Ah cha, one must be understanding what is "partial pressure" of a gas, in a mixture, if one is wanting to be saying something about the dynamics of such. Vapour pressure is connected to insolation, but also to the capacity of a gas to absorb heat and 'accommodate' the added partial pressure; in this case the partial pressure of water vapour against all the other pressures/concentrations. This is much like finding a 'centre' from which something extends linearly, however it has non-linear 'amplification' pushing it too. So which is the 'signal' and which is the amplifier, and how does it make the signal larger - what is the amplitude? I think it resembles a voltage-amplifier, which means the voltage resembles H2O pp, and the signal is the 'induced' voltage across the input (resembling the 'heat' current/potential produced by CO2/methane pp). Heat density scales with H2O vapour density, which transports the excess heat via convection; Voltage potential 'transports' excess charge/current via 'electron convection'. This is, however an extremely simplified explanation - but not out of the cricket ground altogether. It's within the boundary.
What the transistor-as-atmosphere circuit needs is a more accurate/precise model of the components, so far there's just the potentials, as pp of a gas (which as all high-school students and Sesame St. watchers know, has a pressure). I want to launch into a review of some notes I got from somewhere, so maybe I should decamp to my favourite campsite - Phiz&Mat, to chuck a few things into it? See if I can wake Ben & co. up. Anyhoo, there are 'multiple' components in the climate circuit - only some of which we understand with that oh-so-precious accuracy and precision. Partly that's our 'fault' because we haven't invested the time, effort, technology, etc, until now, and maybe we shoulda done it sooner. I don't know that you can argue that well against the satellite images - the infrared record for example, the paleoclimate records (bubbles of ancient atmosphere, archeological records of the climate in tree rings and sedimentary deposits, blah blah), or the instrumentation, a lot of it electronic, of course, which has only reached a point on the curve that we can launch satellites that take all sorts of images. Electronics is cool, it ties to other kinds of physics, and the guts of oscillatory states - harmonic motion. Which of course has two flavours, like everything else: simple and complex. Otherwise (when it isn't simple or complex) its another sort of motion - which every circuit has, a level of chaotic 'noise', and which is tied to something called 'information content', but that's another model again. Electronics is sort of poised between dynamics and oscillatory motion of physical systems, information and communications, and, well, electromagnetics is part of the fabric of something else. And its an increasingly vital part of a whole lot of human activity, it's contributing as an industry, and from the 'follow-on' effect of all the power it requires and the heat content of different kinds of matter, and, well the motion of quantized particles, or how to make them move in certain ways. A potential stretches an elastic surface, so when the surface is perturbed by 'throwing' electrons at it, they bounce further than when the surface isn't stretched. Sort of thing. The link is that water vapour content is the 'stretch', and it stretches the thing that 'produces' it by retaining (delaying) heat, by preventing it from radiating into space (infinity). It's a positive feedback, a cycle which is open at one end, or it's closed by the boundary of the atmosphere. So finding the relevant components in it, is the job that the climate scientists and model builders are on. Like the LHC it's a seriously non-trivial task. How much is the 'data' worth? What is the expectation we'll see a signal at all?
