Planet Zoo Scenario 7
Percival Blanco
The three blocks in the left column of the panel to the right indicate the three levels that are part of the set of levels called "Captain Lockjaw's Buried Treasures". The blue background indicates you currently have the 1st block, associated with the first level, selected.
If you look closely, these track your progress within the set. The three icons below the teaser thumbnail for the level indicate the currently best achieved star rating for the scenario. In your example you fully completed the first level.
A level is counted as complete typically after getting at least one star. When this happens, the next level is unlocked. You can see that it is due to a subtle difference: Unlocked levels use color thumbnails, while locked levels use grey thumbnails. Click on the second thumbnail to play the second level in the set.
Sidenote: This also clears up the meaning of '3 ouf of 9'. There are three levels in the set with three stars each. Thus there are 3x3 = 9 stars in the whole set. So this bit of text tracks the progress of achieving goals for the whole set.
You have completed the "Pirate Battle" scenario. The game allows you to continue playing, in case you are having a lot of fun with that particular park or you want to finish something you were working on. However, there are no more stars to get on that map. You should have seen a popup when you obtained each star. The popup for the third star serves as a "level completed" screen.
The reason "Captain Lockjaw's Buried Treasures" shows you having 3/9 stars is because it contains 3 scenarios. You have all three stars from "Pirate Battle", but there are two more maps with 3 stars each, which you haven't earned. These maps can be accessed by clicking the vertical tabs to the left of the scenario description in your screenshot.
Scientifically, however, this is a little more complicated, as temperature measurements even for the early 1900s are scarce, with increased uncertainties around their quality. Scientists generally choose more recent reference periods. In the case of the IPCC AR5 this was 1986-2005, from which they derived temperature differences both forwards and backwards in time.
When multiple greenhouse gases are involved, the quantification of negative emissions depends on the climate metric chosen to compare emissions of different gases (such as global warming potential, global temperature change potential, and others, as well as the chosen time horizon).
A plausible description of how the future may develop based on a coherent and internally consistent set of assumptions about key driving forces (e.g., rate of technological change, prices) and relationships. Note that scenarios are neither predictions nor forecasts, but are used to provide a view of the implications of developments and actions.
Integrated assessment models (IAMs) integrate knowledge from two or more domains into a single framework. They are one of the main tools for undertaking integrated assessments. One class of IAM used in respect of climate change mitigation may include representations of: multiple sectors of the economy, such as energy, land use and land-use change; interactions between sectors; the economy as a whole; associated GHG emissions and sinks; and reduced representations of the climate system. This class of model is used to assess linkages between economic, social and technological development and the evolution of the climate system. Another class of IAM additionally includes representations of the costs associated with climate change impacts but includes less detailed representations of economic systems. These can be used to assess impacts and mitigation in a cost-benefit framework and have been used to estimate the social cost of carbon.
The jumping-Jupiter scenario specifies an evolution of giant-planet migration described by the Nice model, in which an ice giant (Uranus, Neptune, or an additional Neptune-mass planet) is scattered inward by Saturn and outward by Jupiter, causing their semi-major axes to jump, and thereby quickly separating their orbits.[1] The jumping-Jupiter scenario was proposed by Ramon Brasser, Alessandro Morbidelli, Rodney Gomes, Kleomenis Tsiganis, and Harold Levison after their studies revealed that the smooth divergent migration of Jupiter and Saturn resulted in an inner Solar System significantly different from the current Solar System.[1] During this migration secular resonances swept through the inner Solar System exciting the orbits of the terrestrial planets and the asteroids, leaving the planets' orbits too eccentric,[1] and the asteroid belt with too many high-inclination objects.[2] The jumps in the semi-major axes of Jupiter and Saturn described in the jumping-Jupiter scenario can allow these resonances to quickly cross the inner Solar System without altering orbits excessively,[1] although the terrestrial planets remain sensitive to its passage.[3][4]
The jumping-Jupiter scenario also results in a number of other differences with the original Nice model. The fraction of lunar impactors from the core of the asteroid belt during the Late Heavy Bombardment is significantly reduced,[5] most of the Jupiter trojans are captured during Jupiter's encounters with the ice giant,[6] as are Jupiter's irregular satellites.[7] In the jumping-Jupiter scenario, the likelihood of preserving four giant planets on orbits resembling their current ones appears to increase if the early Solar System originally contained an additional ice giant, which was later ejected by Jupiter into interstellar space.[8] However, this remains an atypical result,[9] as is the preservation of the current orbits of the terrestrial planets.[4]
In the original Nice model a resonance crossing results in a dynamical instability that rapidly alters the orbits of the giant planets. The original Nice model begins with the giant planets in a compact configuration with nearly circular orbits. Initially, interactions with planetesimals originating in an outer disk drive a slow divergent migration of the giant planets. This planetesimal-driven migration continues until Jupiter and Saturn cross their mutual 2:1 resonance. The resonance crossing excites the eccentricities of Jupiter and Saturn. The increased eccentricities create perturbations on Uranus and Neptune, increasing their eccentricities until the system becomes chaotic and orbits begin to intersect. Gravitational encounters between the planets then scatter Uranus and Neptune outward into the planetesimal disk. The disk is disrupted, scattering many of the planetesimals onto planet-crossing orbits. A rapid phase of divergent migration of the giant planets is initiated and continues until the disk is depleted. Dynamical friction during this phase dampens the eccentricities of Uranus and Neptune stabilizing the system. In numerical simulations of the original Nice model the final orbits of the giant planets are similar to the current Solar System.[10]
Later versions of the Nice model begin with the giant planets in a series of resonances. This change reflects some hydrodynamic models of the early Solar System. In these models, interactions between the giant planets and the gas disk result in the giant planets migrating toward the central star, in some cases becoming hot Jupiters.[11] However, in a multiple-planet system, this inward migration may be halted or reversed if a more rapidly migrating smaller planet is captured in an outer orbital resonance.[12] The Grand Tack hypothesis, which posits that Jupiter's migration is reversed at 1.5 AU following the capture of Saturn in a resonance, is an example of this type of orbital evolution.[13] The resonance in which Saturn is captured, a 3:2 or a 2:1 resonance,[14][15] and the extent of the outward migration (if any) depends on the physical properties of the gas disk and the amount of gas accreted by the planets.[15][16][17] The capture of Uranus and Neptune into further resonances during or following this outward migration results in a quadruply resonant system,[18] with several stable combinations having been identified.[19] Following the dissipation of the gas disk, the quadruple resonance is eventually broken due to interactions with planetesimals from the outer disk.[20] Evolution from this point resembles the original Nice model with an instability beginning either shortly after the quadruple resonance is broken[20] or after a delay during which planetesimal-driven migration drives the planets across a different resonance.[19] However, there is no slow approach to the 2:1 resonance as Jupiter and Saturn either begin in this resonance[15][17] or cross it rapidly during the instability.[18]
The stirring of the outer disk by massive planetesimals can trigger a late instability in a multi-resonant planetary system. As the eccentricities of the planetesimals are excited by gravitational encounters with Pluto-mass objects, an inward migration of the giant planets occurs. The migration, which occurs even if there are no encounters between planetesimals and planets, is driven by a coupling between the average eccentricity of the planetesimal disk and the semi-major axes of the outer planets. Because the planets are locked in resonance, the migration also results in an increase in the eccentricity of the inner ice giant. The increased eccentricity changes the precession frequency of the inner ice giant, leading to the crossing of secular resonances. The quadruple resonance of the outer planets can be broken during one of these secular-resonance crossings. Gravitational encounters begin shortly afterward due to the close proximity of the planets in the previously resonant configuration. The timing of the instability caused by this mechanism, typically occurring several hundred million years after the dispersal of the gas disk, is fairly independent of the distance between the outer planet and the planetesimal disk. In combination with the updated initial conditions, this alternative mechanism for triggering a late instability has been called the Nice 2 model.[20]