An important aspect of weather prediction is to calculate the atmospheric pressure pattern—the positions of the highs and lows and their changes. Modern research has shown that sea-level pressure patterns respond to the motions of the upper-atmospheric winds, with their narrow, fast-moving jet streams and waves that propagate through the air and pass air through themselves.

Frequent surprises and errors in estimating surface atmospheric pressure patterns undoubtedly caused 19th-century forecasters to seek information about the upper atmosphere for possible explanations. The British meteorologist Glaisher made a series of ascents by balloon during the 1860s, reaching an unprecedented height of nine kilometres. At about this time investigators on the Continent began using unmanned balloons to carry recording barographs, thermographs, and hygrographs to high altitudes. During the late 1890s meteorologists in both the United States and Europe used kites equipped with instruments to probe the atmosphere up to altitudes of about three kilometres. Notwithstanding these efforts, knowledge about the upper atmosphere remained very limited at the turn of the century. The situation was aggravated by the confusion created by observations from weather stations located on mountains or hilltops. Such observations often did not show what was expected, partly because so little was known about the upper atmosphere and partly because the mountains themselves affect measurements, producing results that are not representative of what would be found in the free atmosphere at the same altitude.

Fortunately, a large enough number of scientists had already put forth ideas that would make it possible for weather forecasters to think three-dimensionally, even if sufficient meteorological measurements were lacking. Henrik Mohn, the first of a long line of highly creative Norwegian meteorologists, Wladimir Köppen, the noted German climatologist, and Max Margules, an influential Russian-born meteorologist, all contributed to the view that mechanisms of the upper air generate the energy of storms.

In 1911 William H. Dines, a British meteorologist, published data that showed how the upper atmosphere compensates for the fact that the low-level winds carry air toward low-pressure centres. Dines recognized that the inflow near the ground is more or less balanced by a circulation upward and outward aloft. Indeed, for a cyclone to intensify, which would require a lowering of central pressure, the outflow must exceed the inflow; the surface winds can converge quite strongly toward the cyclone, but sufficient outflow aloft can produce falling pressure at the centre.

Meteorologists of the time were now aware that vertical circulations and upper-air phenomena were important, but they still had not determined how such knowledge could improve weather forecasting. Then, in 1919, the Norwegian meteorologist Jacob Bjerknes introduced what has been referred to as the Norwegian cyclone model. This theory pulled together many earlier ideas and related the patterns of wind and weather to a low-pressure system that exhibited fronts—which are rather sharp sloping boundaries between cold and warm air masses. Bjerknes pointed out the rainfall/snowfall patterns that are characteristically associated with the fronts in cyclones: the rain or snow occurs over large areas on the cold side of an advancing warm front poleward of a low-pressure centre. Here, the winds are from the lower latitudes, and the warm air, being light, glides up over a large region of cold air. Widespread, sloping clouds spread ahead of the cyclone; barometers fall as the storm approaches, and precipitation from the rising warm air falls through the cold air below. Where the cold air advances to the rear of the storm, squalls and showers mark the abrupt lifting of the warm air being displaced. Thus, the concept of fronts focused attention on the action at air mass boundaries. The Norwegian cyclone model could be called the frontal model, for the idea of warm air masses being lifted over cold air along their edges (fronts) became a major forecasting tool. The model not only emphasized the idea but it also showed how and where to apply it.

More From Britannica

Why Is Predicting the Weather So Difficult for Meteorologists?

In later work, Bjerknes and several other members of the so-called Bergen school of meteorology expanded the model to show that cyclones grow from weak disturbances on fronts, pass through a regular life cycle, and ultimately die by the inflow filling them. Both the Norwegian cyclone model and the associated life-cycle concept are still used today by weather forecasters.

While Bjerknes and his Bergen colleagues refined the cyclone model, other Scandinavian meteorologists provided much of the theoretical basis for modern weather prediction. Foremost among them were Vilhelm Bjerknes, Jacob’s father, and Carl-Gustaf Rossby. Their ideas helped make it possible to understand and carefully calculate the changes in atmospheric circulation and the motion of the upper-air waves that control the behaviour of cyclones.

Modern trends and developments