[** more provisos].
For a short period of tome the energy in equals the energy out as everything is in balance.
Then the radiating layer contracts as the atmosphere cools.

Does the CO2 level affect this pattern? No [* more provisos].
What it does affect though is the amount of atmospheric thermalisation that day.
The atmosphere will be warmer with more CO2 in it.
Not in 100 years but at that lovely moment of equibrilation.
Which occurs every day, usually after midday, though it might occur several times around that time due to albedo cloud changes.

ATTP “quite soon after a perturbation (say, an increase in atmospheric CO2) the LW fluxes can return to balance,”
OK
” but the cloud feedback leads to an imbalance in the SW fluxes, which then dominates the subsequent warming.”

Not sure of this. Feedbacks occur including clouds which is more part of the expected imbalance due to the change in incoming heat.
The SW fluxes can only be variable due to the variable albedo? They temporarily alter the actual heat input which is why you might have several moments of equilibrium usually after midday. The longterm feedback effect amplification is more due to increased GHG [water vapour] in the air raising the ECS not the SW effects.