Earths Magnetic Field

[Sparky]

Working with data collected from the CARISMA radio array and interpreted as audio, we hear tweeting and rumbles caused by incoming solar wind, captured at the frequency of 20 Hertz.

I can't hear the audio at the link, but in the 60's i was able to listen to the received signal of a Forward Propagation Tropospheric Scatter, or Tropo for short, in Alaska. It sounded like seagulls.

[Dragoneye]

While not expressing an opinion one way or the other, I have to admit that - given that they are charged sheath vortexes after all - I am wondering if the New Years Eve tornados were correlated with the bird deaths.

Not causal, but whether the tornados were spawned and the birds killed by the same thing. And if so, what's that thing?

Not saying they are... just wondering.

May be on to something here.

As human observers of the earth and cosmos we note, obviously, that which we see or otherwise detect/experience through our senses. due to this things like dust devils, tornados, hurricanes and assorted other forms of whirlwinds are noted and logged.

We now know via EU that these whirlwinds are indeed charged sheath vortices. Could there be lesser or undetected by human senses charged sheath vortices? In the autumn when leaves have fallen it is a very common sight to see a small grouping of these fallen leaves being whirled around by some supposed movement of air. The wind remains unseen be we note the effect it has on the leaves. There are no gusts shaking the trees. We note that we rarely feel even a zephyr, yet the leaves go whirling down the sidewalk in front of us. Could it be that there are charged sheath vortices that never manifest as visible whirlwinds? If so, could these be of sufficient energy to disrupt the magnetic senses of birds, fish, whales or assorted other animals? Could it also be that unseen charged sheath vortices are responsible for certain cloud anomalies which appear as a hole punched in a thin layer of cloud such as seen here: (may want to turn down audio as language may be rough for some)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxyloVlG3Dc
and here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-4zkXKeB_s

I would propose that such charged sheath vortices(csv) do exist and impact us here on earth. Further, it is quite possible that just as these would disrupt the senses and perhaps neural patterns of other terrestrial lifeforms that these csv can and do affect humans as well. Such an effect was postulated by Velikovsky in "Worlds in Collision". There are videos that could ultimately be evidence of just such an effect. These are of news reporters just suddenly speaking incoherently. There may be other effects such as a person just suddenly stopping and starting to stare and drool.

The human body is electric. Our brains and neural systems are also electric. We do not know the full impact of this yet but there is much that would lead one to think that such effects could occur. This was the basis of the former and now the new attempts at electro-shock therapy. One must also ask of the effects of tasering or accidental electric shocks. Is there a time exposure component (duration of shock)? Is there a frequency component (such as in DC to AC)?

This is something I continue to watch as I think bears much further investigation.

On the earth there are things that are EU connected like the South Atlantic Anomaly, ocean whirlpools and so on that are occurring on the earth today. These demand explanation from and beyond the fundamentals of EU.

[Lloyd]

A friend asked: if ... unmagnetized planets are still spinning, why, or how, would they have lost whatever magnetic field they would have originally generated [if planetary magnetic fields are due to spinning charges]?

* For answers, I think some of the material below is promising.
Earth’s Magnetic Field Fluctuates?
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2003/29dec_magneticfield

According to Glatzmaier, the ongoing 10% decline doesn't mean that a reversal is imminent. "The field is increasing or decreasing all the time," he says. "We know this from studies of the paleomagnetic record." Earth's present-day magnetic field is, in fact, much stronger than normal. The dipole moment, a measure of the intensity of the magnetic field, is now 8 × 1022 amps × m2. That's twice the million-year average of 4× 1022 amps × m2.

* Of course, the dating of a million-year average is likely way wrong. But it may indicate what the strength of Earth's magnetic field was before it entered the Solar System. Right? And that may show how much charge the Earth was subjected to [in the Saturn System].
Sources of Charge for Earth’s Magnetic Field
* Mathis contends that charge is a flow of spinning photons emitted by all matter.
http://milesmathis.com/galmag.pdf

William Gilbert, … with his terrellas, or little Earths, back in 1600, … showed that the Earth acted like a magnetized object by comparing it to a sphere he shaped out of a lodestone. By passing a small compass over the terrella, Gilbert demonstrated that a horizontal compass would point towards the magnetic pole, while a dip needle, balanced on a horizontal axis perpendicular to the magnetic one, indicated the proper "magnetic inclination" between the magnetic force and the horizontal direction. …[T]he lodestone is magnetized without converting mechanical energy to magnetic energy. [Is] the magnetism of a terrella due to a dynamo in the core? No, it is due to charge. Why can a lodestone be explained with charge but the Earth needs a dynamo? Put simply, it is because modern physicists can't figure out where the Earth's charge comes from. Since they can't point to a source, they prefer to hide it. But there are two pretty obvious sources, and it takes a large degree of dullness to miss them. The first is the charge at the quantum level, which does not disappear when you decrease your magnification. Every electron and proton is charged, and that charge does not disappear when they combine in atoms. The atom is fairly neutral, but the ions are still charged inside. Charge offsets to some degree, but it doesn't disappear. The second is the Sun, which is bombarding us with E/M radiation all the time. Everything contains charge, but it should be doubly obvious that E/M radiation contains charge. How do they think these ions are ionized[?]: charge. Modern physicists seem to think that charge is something like a kick, that doesn't persist after the kick. But we know that charge is more like an injection or a coat of paint [or an emission], that the ion carries with it.

Explanation of Planets’ Magnetic Fields
http://milesmathis.com/marsmag.pdf

I have already explained the lack of magnetism on Venus as due to the fact that it [Venus] is upside down. When its magnetic field is emitted from the surface, this field hits the ambient field. Since one field is upside down to the other, they cancel as a matter of spin. Yes, I have shown that magnetism is a function of photon spin, and the photons coming out of Venus are upside down…. Compared to the Solar system field, Venus is emitting anti-photons. We have a spin cancellation. It is that simple.
… Venus, especially, has a powerful ionosphere, one that blocks the Solar Wind much like our magnetosphere.
… With the Moon, we have a slightly different mechanism. … Since the Moon is so close to the Earth, the Moon's ambient field is determined more by the Earth than the Sun.
… Mars is not upside down, like Venus, and it is not spinning that slowly, and it is not in the shadow of some other very near body. Its day is about the same as the Earth's, and its radius is about half, so it seems at a glance that by my theory it would have about half the charge and therefore half the magnetism. But that “at a glance” is way off, since we have left Jupiter out of it. We can't do that, as I showed in both my axial tilt papers and my Bode series paper. Charge moving toward the Sun increases in charge density and therefore in charge power, which also increases the magnetic power. This is just to say that the photons get closer together, because they are moving into a smaller volume. Therefore, Mars IS [in] the shadow of another body [Jupiter].

Solar System Was Different in the Past

We know that although Mars has a low current magnetism, some of the rocks on Mars have a much higher residual magnetism. This has been taken to mean that Mars had more magnetism in the past. I think this is entirely possible, and that this reading is probably correct. But I do not think the magnetism was knocked off the planet by asteroids. No, this residual magnetism in the rocks on Mars is telling us something very important, not about Mars, but about the make-up of the Solar system in the past. It means that either Mars was not at its current orbital distance at that time, or the big outer planets were not. Something was vastly different. Given the asteroid belt and other glaring evidence, this is not hard to imagine. From this we see that my theory of planetary magnetism will give us the tool to work backward in time, rebuilding previous Solar system relationships. These rocks, which we find on other planets and moons as well, are like tablets with numbers on them. They will be very useful in future.

Positive and Negative Layers in Planets
* Charles Chandler has suggested on the NIAMI board that the Sun’s magnetic field is so weak, only 3 times as strong as the Earth’s, because of opposing fields generated by positive and negative layers within the Sun. The planets could also have such layers.

[seasmith]

* Charles Chandler has suggested on the NIAMI board that the Sun’s magnetic field is so weak, only 3 times as strong as the Earth’s, because of opposing fields generated by positive and negative layers within the Sun.

Possibly, but maybe on a sliding planet-solar-IMF scale it is not weaker, only more extended and diffuse in Form.
The sun's magnetosphere is ultimately a response to its galactic trajectory (~modulated by planetary motions);
as the planets' fields are to their solar orbits, just as Mathis infers.

Inner solar layers would seem to be more characteristic of its function as capacitor, which aren't normally magnets, but do modulate charge.

IMF-sun-planets are in a constant oxidation/reduction cycle, to extend a molecular analogy.

[nick c]

Welcome back Lloyd,

A friend asked: if ... unmagnetized planets are still spinning, why, or how, would they have lost whatever magnetic field they would have originally generated [if planetary magnetic fields are due to spinning charges]?

I think your friend is implying that the planets (at least in some cases and/or to some degree) may be acting as lodestones or permanent magnets - the degree of magnetization and/or demagnetization of the particular planets as the result of their differing and catastrophic histories. The surfaces of the various terrestrial type bodies show the marks of electrical discharges on a planet wide scale. I do not know what effect interplanetary discharges would have on a planets charge? or the resulting effect if a planet was a satellite of a captured brown dwarf star or gas giant planet and then removed from that position. Seems to me that some terella style experimentation may shed some light.

For answers, I think some of the material below is promising.
Earth’s Magnetic Field Fluctuates?
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/sc ... neticfield

According to Glatzmaier, the ongoing 10% decline doesn't mean that a reversal is imminent. "The field is increasing or decreasing all the time," he says. "We know this from studies of the paleomagnetic record." Earth's present-day magnetic field is, in fact, much stronger than normal. The dipole moment, a measure of the intensity of the magnetic field, is now 8 × 1022 amps × m2. That's twice the million-year average of 4× 1022 amps × m2.

* Of course, the dating of a million-year average is likely way wrong. But it may indicate what the strength of Earth's magnetic field was before it entered the Solar System. Right? And that may show how much charge the Earth was subjected to [in the Saturn System].

Yes, it is a matter of interpretation of the data. Certainly, the conclusions of consensus scientists are dependant upon uniformitarian assumptions. Even if we discard the dating, which comes from radiometric measurements of geological strata, they are still assuming that the increases and decreases of the Earth's magnetic field took place upon an Earth with little or no changes from the ambient conditions that we are experiencing today. In other words, the assumption is that EM conditions including cycles, orbital and rotation parameters, primary Sun, etc. etc. were the same as today; these assumptions do not apply to a catastrophic model. If the Earth's magnetic field and charge is a remnant of the past then there is no reason to assume that the present measured decline is the result of a cycle or that it will eventually reverse. So when we detect that a certain geological strata was formed under a stronger field and/or reversed magnetic polarity it tells us nothing about the present conditions.
Back to the dating: I find it interesting that consensus geology totally ignores the century old work of Folgheraiter. Apparently it is one of those inconvenient anomalies that is best left unaddressed. After analyzing the magnetic dip of numerous Etruscan and Greek vases, Folgheraiter came to the inescapable conclusion that sometime in the early 1st millenium BCE the Earth reversed its' magnetic field.
Nature, Dec. 31, 1896, P206
http://books.google.com/books?id=50cCAA ... es&f=false
Now we can quibble with the dates, whether a particular vase is from 500 BCE or 900 BCE, but either way there is no reconcilliation with the currently accepted dates by consensus geology. Using the radiometric clocks, the last reversal is said to have taken place some 780,000 years ago, yet we have physical evidence (if not a complete reversal, at least parts of Europe were in the southern magnetic field of the Earth) that such an event took place not only within the memory of man but within historical times.



Wal Thornhill on what generates a planet's magnetic field:

A rotating charged body will produce a dipolar magnetic field. Scientists discard this simple explanation because it is calculated for the Earth that the moving charge would have to constitute a current of a billion Amps, which implies a tremendously strong electric field at the Earth’s surface. But this simple electrostatic argument fails in a plasma environment. The electric field at the Earth’s surface reflects merely the difference in voltage between the Earth and its plasma sheath at the magnetospheric boundary with the solar wind. Like a bird sitting on a high-voltage transmission line, we are unaware of the electrification beneath our feet.
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=e511t4z2

In that context, the question comes down to what is the source of the Earth's magnetic field (or charge)?
1. Permanent magnet or remnant magnetism
2. Internal dynamo
3. External source
4. Some combination of the above
What is the source of a planet's charge (or lack thereof)?

[redeye]

I have already explained the lack of magnetism on Venus as due to the fact that it [Venus] is upside down. When its magnetic field is emitted from the surface, this field hits the ambient field. Since one field is upside down to the other, they cancel as a matter of spin.

How does Miles explain Uranus and Neptune?

Voyager's observations revealed that the magnetic field is peculiar, both because it does not originate from the planet's geometric center, and because it is tilted at 59° from the axis of rotation.[89][90] In fact the magnetic dipole is shifted from the center of the planet towards the south rotational pole by as much as one third of the planetary radius.[89] This unusual geometry results in a highly asymmetric magnetosphere, where the magnetic field strength on the surface in the southern hemisphere can be as low as 0.1 gauss (10 µT), whereas in the northern hemisphere it can be as high as 1.1 gauss (110 µT).[89] The average field at the surface is 0.23 gauss (23 µT).[89] In comparison, the magnetic field of Earth is roughly as strong at either pole, and its "magnetic equator" is roughly parallel with its geographical equator.[90] The dipole moment of Uranus is 50 times that of Earth.

Neptune also resembles Uranus in its magnetosphere, with a magnetic field strongly tilted relative to its rotational axis at 47° and offset at least 0.55 radii, or about 13500 km from the planet's physical centre.

Quotes from Wikipedia

Cheers!

[Lloyd]

Mathis on Uranus and Neptune Magnetic Fields
* Here are 3 of Mathis' papers that deal with Uranus and Neptune magnetic fields: https://www.google.com/#hl=en&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=site:milesmathis.com+uranus+neptune+%22magnetic+field%22.
Video on Earth's Magnetic Field
* I found a website, http://physicsexplained.blogspot.com/2008_12_01_archive.html, that suggests that the magnetic field of Earth is due to the core being oval-shaped and moving about in relation to the surface, explaining why the magnetic poles move on the surface. There's a video to show this more clearly at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiCBrXKIH_0.

[redeye]

Thanks for the links Lloyd. I like Miles as I think he asks a lot of the right questions but I generally dislike his solutions as I feel he is making the same mistakes as the people he criticises, too many ad hoc entities in his models, although a lot of his stuff is over my head to be honest.

Uranus and Neptune are the two main obstacles to understanding Magnetosheres as they just don't seem to have paid attention in physics class and are a couple of rebels doing whatever they please, very inconsiderate IMHO!

Neptune axial tilt and magnetosphere

simpler image of axis and magnetosphere

cool resources

I believe planetary magnetospheres are created by a toroidal electrical current around a planet, see this thread, and I also believe that this electrical current is formed from an interaction with the Heliospheric current sheet and the planet's interaction with the sun in much the same way that Io interacts with Jupiter. I can't really say why, of course, but I feel study of the Io Jupiter relationship may be the key to gaining an understanding of magnetospheres in general.

Todays TPOD shows the bright spots in the "Southern" hemisphere of Uranus. I had been wondering if these could be analagous to the bright spots in Jupiter's polar aurorae, as alluded to in the TPOD?

I seem to remember having a point when I started typing this but I seem to have forgotton where I was going.......anyway.

Cheers!

[Sparky]

redeye:

I like Miles as I think he asks a lot of the right questions but I generally dislike his solutions -

Miles:

-the photons coming out of Venus are upside down-

how could anyone not like conclusions like that?!

[redeye]

how could anyone not like conclusions like that?!

Aye, but at least he's asking the difficult questions and encouraging people to look at things from a different perspective.

Cheers!

[seasmith]

.
Origin of particle acceleration in cusps of Earth's magnetosphere uncovered

" ... In the meantime, the interplanetary magnetic field changed direction from northward to southward, thus shifting the site where magnetic reconnection events occur from one side of the cusp to the opposite side," she adds.

The various components of Earth's magnetic environment.
Credit: ESA

A magnetic reconnection event is a variation in the magnetic field line configuration, which also results in the release of energy. A shift in the reconnection site changes the location, size and shape of the region of weak magnetic field in the cusp – the so-called diamagnetic cavity. As they crossed the cusp on 14 February 2003, the four Cluster spacecraft encountered a cavity whose structure was varying in space and time due to magnetic reconnection. Hence, they repeatedly entered and exited regions of weaker and stronger magnetic field; at times, three spacecraft were in the cavity and one outside of it, or vice versa.

"Our analysis of the Cluster data and comparison with simulations provide the first robust evidence in favour of a local acceleration mechanism: particles are being energised within the cusps," explains Katariina Nykyri from the Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (USA).

"Our simulations revealed that magnetic reconnection events contribute significantly to modifying the structure of the electric potential within the cusp region," he adds. This is particularly interesting in this context since particles gain energy as they cross regions with potential differences. The simulations also showed that the cavity's geometrical configuration can efficiently trap particles for significant periods of time within the cusp.

http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object ... ctid=50424


Isn't it the other way around:
That a change in "electric potential" modifies the structures of the ambient magnetic field domains, as in the formation of a double-layer ?
Or is the process reversible and inversible ??

[Sparky]

-the four Cluster spacecraft encountered a cavity whose structure was varying in space and time due to magnetic reconnection.

[seasmith]

Sparky » Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:55 pm

-the four Cluster spacecraft encountered a cavity whose structure was varying in space and time due to magnetic reconnection.

Looking beyond the discussion about the validity of the whole magnetic reconnection model for a while, let's just look at the data presented.
1. There are cusps (points of intersection of two arcs or curves) where earth's magnetic domain interacts with the surrounding solar magnetic domain, and where solar 'wind' particles can enter the upper atmosphere. These particles are often accelerated in the cusp zones.
2. There are volumes within the cusps where the magnetic field(s) are very weak, that they call "diamagnetic cavities".
3. Within these cavities, the ESA satellites detected electrons accelerating perpendicularly to the local magnetic field, and since they were anti-parallel to the B field, their conclusion is that the Acceleration is a local dynamic.
[Acceleration of charged particles is an effect of Electric "potential differences"]
[ Cavities, in optics, are used as resonant chambers to amplify an effect ]
4. Coincidently, "In the meantime, the interplanetary magnetic field changed direction from northward to southward, thus shifting the site where [[magnetic reconnection]?] events occur from one side of the cusp to the opposite side,"


So the questions are to precedence:
Is there an interplanetary, or larger, Electric potential change that is causing the ""interplanetary magnetic field change" ?
Is the electron acceleration purely a local magnetic effect, or a secondary consequence of magnetic
Pole reversal & Reformation of electric double-layers (lining the cusps) ?

s

[sjw40364]

how could anyone not like conclusions like that?!

Yah, but he does come up with some good ideas, and he'll let them know just how right he is and wrong they are

[seasmith]

~
Remember the "Magnetic Portals Connect Earth to the Sun" THEMIS satellite story a couple years ago:

"It's called a flux transfer event or 'FTE,'" says space physicist David Sibeck of the Goddard Space Flight Center. "Ten years ago I was pretty sure they didn't exist, but now the evidence is incontrovertible."

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/sc ... 0oct_ftes/


Now NASA has found a way to find these with the upcoming (2014) Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission, by mapping "X-points"; derived from previous magnetospheric mapping done in the '90's by the Polar probe.

"We call them X-points or electron diffusion regions," explains plasma physicist Jack Scudder of the University of Iowa. "They're places where the magnetic field of Earth connects to the magnetic field of the Sun, creating an uninterrupted path leading from our own planet to the sun's atmosphere 93 million miles away."

http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibr ... image_full

Observations by NASA's THEMIS spacecraft and Europe's Cluster probes suggest that these magnetic portals open and close dozens of times each day. They're typically located a few tens of thousands of kilometers from Earth where the geomagnetic field meets the onrushing solar wind. Most portals are small and short-lived; others are yawning, vast, and sustained. Tons of energetic particles can flow through the openings, heating Earth's upper atmosphere, sparking geomagnetic storms, and igniting bright polar auroras.
...
Mingling lines of magnetic force from the sun and Earth criss-cross and join to create the openings. "X-points" are where the criss-cross takes place. The sudden joining of magnetic fields can propel jets of charged particles from the X-point, creating an "electron diffusion region."

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/sc ... enportals/


"Portals" are another variety of "Cusps of Earth's Magnetosphere"


s