|
|
Post by Acolyte on Dec 24, 2008 23:29:32 GMT
Would be a nice puzzle if the images showed up... Are they perhaps on a pay-per-view site?
Also, it spoils the fun a bit to have the answer given with the puzzle...
EDIT: Oops, turned out to be my system - I reset the ADSL & voila, the pictures show up.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob9000 on Dec 26, 2008 8:11:02 GMT
Ok, so It's a quiet Boxing Day, my daughter's gone to bed and my wife's happy in front of the TV, and I've got a bit of time. So...I decided to measure the distances of the MNP from the NP, graph them over time, and correlate them with the temperature. And heeeerrrreee we are....   So there you go. However, there's some caveats with the data. First up, the map doesn't give you very good data. As Vukcevic noted, we really need a better and more accurate data set here. For one, I had no way of telling how quickly the pole moved between the centuries, so I had to assume a constant momentum between each mark, which of course gives an inaccurate answer. From 1400 to 1800 there are no intervening marks at all. The values that were in between the marks were simply my estimates of a quarter, and halfway between them. I just guessed. The Y axis units are in centimetres from the picture I worked off. In short, they're meaningless. I only 'made' my graph fit the temperature graph so we could see the correlation, (if any). Exactly how much difference this makes, (if any) isn't clear from this at all. In short, this is an estimate. It's not scientific, and I don't think it proves anything. Feel free to use this for whatever you want, but don't go sticking it on your Ph.D thesis because it's not hard, scientific data, it's an estimate. BTW, I measured the distance using the measuring tool on Photoshop. I clicked in the middle, then clicked on the orange line, and took what photoshop said was the measurement. Merry Christmas! |
|
|
|
Post by vukcevic on Dec 26, 2008 20:28:31 GMT
Appeal for a map of the Magnetic North Pole drift I need a map with a higher resolution and more details than the one above.
Please either post a web location or email to: vukcevicuATyahoo.com |
|
|
|
Post by tallbloke on Dec 27, 2008 10:00:35 GMT
Wouldn't the "centre of the summer ice area" move around as well as the effects of cloud coverage etc moved around with the MNP over the centuries? It's an interesting idea that the position of the MNP may be linked to temperature, but it seems a bit problematic to 'firm up' an idea concerning an area where there is little in the way of firm historical data, and no firm ground to stand on geographically. Would the idea 'fit' with the northwest passage being ice free near the start of the C20th (despite relatively cool global temps), and the vikings inhabiting a warm southern greenland around 900AD? Keep it coming  |
|
|
|
Post by vukcevic on Dec 27, 2008 11:29:53 GMT
Sorry for disappearance of my images and text files. My website has reached the limit and is deleting recent files. You can have some webspace on my server if you like. email me, rog (at) tallbloke (dot) net Thanks For the offer. I will sort out problem in the New Year after well deserved break. |
|
|
|
Post by tallbloke on Dec 28, 2008 9:08:52 GMT
You can have some webspace on my server if you like. email me, rog (at) tallbloke (dot) net
|
|
|
|
Post by csspider57 on Dec 28, 2008 22:23:24 GMT
Appeal for a map of the Magnetic North Pole drift I need a map with a higher resolution and more details than the one above.
Please either post a web location or email to: vukcevicuATyahoo.com No luck Vukcevic, thanks to you for the map we have. First thing I did when I saw it was to compare our current MNP to the MNP at Maunder. I imagine that is what most people here did. Do you think that heating of the outer core and the resulting expansion due to more liquidification of the outer core is the cause of polar wandering? It would seem that the liquidified portion, where our magnetic field is generated, would have to change and hotspots rising may show different field intensities or anomalies where it does rise, until the centrifuge stabilizes the new mass. Do you think that Earths core is self generating or self sustaining dynamo or is it directly sun induced or sun dependent. Lots of volcanism in the last century indicating the core heated simultaneously with the atmosphere as well as heat induced changes within the entire solar system. To me the last seven sunspot cycles are an anomaly in themselves, indicating or the intrduction of a new phenomenum to the regular sunspot cycles. This I believe to be associated with the location of the solar system within the interstellar environment, such as interstellar magnetic field strength and density of interstellar matter (clouds) which also changes in time as does the orbit of the solar system within this environment. But that's just my opinion. I bought Al Gores movie and started nibbling on the CO2 info, but I now think much differently about how this planet heats up! While searching for a more detailed map, I did run across some maps showing True Polar Wander TPW, (none with detail) depicting the North Magnetic Pole in the Pacific Ocean. Have to wonder what kind of sunspot cycles lead up to that scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Dec 29, 2008 9:46:28 GMT
There seems to be some variation as to just where the pole has been - Palomar has it wandering about since (it seems) 200AD or so - Natural Resources Canada claims it was discovered in 1831 & shows a more simplified path from there to 2001.  |
|
|
|
Post by csspider57 on Dec 30, 2008 2:48:33 GMT
There seems to be some variation as to just where the pole has been - Palomar has it wandering about since (it seems) 200AD or so - Natural Resources Canada claims it was discovered in 1831 & shows a more simplified path from there to 2001. I have that pic as well. I thought he was looking an older map with more dates. The mainstream wandering pole news articles re-surfaced again this past year after WHOI (Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst.) announced that their indeed was a volcanic eruption on Gakkel Ridge in the Arctic ocean in 1999. Mainstream media also released articles at this time stating that melting ice caps would trigger more volcanic eruptions. " series of 300 strong earthquakes over a period of eight months indicated an eruption at 85° N 85° E in 4 kilometres water depth in 1999."
www.idw-online.de/pages/de/news266954 Volcanic eruptions reshape Arctic ocean floor: study
The Gakkel Ridge, an underwater mountain chain snaking 1,800 kilometres (1,100 miles) from the northern tip of Greenland to Siberia.
by Staff Writers
Paris (AFP) June 25, 2008
Recent massive volcanoes have risen from the ocean floor deep under the Arctic ice cap, spewing plumes of fragmented magma into the sea, scientists who filmed the aftermath reported Wednesday.
The eruptions -- as big as the one that buried Pompei -- took place in 1999 along the Gakkel Ridge, an underwater mountain chain snaking 1,800 kilometres (1,100 miles) from the northern tip of Greenland to Siberia.
Scientists suspected even at the time that a simultaneous series of earthquakes were linked to these volcanic spasms.
But when a team led of scientists led by Robert Sohn of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts finally got a first-ever glimpse of the ocean floor 4,000 meters (13,000 feet) beneath the Arctic pack ice, they were astonished.
www.terradaily.com/reports/Volcanic_eruptions_reshape_Arctic_ocean_floor_study_999.html Earth's Core, Magnetic Field Changing Fast, Study Says
Kimberly Johnson
for National Geographic News June 30, 2008 Rapid changes in the churning movement of Earth's liquid outer core are weakening the magnetic field in some regions of the planet's surface, a new study says.
"What is so surprising is that rapid, almost sudden, changes take place in the Earth's magnetic field," said study co-author Nils Olsen, a geophysicist at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen.
The findings suggest similarly quick changes are simultaneously occurring in the liquid metal, 1,900 miles (3,000 kilometers) below the surface, he said.
The swirling flow of molten iron and nickel around Earth's solid center triggers an electrical current, which generates the planet's magnetic field.
news.nationalgeographic.com/n.../76158139.html Surprisingly rapid changes in the Earth's core discovered
July 08, 2008
Effects on the magnetic field
In a recent paper published in Nature Geoscience (*), the geophysicist Mioara MANDEA from the GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam and her Danish colleague Nils OLSEN from the National Space Institute/DTU Copenhagen, have shown that motions in the fluid in the Earth's core are changing surprisingly fast, and that this, in turn, effects the magnetic field of our Planet.
www.brightsurf.com/news/headlines/38844/Surprisingly_rapid_changes_in_the_Earths_core_discovered.html If the liquid outer core changes, the magnetic poles would move or drift. But what causes the core to heat and the outer core become more liquid. If you check the articles on sun activity during 1998 and 1999 you find this. Solar Flares on Steroids
Solar flares that scorch Earth's atmosphere are commonplace. But scientists have discovered a few each year that are not like the others: they come from stars thousands of light years away.
September 12, 2003: On August 24, 1998, there was an explosion on the sun as powerful as a hundred million hydrogen bombs. Earth-orbiting satellites registered a surge of x-rays. Minutes later they were pelted by fast-moving solar protons. Our planet's magnetic field recoiled from the onslaught, and ham radio operators experienced a strong shortwave blackout.
None of these things made headlines. The explosion was an "X-class" solar flare, and during years around solar maximum, such as 1998, such flares are commonplace. They happen every few days or weeks. The Aug. 24th event was powerful, yet typical.
A few days later--no surprise--another blast wave swept past Earth. Satellites registered a surge of x-rays and gamma-rays. Hams experienced another blackout. It seemed like another X-class solar flare. Except for one thing: this flare didn't come from the sun.
It came from outer space.
"The source of the blast was SGR 1900+14, a neutron star about 45,000 light years away," says NASA astronomer Pete Woods. "It was the strongest burst of cosmic x-rays and gamma rays we've ever recorded."
SGR 1900+14 is a special kind of neutron star called a magnetar. "Magnetars have the strongest magnetic fields in the universe: a million billion (1015) gauss," he says. For comparison, the magnetic field of the sun is less than 10 gauss in most places, and about 1000 gauss near sunspots.
Magnetism and solar flares go together. On the sun, flares happen when magnetic fields above sunspots become twisted and stretched. They're like rubber bands pulled too tightly. Snap! They recoil with explosive results. Physicists call this "magnetic reconnection."
science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/12sep_magnetars.htm Solar wind blows some of Earth's atmosphere into space
Polar spacecraft measures "auroral fountain" flowing out as solar wind flows in
Dec. 8, 1998: Residents of the far north who saw a massive display of the aurora borealis in late September were also staring through an invisible fountain of gas being accelerated into space by a powerful bubble of solar wind, which pumped about 200 gigawatts of electrical power into the Earth.
At the same time, a special space weather research satellite was taking measurements showing that solar events can directly affect our outer atmosphere.
"This is the first time we've been able to correlate these solar coronal mass ejections (CMEs) with enhanced ion outflows from the upper ionosphere," said Dr. James Spann of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center. Spann is a co-investigator on the Ultraviolet Imager, one of two instruments aboard the Polar spacecraft that measured the effects of the CME as it arrived at the Earth.
science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast08dec98_1.htm Now add this up with what we recently learned from the THEMIS satellites about reconnection. NASA Spacecraft Make New Discoveries about Northern Lights 12.11.2007
Even more impressive was the substorm's power. Angelopoulos estimates the total energy of the two-hour event at five hundred thousand billion (5 x 1014) Joules. That's approximately equivalent to the energy of a magnitude 5.5 earthquake.
Where does all that energy come from? THEMIS may have found an answer:
"The satellites have found evidence for magnetic ropes connecting Earth's upper atmosphere directly to the Sun," says Dave Sibeck, project scientist for the mission at the Goddard Space Flight Center. "We believe that solar wind particles flow in along these ropes, providing energy for geomagnetic storms and auroras."
science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2007/11dec_themis.htm Magnetic Portals Connect Sun and Earth
10.30.2008
Researchers have long known that the Earth and sun must be connected. Earth's magnetosphere (the magnetic bubble that surrounds our planet) is filled with particles from the sun that arrive via the solar wind and penetrate the planet's magnetic defenses. They enter by following magnetic field lines that can be traced from terra firma all the way back to the sun's atmosphere
science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/30oct_ftes.htm A Giant Breach in Earth's Magnetic Field
12.16.2008
"The opening was huge—four times wider than Earth itself," says Wenhui Li, a space physicist at the University of New Hampshire who has been analyzing the data. Li's colleague Jimmy Raeder, also of New Hampshire, says "1027 particles per second were flowing into the magnetosphere—that's a 1 followed by 27 zeros. This kind of influx is an order of magnitude greater than what we thought was possible."
science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/16dec_giantbreach.htm?list1049613 We know during earthquakes and volcanic eruptions that there are electrical discharges from the earth. But how does the Earth charge it's core simultaneouly to the warming and anomalies occurring on other planets in this solar system??? Answering the question might go against the grain of the MainStream. huh? |
|
|
|
Post by meemoeuk on Dec 31, 2008 4:46:59 GMT
> measure the distances of the MNP from the NP
Ok, but vukcevic suggested a corelation between temperature and distance of MNP from some ring through the pole.
Interesting relation vukcevic, at best it's evidence for a causal relation between the sun magnetic field and Earth's.
But a skeptic would point out that most swiggly lines simular to the MNP position could be arbitrarily bisected to give a corelation to world temp. Is there any independant reason for taking the pole ring that cuts through west russia and east america?
|
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Dec 31, 2008 5:44:28 GMT
A Giant Breach in Earth's Magnetic Field
12.16.2008
"The opening was huge—four times wider than Earth itself," says Wenhui Li, a space physicist at the University of New Hampshire who has been analyzing the data. Li's colleague Jimmy Raeder, also of New Hampshire, says "1027 particles per second were flowing into the magnetosphere—that's a 1 followed by 27 zeros. This kind of influx is an order of magnitude greater than what we thought was possible."
science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/16dec_giantbreach.htm?list1049613 OK I can't help myself... 10 27 particles per sec... & they found ti an order of magnitude greater than they thought possible - so they expected it might be 10 26 particles p/s? Or does someone (the quotee) not know what an order of magnitude is? We know during earthquakes and volcanic eruptions that there are electrical discharges from the earth. But how does the Earth charge it's core simultaneouly to the warming and anomalies occurring on other planets in this solar system??? Answering the question might go against the grain of the MainStream. huh? I've asked similar questions - & it's definitely against the mainstream but it gets a better reception here than on, say, bautforums. * Gravity is billions or more times weaker than either electric or magnetic force. * there are interconnected mangetospheres out to at least Jupiter's orbit * the solar wind is basically a sea of chagred particles out to the heliopause * the solar system consists of a number of metal balls (or equivalent where you've got metallic hydrogen) spinning & moving through the equivalent of a system-wide electric field. * most of those balls have a magentic component as well, even if it is weak - earth's is anomalously large for a small planet. Now I would be fascinated if someone could tell me how that ISN'T a magneto-electrical machine in motion? Just to add some fuel... one of the few clues we have as to the way Ed Leedskalnin thought is that he said there is no such thing as electric charge, that it is all just magnetic particles or fields. Now Ed didn't make computer models & he's not widely known as a physicist, theoretical or otherwise, but he did use what he knew to move hundreds of tonnes of rock around like it was balsa wood. See Coral Castlehe might have been incorrect in his theories but when someone has an idea that is different to how you & I see things, & he takes those dieas & does something you & I can't, I have a tendency to accept what he says until I get a better explanation. And to this day I have yet to see anyone provide a sensible explanation for what either magnetic poles or electric charges are. Like gravity we label it, describe it, use it to do work & then think we know what it is but truly we have no idea as to what generates any of them. So if you look at the heliosphere from the outside, you see a distorted egg, thicker shell in the direction of travel through the interstellar medium, & filled with an electric & magnetic flux and field, constantly in motion & generating both magnetic events & electric currents. I think we should be looking for electric and/or magnetic explanations that are (perhaps) modified slightly by the very weak gravitic effects. |
|
|
|
Post by csspider57 on Jan 1, 2009 16:49:11 GMT
Dec 29, 2008, 8:48pm, csspider57 wrote:
A Giant Breach in Earth's Magnetic Field
12.16.2008
"The opening was huge—four times wider than Earth itself," says Wenhui Li, a space physicist at the University of New Hampshire who has been analyzing the data. Li's colleague Jimmy Raeder, also of New Hampshire, says "1027 particles per second were flowing into the magnetosphere—that's a 1 followed by 27 zeros. This kind of influx is an order of magnitude greater than what we thought was possible."
science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/16dec_giantbreach.htm?list1049613
OK I can't help myself... 1027 particles per sec... & they found ti an order of magnitude greater than they thought possible - so they expected it might be 1026 particles p/s?
Or does someone (the quotee) not know what an order of magnitude is? I copied it from their web site and pasted it here. It should read 10 to the 27th power and not 1027. Why it didn't display as it should have I don't know. Good insights on the rest of your post there Acolyte. |
|
|
|
Post by jorgekafkazar on Jan 1, 2009 17:40:10 GMT
[stuff trimmed] "The swirling flow of molten iron and nickel around Earth's solid center triggers an electrical current, which generates the planet's magnetic field." [nationalgeographic link doesn't work] If the liquid outer core changes, the magnetic poles would move or drift. But what causes the core to heat and the outer core become more liquid. If you check the articles on sun activity during 1998 and 1999 you find this. [trimmed] A Giant Breach in Earth's Magnetic Field
12.16.2008
"The opening was huge—four times wider than Earth itself," says Wenhui Li, a space physicist at the University of New Hampshire who has been analyzing the data. Li's colleague Jimmy Raeder, also of New Hampshire, says "1027 particles per second were flowing into the magnetosphere—that's a 1 followed by 27 zeros. This kind of influx is an order of magnitude greater than what we thought was possible."
science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/16dec_giantbreach.htm?list1049613 We know during earthquakes and volcanic eruptions that there are electrical discharges from the earth. But how does the Earth charge it's [its] core simultaneouly to the warming and anomalies occurring on other planets in this solar system??? Answering the question might go against the grain of the MainStream. huh? Right. But {woo-woo ON} I don't think we have to look far for a connection between solar cycles and planetary heating. The Earth's core, and, to some extent, its crust and oceans, are conductors. Moving a conductor in a magnetic field [such as the Sun's] will generate a current. That current may, in turn, heat the crust/oceans. When the Sun's magnetic field drops off (as it recently has by about a factor of ten, the terrestrial dynamo stops generating current, thus reducing the magnetic heating. There are geologic forces associated with the dynamo that will be lessened as the sun's field drops. The accumulated stresses will then dissipate. Be careful where you're standing when they do.{woo-woo OFF} |
|
