Earth's rotating inner core shifts speeds
http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/13/18233749-earths-rotating-inner-core-shifts-speeds?lite&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
List Members,
The article starts out with the following comments:
"Earth's solid-metal inner core is a key component of the planet, helping to give rise to the magnetic field that protects us from harmful space radiation, but its remoteness from the planet's surface means that there is much we don't know about what goes on down there. But some secrets of the inner core are being revealed by acoustic waves passing through the planet's heart and iron squeezed to enormous pressures in the lab."
"Two new studies, both detailed online Sunday in the journal Nature Geoscience, reveal that Earth's inner core may actually be softer than previously thought, and that the speed at which it spins can fluctuate over time."
Well, they go into these theories with pre-conceived conclusions; here we are told that a spinning, inner-core dynamo effect causes the magnetic canopy around the planet.
Magnetic properties are killed by heat; the temperature that kills magnetic properties is called the Curie Point and is at 1,400* F for iron. The middle layers of the Earth's crust are supposed to be so hot that rock becomes soft and bendable, so how could any magnetic properties pass through a couple thousand miles of heated rock like that?
Cater spells out the fallacy in his book The Awesome Life Force, Page 139:
"The conventional theory of geomagnetism has about the same merit as some of the other theories already discussed. According to accepted viewpoint, the major portion of geomagnetism is the result of electric currents in a molten iron core 2,000 miles below the surface. The theory is automatically destroyed because an iron core doesn't exist. But even if one did exist, the conventional conclusion would be equally false. Scientists are somewhat vague as to how a magnetic field could extend 2,000 miles beyond an electric current. It requires a very powerful current to produce even relatively weak magnetic effects a very short distance above the flow. The electrical resistance of iron, at the alleged temperatures of the core, would be staggering. A steady flow of electricity requires constant potential differences. How are such potential differences produced and maintained in this hypothetical core?"
"The magnitude, depth and width of such currents would have to be unbelievable to extend the magnetic field even a small fraction of the distance required, and the EMF required to produce it would be even more incredible. Where could such an EMF come from? So far, scientists seem reluctant about explaining this, especially since these currents are confined to a ball and would therefore follow closed paths."
List members, I conclude that their theories are all conscious propaganda, and not just madness. If I can find these things out and see how fallacious their orthodox theory is, then the department chairpersons must realize it, too. It is funny that people are carefully screened before they can study geoscience and astronomy, and that the only ones to graduate and enjoy careers have to mimic this nonsense as if they were parrots.
Fools and rascals! The rascals espouse, and the fools follow lamely!
Dean
···
--- In [email protected], Paul <templars_23@...> wrote:
Earth's rotating inner core shifts speeds
Science News: Latest Development and Breakthroughs in Technology, Health, and More | NBC News[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
People,
Salem Kentucky and Livingston County are two places which Bruce Walton mentioned in his Etidorhpa Cave Search article.
http://www.holloworbs.com/etidorhpa_cave_search.htm
Here is a map of Salem, and you can see the county line. Other places mentioned were Lola and Hodge:
DD
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
List Members,
Here is a comment from the article below:
" But the feeling of cold was ironic - it is the rise in air temperatures recorded here that is at least partly responsible for the sudden acceleration of the melting."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3922579.stm
So where is this rise in temperatures coming from, in the ultimate issue? Arctic explorers have always noted warm winds from the North, where we know the opening to the hollow earth is located.
EVIDENCE FROM ARCTIC EXPLORATION
Gardner's book is 450 pages in length. With fifty books, chiefly on Arctic exploration, in his bibliography, he was most thorough in his research. Gardner claimed that the earth is a hollow shell approximately 800 miles thick in its crust, with an opening at the polar end approximately 1,400 miles across. He says that the mammoth comes from the interior and is still living there, and the huge tropical animals found frozen in ice in the polar region were not prehistoric but were animals from the interior that came to the surface and were frozen in ice when they did. In support of his theory of a polar opening and a central sun in the hollow interior of the earth, Gardner points out that birds and animals migrate to the north in winter to find warmer weather. He also notes that when explorers go north of 80 degrees north latitude, they find the water to become warmer due to warm currents coming from the polar region, and the air becomes warmer due to warm winds from the north. These cause the open sea, in place of ice, in the extreme north. They also find red pollen on icebergs and glaciers, and find logs and other debris washed ashore by these warm currents from the north. Gardner summarizes the evidence in favor of his theory of a hollow earth with two polar openings and a central sun as follows:
"How do scientists explain the fact that when we go north it becomes colder up to a certain point and then begins to get warm? How do they explain the further fact that the source of this warmth is not any influence from the south but a series of currents of warm water and of warm winds from the north supposed to be a land of solid ice? Where can these currents come from? How could they come from anything else but an open sea? And why should there be a warm open sea at the very place where scientists expect to find eternal ice? Where could this warm water possibly come from?
http://www.holloworbs.com/Chapte_Four_of_Marshall_B.htm
The Sun of the solar system is becoming overactive as evidenced from all of the sunspot activity. The hollow earth is also warming up in synchronicity, and the warmth is overflowing through the polar orifices, bring about melting in the polar ice cap. This is why all of these stories relating to the size of the ice cap are so interesting to us.
Dean
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk/folklore/english_folk/knockers.html
Posted by Dean
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The Earth's inner sun is a ball of plasma -- prima materia
Owens' Plasma Core
http://www.wincom.net/earthexp/n/owen.htm
[quote]He suggests that if the inner core is plasma there is a potential for expansion when the core changes from a plasma into an atomic state. The Earth's outer core may be molten because it has already changed into its atomic state. (This author adds that an explosion potential would also be present if the gravity envelope had been broken by an impact catastrophe.)
Owen points out that a plasma core provides a better explanation for the behaviour of the mantle which surrounds the Earth's outer core. The mantle lies directly beneath the crust and its convection currents are responsible for the creation of new crust and continental movement.
Furthermore, the Earth's magnetic field can be generated as effectively by a plasma core as by one of nickel-iron.[/quote]
Go to this link and then click on heading called "Abzu"
Age of Ureas
http://www.zeitlin.net/EndEnchantment/Secrets.html
[quote]Clearly there are many ways in which an inner earth cavity would support gravity. But not all possible cavities would be suitable candidates for our inner earth. The constraints are:
It must be open to both of the Earth's poles or polar regions.
It must be able to contain a small "sun".
It should not result in significant gravitational or seismic anomalies at the Earth's surface (or if it does, earth scientists must be capable of misconstruing them).
About that sun that always seems to be present inside the cavity: WHY would it be there, where did it come from, and what makes it stable in that position?
Part of our difficulty in approaching these questions stems from failing to grasp the sun and the surrounding planet as a single unit, and failing to consider the process of planetary formation. Open SETI frequently entertains the cosmological and physical theories of Dr. Paul A. LaViolette. In particular, as described in Open SETI Physics 101, planets are formed from the energy and particles emitted from a gravitational well where there is excess genic energy. At the point of emission, there is probably what appears to be a hot little sun.
The next phase might be an interaction between interstellar particles being attracted toward the gravitational well and outward-moving energy and particles. Might there be a point of equilibrium at a given radius where a shell of matter would begin to form? The details of this process are not to my knowledge given in any of LaViolette's books (if they are, we will find out shortly).
What is the mechanism that stabilizes the system so that the sun does not wander around and collide with the shell? Again on our page, we mention that the genic energy radiation pressure goes as 1/r4, which creates a strong restoring force opposing any such tendency.
Another major detail requiring an explanation would be the holes at the poles of rotation. I personally am not clear on this point, as the dynamics appears complex, but it seems reasonable that if there was rotation in the first place, that these holes might appear due to centrifugal force.
Is LaViolette's planetary formation model the final word in the view of Open SETI? Actually it is not. The Electric Sky Model of plasma astrophysics, introduced for your convenience at the link, and its subsidiary Electric Sun, described for example in Donald Scott's The Electric Sky (2006), being scalable over the range of cosmological- to laboratory-sized dimensions, provides us with a perfectly reasonable model of a small sun that could exist in the earth's cavity. This is because stars are not fusion reactors requiring a certain size and gravitational pressure, but simple foci of plasma occurring along strung-out Birkeland Currents.
In this model, the energy from the sun (any sun) is supplied by the Birkeland current, a plasma in "dark current mode" (i.e, in the low-current-density regime in which it is not emitting light).
The Birkeland current feeding a planet's inner sun would very definitely have to pass through polar openings.
Is it possible that those openings are a part of the geometry of a "recombination zone" that is responsible for planetary formation itself?[/quote]
···
--- In [email protected], "Dean D" <silopanna@...> wrote:
List Members,
The article starts out with the following comments:
"Earth's solid-metal inner core is a key component of the planet, helping to give rise to the magnetic field that protects us from harmful space radiation, but its remoteness from the planet's surface means that there is much we don't know about what goes on down there. But some secrets of the inner core are being revealed by acoustic waves passing through the planet's heart and iron squeezed to enormous pressures in the lab."
"Two new studies, both detailed online Sunday in the journal Nature Geoscience, reveal that Earth's inner core may actually be softer than previously thought, and that the speed at which it spins can fluctuate over time."
Well, they go into these theories with pre-conceived conclusions; here we are told that a spinning, inner-core dynamo effect causes the magnetic canopy around the planet.
Magnetic properties are killed by heat; the temperature that kills magnetic properties is called the Curie Point and is at 1,400* F for iron. The middle layers of the Earth's crust are supposed to be so hot that rock becomes soft and bendable, so how could any magnetic properties pass through a couple thousand miles of heated rock like that?
Cater spells out the fallacy in his book The Awesome Life Force, Page 139:
"The conventional theory of geomagnetism has about the same merit as some of the other theories already discussed. According to accepted viewpoint, the major portion of geomagnetism is the result of electric currents in a molten iron core 2,000 miles below the surface. The theory is automatically destroyed because an iron core doesn't exist. But even if one did exist, the conventional conclusion would be equally false. Scientists are somewhat vague as to how a magnetic field could extend 2,000 miles beyond an electric current. It requires a very powerful current to produce even relatively weak magnetic effects a very short distance above the flow. The electrical resistance of iron, at the alleged temperatures of the core, would be staggering. A steady flow of electricity requires constant potential differences. How are such potential differences produced and maintained in this hypothetical core?"
"The magnitude, depth and width of such currents would have to be unbelievable to extend the magnetic field even a small fraction of the distance required, and the EMF required to produce it would be even more incredible. Where could such an EMF come from? So far, scientists seem reluctant about explaining this, especially since these currents are confined to a ball and would therefore follow closed paths."
List members, I conclude that their theories are all conscious propaganda, and not just madness. If I can find these things out and see how fallacious their orthodox theory is, then the department chairpersons must realize it, too. It is funny that people are carefully screened before they can study geoscience and astronomy, and that the only ones to graduate and enjoy careers have to mimic this nonsense as if they were parrots.
Fools and rascals! The rascals espouse, and the fools follow lamely!
Dean
--- In [email protected], Paul <templars_23@> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Earth's rotating inner core shifts speeds
> Science News: Latest Development and Breakthroughs in Technology, Health, and More | NBC News
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
This is on the right path.
What is the mechanism that stabilizes the system so that the sun does not wander around and collide with the shell?
Simply because that apparent mechanism (sun and planets) is an build in system or rather the visible part of an cosmic move.There is an interesting video I posted a few months ago showing that planets are not moving around the sun but rather are traveling with it.None of these visible parts can collide and its an eternal journey through space . ( for us).
*In this model, the energy from the sun (any sun) is supplied by the
Birkeland current, a plasma in "dark current mode" (i.e, in the
low-current-density regime in which it is not emitting light).
The Birkeland current feeding a planet's inner sun would very definitely have to pass through polar openings.
Is it possible that those openings are a part of the geometry of a
"recombination zone" that is responsible for planetary formation
itself?[/quote]
Yes the dark current mode is just another name for the cosmic matter which can have any type of *density*.(unfortunately these guys haven't agree with that ,their ego being too strong)
It is by these openings that cosmic matter is *recombinated* that is transformed in different physical elements,mostly now in water and gas,and that recombination is taking place first inside the planet (visible crust).
My two cents
Joe
···
--- On Wed, 5/22/13, gritzle70 <[email protected]> wrote:
From: gritzle70 <[email protected]>
Subject: [allplanets-hollow] Re: Earth's rotating inner core shifts speeds
To: [email protected]
Date: Wednesday, May 22, 2013, 3:55 AM
The Earth's inner sun is a ball of plasma -- prima materia
Owens' Plasma Core
http://www.wincom.net/earthexp/n/owen.htm
[quote]He suggests that if the inner core is plasma there is a potential for expansion when the core changes from a plasma into an atomic state. The Earth's outer core may be molten because it has already changed into its atomic state. (This author adds that an explosion potential would also be present if the gravity envelope had been broken by an impact catastrophe.)
Owen points out that a plasma core provides a better explanation for the behaviour of the mantle which surrounds the Earth's outer core. The mantle lies directly beneath the crust and its convection currents are responsible for the creation of new crust and continental movement.
Furthermore, the Earth's magnetic field can be generated as effectively by a plasma core as by one of nickel-iron.[/quote]
Go to this link and then click on heading called "Abzu"
Age of Ureas
http://www.zeitlin.net/EndEnchantment/Secrets.html
[quote]Clearly there are many ways in which an inner earth cavity would support gravity. But not all possible cavities would be suitable candidates for our inner earth. The constraints are:
It must be open to both of the Earth's poles or polar regions.
It must be able to contain a small "sun".
It should not result in significant gravitational or seismic anomalies at the Earth's surface (or if it does, earth scientists must be capable of misconstruing them).
About that sun that always seems to be present inside the cavity: WHY would it be there, where did it come from, and what makes it stable in that position?
Part of our difficulty in approaching these questions stems from failing to grasp the sun and the surrounding planet as a single unit, and failing to consider the process of planetary formation. Open SETI frequently entertains the cosmological and physical theories of Dr. Paul A. LaViolette. In particular, as described in Open SETI Physics 101, planets are formed from the energy and particles emitted from a gravitational well where there is excess genic energy. At the point of emission, there is probably what appears to be a hot little sun.
The next phase might be an interaction between interstellar particles being attracted toward the gravitational well and outward-moving energy and particles. Might there be a point of equilibrium at a given radius where a shell of matter would begin to form? The details of this process are not to my knowledge given in any of LaViolette's books (if they are, we will find out shortly).
What is the mechanism that stabilizes the system so that the sun does not wander around and collide with the shell? Again on our page, we mention that the genic energy radiation pressure goes as 1/r4, which creates a strong restoring force opposing any such tendency.
Another major detail requiring an explanation would be the holes at the poles of rotation. I personally am not clear on this point, as the dynamics appears complex, but it seems reasonable that if there was rotation in the first place, that these holes might appear due to centrifugal force.
Is LaViolette's planetary formation model the final word in the view of Open SETI? Actually it is not. The Electric Sky Model of plasma astrophysics, introduced for your convenience at the link, and its subsidiary Electric Sun, described for example in Donald Scott's The Electric Sky (2006), being scalable over the range of cosmological- to laboratory-sized dimensions, provides us with a perfectly reasonable model of a small sun that could exist in the earth's cavity. This is because stars are not fusion reactors requiring a certain size and gravitational pressure, but simple foci of plasma occurring along strung-out Birkeland Currents.
In this model, the energy from the sun (any sun) is supplied by the Birkeland current, a plasma in "dark current mode" (i.e, in the low-current-density regime in which it is not emitting light).
The Birkeland current feeding a planet's inner sun would very definitely have to pass through polar openings.
Is it possible that those openings are a part of the geometry of a "recombination zone" that is responsible for planetary formation itself?[/quote]
--- In [email protected], "Dean D" <silopanna@...> wrote:
List Members,
The article starts out with the following comments:
"Earth's solid-metal inner core is a key component of the planet, helping to give rise to the magnetic field that protects us from harmful space radiation, but its remoteness from the planet's surface means that there is much we don't know about what goes on down there. But some secrets of the inner core are being revealed by acoustic waves passing through the planet's heart and iron squeezed to enormous pressures in the lab."
"Two new studies, both detailed online Sunday in the journal Nature Geoscience, reveal that Earth's inner core may actually be softer than previously thought, and that the speed at which it spins can fluctuate over time."
Well, they go into these theories with pre-conceived conclusions; here we are told that a spinning, inner-core dynamo effect causes the magnetic canopy around the planet.
Magnetic properties are killed by heat; the temperature that kills magnetic properties is called the Curie Point and is at 1,400* F for iron. The middle layers of the Earth's crust are supposed to be so hot that rock becomes soft and bendable, so how could any magnetic properties pass through a couple thousand miles of heated rock like that?
Cater spells out the fallacy in his book The Awesome Life Force, Page 139:
"The conventional theory of geomagnetism has about the same merit as some of the other theories already discussed. According to accepted viewpoint, the major portion of geomagnetism is the result of electric currents in a molten iron core 2,000 miles below the surface. The theory is automatically destroyed because an iron core doesn't exist. But even if one did exist, the conventional conclusion would be equally false. Scientists are somewhat vague as to how a magnetic field could extend 2,000 miles beyond an electric current. It requires a very powerful current to produce even relatively weak magnetic effects a very short distance above the flow. The electrical resistance of iron, at the alleged temperatures of the core, would be staggering. A steady flow of electricity requires constant potential differences. How are such potential differences produced and maintained in this hypothetical core?"
"The magnitude, depth and width of such currents would have to be unbelievable to extend the magnetic field even a small fraction of the distance required, and the EMF required to produce it would be even more incredible. Where could such an EMF come from? So far, scientists seem reluctant about explaining this, especially since these currents are confined to a ball and would therefore follow closed paths."
List members, I conclude that their theories are all conscious propaganda, and not just madness. If I can find these things out and see how fallacious their orthodox theory is, then the department chairpersons must realize it, too. It is funny that people are carefully screened before they can study geoscience and astronomy, and that the only ones to graduate and enjoy careers have to mimic this nonsense as if they were parrots.
Fools and rascals! The rascals espouse, and the fools follow lamely!
Dean
--- In [email protected], Paul <templars_23@> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Earth's rotating inner core shifts speeds
> Science News: Latest Development and Breakthroughs in Technology, Health, and More | NBC News
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]