Thank you for the lucid explanation Naima; I believe I can now visualize the difference between the two terms. Because kinematic viscosity decreases for air at a higher density, it flows more easily under the influence of gravity. Thus, you've essentially answered my question about whether my calculations are correct regarding the derivation of the frictional Taylor number.

I need this data because I'm also trying to decide the atmospheric circulation regime for my planet, with a preference for "multiple jets" which features eddies that mature into cyclones vs. asymmetric circulation which precludes jets and eddies from forming in the first place. Essentially I want a planet that features unpredictable weather dominated by cyclones, which can only occur at about 2.3 atmospheres on my planet factoring in its (extreme) rotation rate.

By discussing this topic with enthusiasm, I was also hoping to generate interest, and therefore membership applications, for Cartographer's Guild. I notice that 4,500 individuals have viewed my map as of 7 PM on February the 6th. If even one in 1,000 of those viewers had any expertise or previous interest on this topic, that could potentially generate 4 or 5 new members who could support Cartographer's Guild and join the discussion, especially for conworld submissions, which I consider the "less popular" type of map.

Again, thank you, Naima, for your expertise in explaining the difference between dynamic viscosity and kinematic viscosity; I'm now one step closer to a finished project here.

And for those other members who are interested in this kind of map, I'll update you as soon as I have more material.

Thanks.

Peter