Can we control the temperature of Earth?
- Thread starter Bjarne
- Start date
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
It IS a scientific a theory with supporting evidence.
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
The Wikipedia dynamo theory article has this
I am sure that everyone (except maybe Bjarne
) has done or seen the outlining of the structure of the magnetic fields from a bar magnetic by iron filings. Note that the magnetic field is vertical at the very center of the poles but at an angle at any horizontal distance. Now imagine floating above the north pole of a bar magnet and wanting to kow how far above it you are. The steps are easy:
It may not be necessary to got the the magnetic north pole. It may be possible to do the same calculation from observations of the magnetic field inclination from many points around the world. That sounds what Gauss did in his 1838 paper: Gauss, J. C. F., Allgemeine Theorie des Erdmagnetismus: Resultate aus den Beobachtungen des magnetischen Vereins in Jahre 1838. 1838, Leipzig. 73. ("General Theory of Terrestrial Magnetism: Results from the observations of the magnetic Association in 1838"). That publication is cited in this web page ("In 1838, the mathematical genius, Johann Carl Friedrich Gauss, proved that the Earth’s magnetism source is at, or very near, the center of the Earth [2] (Figure 1)." but I cannot find an English translation.
I do not know what observations this sentence is referring to, but here is how I would test how far from the surface of the Earth it's magnetic field was generated.
I am sure that everyone (except maybe Bjarne
) has done or seen the outlining of the structure of the magnetic fields from a bar magnetic by iron filings. Note that the magnetic field is vertical at the very center of the poles but at an angle at any horizontal distance. Now imagine floating above the north pole of a bar magnet and wanting to kow how far above it you are. The steps are easy:- Find the position where the magnetic field is vertical.
- Move a known distance horizontally and measure the inclination of the magnetic field again.
- Use the laws of magnetism to calculate what how far the north pole has to be away in order to produce the measured angle.
It may not be necessary to got the the magnetic north pole. It may be possible to do the same calculation from observations of the magnetic field inclination from many points around the world. That sounds what Gauss did in his 1838 paper: Gauss, J. C. F., Allgemeine Theorie des Erdmagnetismus: Resultate aus den Beobachtungen des magnetischen Vereins in Jahre 1838. 1838, Leipzig. 73. ("General Theory of Terrestrial Magnetism: Results from the observations of the magnetic Association in 1838"). That publication is cited in this web page ("In 1838, the mathematical genius, Johann Carl Friedrich Gauss, proved that the Earth’s magnetism source is at, or very near, the center of the Earth [2] (Figure 1)." but I cannot find an English translation.
Last edited:
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
The actual scientific dynamo theory
Dynamo theory is a branch of magnetohydrodynamics and shares its complexity. I certainly only uderstand the broad picture!
One source that helped me is this PDF, Dynamo Theory and Earth's Magnetic Field by Paul Demorest. He describes the basics and gives a couple of simple disc models to demonstrate it's basic principles.
Dynamo theory is a branch of magnetohydrodynamics and shares its complexity. I certainly only uderstand the broad picture!
One source that helped me is this PDF, Dynamo Theory and Earth's Magnetic Field by Paul Demorest. He describes the basics and gives a couple of simple disc models to demonstrate it's basic principles.
Bjarne
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,087
-------
If you had read the new theory, you would have knew better
Hence it is not proven according to the scientifically method, and therefore is not a theory
It is only mainstream brainwashed speculation.
And this is what are so damn said now a days.,
Because all it require to be "a theory" today is not the be approved by the scientifically method, as in the good old days,- but rather that if brain washing is going on long enough and mainstream believes (and entertainment) takes over, many people hence are hypnotized to belive we talk about a theory, simple because there is no way back, without to be total ridiculous. - Hence it’s better lying to one self and each other and claims it is a theory.
It’s ignorant incoherent illogical bogus entertainment, nothing else.,
And worse at all: it is force to ignore the FACT that magnetism and temperature are coincident. ( you too had not hear about it remember ? - Because that point to often is ignored amigo)
This old speculations (thesis) missing ability to comprehend coherent FACT - is decisive for that cows long ago have stopped believing that crap speculation.
-------
If you had read the new theory, you would have knew better
- It's not observed
- It is fare from experimental proven
- It is also not proven in other ways.
Hence it is not proven according to the scientifically method, and therefore is not a theory
It is only mainstream brainwashed speculation.
And this is what are so damn said now a days.,
Because all it require to be "a theory" today is not the be approved by the scientifically method, as in the good old days,- but rather that if brain washing is going on long enough and mainstream believes (and entertainment) takes over, many people hence are hypnotized to belive we talk about a theory, simple because there is no way back, without to be total ridiculous. - Hence it’s better lying to one self and each other and claims it is a theory.
It’s ignorant incoherent illogical bogus entertainment, nothing else.,
And worse at all: it is force to ignore the FACT that magnetism and temperature are coincident. ( you too had not hear about it remember ? - Because that point to often is ignored amigo)
This old speculations (thesis) missing ability to comprehend coherent FACT - is decisive for that cows long ago have stopped believing that crap speculation.
-------
Last edited:
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
I read it. It is not a scientific theory it is a bunch of pretty pictures and wrong ideas about science.
The pretty pitcure you linked to is especially strange. Magnetic fields do not act like that. They do not arbitrary change direction to flow thorough a box labeled "Thermal Heat". If you mean the lines to be magnetic field lines then you are wrong - the Earth's magnetic field is well mapped and does not look like that.
I was right: I am sure that everyone (except maybe Bjarne) has done or seen the outlining of the structure of the magnetic fields from a bar magnetic by iron filings.
Dynamo theory
- Is observed.
- Is experimentally confirmed
Hence it is confimed (science is never proven) according to the scientifically method, and therefore is a scientific heory.
This new speculation (idea + pretty pictures) is missing the ability to comprehend coherent FACT - is decisive for that cows long ago have never believed that crap speculation.
And worse at all: signs of the authors delusion and ignorance is that he interprets the FACT that magnetism and temperature are correlated to mean that temperature causes magetism.
Last edited:
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
In addtion to the previous fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads:
Now he is linking to his non-science web page about the cause of the Earth's magnetic field. He has the idea that it is due to magnetic material in the crust. He is ignorant of the fact that the origin of Earth's magnetic field has been established as internal (below the crust)
!
I think that was established by Gauss in 1838.
In addtion to the previous fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads:
Now he is linking to his non-science web page about the cause of the Earth's magnetic field. He has the idea that it is due to magnetic material in the crust. He is ignorant of the fact that the origin of Earth's magnetic field has been established as internal (below the crust)
!I think that was established by Gauss in 1838.
Bjarne
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,087
----
The points are:
When you heat up iron, you are weakening the magnetic field of the iron.
BUT (inside the crust of the Earth) it makes it much easier for a large amount of magnetic "power lines" to align with the rest of the crust in a hot area (below curie temp.)
Better magnetic intergration reinforces the global magnetic strength of the Earth.
We know that the Arctic Ocean (and northern Greenland) are large thermal areas and we also know these areas are positive magnetic anomalies. (This coincidence is also not accidentally)
Large heat flow through the crust causes magnetic structures in this area to be less frozen and more magnetically flexible.
You can easy demonstrate that.
Try to place several vertical iron beam in the Earth.
You will now be able to measure different magnetic strength in these beams, depending on how many “frozen magnetic structures” there are in each beam and where these are pointing to.
Without moving the beam, - varm these to above curie and let them cool down again.
Now almost all magnetic power lines are adapted and integrated to the magnetic field of the Earth, and the magnetic field in each of them are much stronger as before.
The crust of the Earth works in the same way.
Hence thermal areas, for example in northern Greenland or the Arctic Ocean can much more easy adapt to the ever changing’s magnetic directions.
Even though heat reduces the magnetic strength at the same times it improves the magnetic conductivity, and sometimes magnetic conductivity is more important as strength.
When the Earths crust ferro-magnetic field is integrated to a whole, - you off course must have magnetic collision - shown at the image above.
But when this happens in a thermal heated crust area, the colliding magnetic power lines are much easier to bend.
Both statements are wrong
Yes there is probably a hard inner core inside the Earth.
But this doesn’t prove that this is responsible for the magnetic field of the Earth.
The magnetic field of the Earth (is most of the time) stable and “organized” .
Experiments only shows completely chaotic magnetic fluctuation, that in no way can be compared with a organized magnetic field.
An organized electric circulation and hence an electromagnetic field has newer been proven experimentally either.
So how can you call it: "a electromagnetic field".
This is a fantasy muddle-headed idea, without any connection to realety.. .
I rather believe that this speculation, - maximum could be responsible for accidental lightning, but in no way responsible for that organized magnetic field the Earth most of the time possess.
So you have almost nothing, except empty speculation.
And still you MUST decide WHY are there magnetic and temperature variation coincidence.
It’s simply not allowed to ignore that. (except for muddle-headed thesis)
You know that the solar wind also is a magnetic dynamo too.
If you combine that fact with Svensmarks theory, (that in fact is experimentally proven) these two facts forms a synthesis, and seems to be the key to truly understand:
The solar wind seems to be the common denominator, and thta's the end of that story. - No need for advanced muddle.
This is alternative thought my friend, - at least as good as the incoherent and ignorant muddle thesis you belive in.
----
The points are:
When you heat up iron, you are weakening the magnetic field of the iron.
BUT (inside the crust of the Earth) it makes it much easier for a large amount of magnetic "power lines" to align with the rest of the crust in a hot area (below curie temp.)
Better magnetic intergration reinforces the global magnetic strength of the Earth.
We know that the Arctic Ocean (and northern Greenland) are large thermal areas and we also know these areas are positive magnetic anomalies. (This coincidence is also not accidentally)
Large heat flow through the crust causes magnetic structures in this area to be less frozen and more magnetically flexible.
You can easy demonstrate that.
Try to place several vertical iron beam in the Earth.
You will now be able to measure different magnetic strength in these beams, depending on how many “frozen magnetic structures” there are in each beam and where these are pointing to.
Without moving the beam, - varm these to above curie and let them cool down again.
Now almost all magnetic power lines are adapted and integrated to the magnetic field of the Earth, and the magnetic field in each of them are much stronger as before.
The crust of the Earth works in the same way.
Hence thermal areas, for example in northern Greenland or the Arctic Ocean can much more easy adapt to the ever changing’s magnetic directions.
Even though heat reduces the magnetic strength at the same times it improves the magnetic conductivity, and sometimes magnetic conductivity is more important as strength.
When the Earths crust ferro-magnetic field is integrated to a whole, - you off course must have magnetic collision - shown at the image above.
But when this happens in a thermal heated crust area, the colliding magnetic power lines are much easier to bend.
Both statements are wrong
Yes there is probably a hard inner core inside the Earth.
But this doesn’t prove that this is responsible for the magnetic field of the Earth.
The magnetic field of the Earth (is most of the time) stable and “organized” .
Experiments only shows completely chaotic magnetic fluctuation, that in no way can be compared with a organized magnetic field.
An organized electric circulation and hence an electromagnetic field has newer been proven experimentally either.
So how can you call it: "a electromagnetic field".
This is a fantasy muddle-headed idea, without any connection to realety.. .
I rather believe that this speculation, - maximum could be responsible for accidental lightning, but in no way responsible for that organized magnetic field the Earth most of the time possess.
So you have almost nothing, except empty speculation.
And still you MUST decide WHY are there magnetic and temperature variation coincidence.
It’s simply not allowed to ignore that. (except for muddle-headed thesis)
You know that the solar wind also is a magnetic dynamo too.
If you combine that fact with Svensmarks theory, (that in fact is experimentally proven) these two facts forms a synthesis, and seems to be the key to truly understand:
- Why are there magnetic and temperature variation coincidence
- The true outer dynamo
- The cause of ice ages.
- The (main) cause of climate change
The solar wind seems to be the common denominator, and thta's the end of that story. - No need for advanced muddle.
This is alternative thought my friend, - at least as good as the incoherent and ignorant muddle thesis you belive in.
----
Last edited:
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
The point is that the Earth's magnetic field is measured to originate 5000 kilometers below it's surface.
That is why the old idea that it is due to magnetic material in the crust was discarded in 1838.
The point is that the Earth's magnetic field is measured to reverse polarity at intervals.
That is why the old idea that it is due to magnetic material in the crust has never been raised again.
P.S. In order for this magnetic material to turn off or reverse polarity you would have to heat up the entire crust to its Curie point - hundreds of degrees.
Bjarne
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,087
This can off course only be based on what we believes.
Right
- + the fact that variation of the strength of the Earth magnetic field and global temperatures are coincident, - and that fits perfectly to a ferro-magnetic model, and a much better coherent overall understanding of much more.
- + the facts that in period the Earth magnetic field is so weak that it remind of the magnetic field of Mars, that doesn’t have any inner dynamo, but only a weak and chaotic ferro magnetic crust field. - In these periods not the worlds must stupid cow can see any need for a inner dynamo.
- + the South Atlantic Anomaly can’t be explained by a inner dynamo muddle, but a ferro magnetic crust theory doesn’t have that problem.
- + many of the crust anomalies can’t be explain by the inner dynamo, - but a ferro magnetic field combined with thermal heat flow doesn’t have that problem.
- + the coincidence between thermal heat and magnetic anomalies can not be explained by a inner dynamo speculation, but a ferro magnetic crust field theory doesn’t have that problem.
No not at all. Try to put a iron beam into the Earth, - down under, it will always have Magnetic South in the top. – Now turn it around, the same thing happen. (The opposite happens here. )
It always adapts to the Earth magnetic field.
Thermal heat will help to tie up frozen magnetic structures, hence the field will integrate / adapt better.
If MNP is in a positive magnetic area, (and calm), different thermal heat flow over time will gradually increase the magnetic strength automatically, - so the variation of heat flow through the crust integrates (a calm) magnetic field.
I suggest the following experiment, to solve how the magnetic field lines can bend so much.
Try to bend 2 pieces of iron, and heat up the area where the 2 MNP collides.
When temperatures rises you will guaranteed feel less resistance between the 2 pieces iron.
But still the magnetic field lines will flow into the magnetic (from North) just without resistance.
I also “predict” that you will have stronger magnetic field in the 2 beams when heating at the magnetic collision area.
We only need to understand more, how heat affects a magnetic field, rather than inventing things that doesn’t exist.
Also remember that even though heat weakening a magnetic field, this is both a truth, but also at the same time a lie. Because a magnetic field can much easier adapt / integrate in a warm area, so a warm (but still under curie) magnetic crust field can certainly be an advantage.
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,967
No. The knowledge that the magnetic field originates deep in the earth is based on objective measurement. Bjarne, you can't just go around dismissing data that you don't like as belief. This is objective knowledge, and you have to relate to it.
No it does not. First of all the coincidence is not nearly as clear as you try to claim (which you can find out if you actually read the articles you reference).
Secondly the global temperature changes are neither in a range or magnitude that has any relevance for a ferromagnetic function.
Finally, you forget that we are talking about average temperature. Short-term variation is much higher and has NO correlation with the magnetic field. How will you explain that only long-term variations are connected to the magnetic field, if it is a direct connection?
You are being insolent and stupid. Cut it out.
It has other problems, such as the fact that we can MEASURE that the magnet field does not originate from the crust.
You cannot explain how a thermal heat flow can influence a ferromagnetic crust.
Yes it can. There is a connection through the Solar wind.
The rest was pure nonsense.
In China just now, and I must be really bored to spend time with this. The technical guys are hard at work on a problem, hehehe.
Hans
Last edited:
Bjarne
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,087
The so-called inner dynamo is not “objective”.
Hence you can’t know what you actually are measuring.
There are a lot we don’t know, for example can thermal heat bend the magnetic power lines?
Off course it can.
We can not expect that our limit knowledge always MUST fit for every phenomena, - and not at all so long our knowledge of what magnetism really is unknown.
The only (small) problem the old ferro-magnetic thesis, realle had were: how the magnetic power lines could bend so sharp.
Remember the new inner muddle dynamo had a lot more unsolved problems that a ferro magnetic model would have.
Crap.
Most scientists agree this is a fact.
And you can easy see your self it just by comparing simple graph you can find everywhere on the internet.
Ignoring such a important clue/fact, only demonstrate how superficial “science” have become now a days.
What are you trying to say ? – That you are blinded / inflexible by the inner dynamo muddle speculation, and can’t see any other possible explanations? Well as expected. But proves will change now my friend.
This demonstrates that you haven’t read the theory.
Shortly
There are two factors that affect yhe magnetic field of the Earth, and hence > global temperatures
- The strength of the solar wind
- The Strength of the Earth magnetic field (and this factor depend on where are MNP right now, because the placement of MNP is responsible for the Earth Magnetic susceptibility.)
If you can’t beat the theory, then go for the man ;Mr. Nasty, - or ignore fact.
No one know what causes this anomaly. The reason for this is everybody are single tracked blinded by the geo dynamo muddle.
The cause of that anomaly is obvious simple in a ferro-magnetic model, - simply ferro-magnetic disintegration, caused by bad placement of MNP in areas with bad magnetic conductivity and magnetic entanglement.
Crap.
Ask Danish Space Center they know these coincidence are facts (and not caused by the Solar wind).
The prevailing explanation (in Antarctic) is ice-friction between ice and the crust and that this created a electromagnetic circulation and this again a stronger magnetic field = magnetic anomaly ( HA HA HA HA HA HA HA how funny) .
This shows to me rather electromagnet magnetic short circuit in some peoples brain, or rather desperations trying to keep a old weak staggering and muddle thesis on the track.
Many other magnetic/heat coincidence: scientist (are honest to admit) they have no idea what causing these ( these are beging examined according to Peter Stauning) ....... (threatening to kill the staggering thesis any moment)
Try to google on: Ørsted ser under isen, (and Google-translate it to English.)
And you can read the joke for you self. - “due to friction” how funny.
How much does the ice under Anarctic moves then.......... ( this is where the cows were bending out,... before being killed by laughter )
It is true that there is coincidence between thermal heat and magnetic anomalies, but that this is causes by “friction” is a absolute ridiculous.
Such funny assumptions pop up because if the inner dynamo really rules the field, then thermal heat has no influence on the magnetic field.
But if the field instead is ferro-magnetic, then thermal heat flow lead to a completely different down to Earth explanation, already explained above.
And so it goes
Here is one more crap history:
http://videnskab.dk/content/dk/naturvidenskab/jordens_magnetfelt_andrer_sig_lynhurtigt
Because scientist is complete blinded by the electromagnetic muddy idea they MUST believe that ALL changing’s of the Earth magnetic field MUST be caused by electrical circuit and hence electromagnetism, - and nothing else.
And even though they self are surprised again and again - no one really wakes up and ask the question: could we be on the wrong track?
I mean if any one did, he would certainly be "thrown over board", because of crackpot activity.
Then better keep one mouth shut and swallow the bitter creeds.
What this story "should" have been telling was: that (fast) thermal heat flow is changing the magnetic field of the Earth. But as mentioned this is forbidden thinking.
I already did in the post above, but it seems you didn’t read it.
Put a iron beam in the Earth, don’t move it.
Now heat it up (let say to the Curie point) and let it cool down again.
Now it contributes stronger to the Earths purely ferro-magnetic field.
It’s in fact so simple. No advanced electromagnetic brain short circuit is really necessary.
But as mentioned rectified thinking is only allowed, and the price to pay is common sense.
The world wants to be deceived, and it’s not much to do about it, except wait to nature shows (and proves) us how funny our ideas are.
Last edited:
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
In your own words: Crap.
The fact that the magnetic field originates deep in the earth is based on objective measurements.
This was shown by Johann Carl Friedrich Gauss in 1838 using objective measurements of the Earth's magnetic field. The basics are really easy.
- Measure the direction in which Earth's magnetic field points at various places around the world.
- That gives you magnetic field lines that you can trace to position of the origin of the magnetic field.
- Note that that position is ~5000 kilometers below the surfac eof the Earth.
Bjarne
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,087
It’s a fact you can’t know if speculation (and measurement) on the surface really reflect something that takes place 5000 km inside the Earth.
The fact that we know how magnetic power field lines behave in (and around) cold iron, - doesn’t mean this behave similar when iron (or part of it) is in a heated area (and collide).
We should rather execute experiments based on all possibilities.
Because we haven’t understood everything, (for example not even what magnetism really is etc…) How can you expect nature to act like you believe it should. ?
You must instead read ALL the writing on the wall, and not only that that fits to yours believe.
Doing so me and the cows would not be the only one that can see something is seriously wrong with our prevailing believes, because you have not only few contradiction, but in fact many.
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
The fact is that we know how magnetic fields act around both cold iron and hot iron. Experiments have been done on magnetics for centuries.
What they show is that the shape of magnetic field around a magnetic remains the same at all temperatures. You can use the shape of the magnetic field to determine where the magnetic is if all you can do is measure the field. This was shown by Johann Carl Friedrich Gauss in 1838 using measurements of the Earth's magnetic field. The basics are really easy.
- Measure the direction in which Earth's magnetic field points at various places around the world.
- That gives you magnetic field lines that you can trace to position of the origin of the magnetic field.
- Note that that position is ~5000 kilometers below the surfac eof the Earth.
The fact is that you are displaying your ignorance of physics in exactly the same way you have displayed it in your other threads:
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his three threads
The dumb part of "It’s a fact you can’t know if speculation (and measurement) on the surface really reflect something that takes place 5000 km inside the Earth." is that it applies equally to your resurrection of the old and debunked MF from the crust theory. When we go to the magnetic north pole we do not find a chunk of magnetic material lying on the surface. What we find is that the MNP is currently in the sea ice near Ellesmere Island in northern Canada. And moves about 64 kilometers a year.
It would be equally dumb to say: "It’s a fact you can’t know if speculation (and measurement) on the surface really reflect something that takes place X meters below sea level."
Bjarne
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,087
But when 2 of more magnetic field collides, its a different situation.
2 Cold magnetic resist to approach in a known way
But experiments described in post 90 are important
Like that, - this certainly will change the way the lines flow...
If you believe such experiment have been done, - why should it ? -and what is your source?
We have more to learn regarding this.
Several phenomena's, - can never, - in no way be explained based on a geodynamo model, - this supports we are on the wrong track, and completely wasting time and money.
Remember even though MNP is in a cold areas, thermal heat will always more of less dominate the crust.
Edit
What would happen if the stream of 2 rivers collides?
We can guess what happens, - but we properly need to make some experiments to know more exactly.
Do you think that such experiments have been done ? - Why should someone do it?
And even if, probably it is forgotten somewhere nobody knows, - and not used to anything,
I think it is pretty easy, one time for all, to smash the only argument that keeps the so called geo dynamo alive.
Last edited:
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,967
Yes, Bjarne we know what we are measuring. That you can't understand it, is entirely your problem.
Thermal heat? Thermal means heat. So thermal heat = heat heat
.Your ignorance shows through all the time.
But, no, heat can't bend magnetic field lines. And there is no such thing as magnetic power lines.
Yet this is exactly what you are trying to do. You are trying to cram everything into your own fragmented knowledge, and all other knowledge you dismiss as belief.
That is not exactly a small problem. It is a huge problem. It is like finding your car has no wheels. And it is not the only problem either: The ferromagnetic model can't explain pole reversals.
Only because you have not understood half of it.
Bjarne, the nonsense on your homepage makes no sense at all. Those are not theories, they are the ramblings of an ignoramus.
Hans
Bjarne
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,087
It can rearrange a magnetic field.
What happens when you combine heat, and magnetic collisions, only experiments will reveal.
But since you probably is satisfied to be a believer, you don’t need. – I do. - And I will do so soon i get time. - I like to smash "scientific" creeds. - This is what true science is about.
Last edited:
Usually though the conclusion comes AFTER the experiment.