Ocean News

That was post 569.
But you probably didn't read it.
You just go off half cocked. Then misfire.
and sometimes shoot yourself in the foot!

 

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2011/09jun_bigsurprise/

" A Big Surprise from the Edge of the Solar System
Tweet
Play ScienceCast Video Join Mailing List


June 9, 2011: NASA's Voyager probes are truly going where no one has gone before. Gliding silently toward the stars, 9 billion miles from Earth, they are beaming back news from the most distant, unexplored reaches of the solar system.

Mission scientists say the probes have just sent back some very big news indeed.

It's bubbly out there.

"The Voyager probes appear to have entered a strange realm of frothy magnetic bubbles," says astronomer Merav Opher of Boston University. "This is very surprising."
Big Surprise (splash, 550px)
A NASA video shows how magnetic bubbles might be formed at the edge of the solar system.

According to computer models, the bubbles are large, about 100 million miles wide, so it would take the speedy probes weeks to cross just one of them. Voyager 1 entered the "foam-zone" around 2007, and Voyager 2 followed about a year later. At first researchers didn't understand what the Voyagers were sensing--but now they have a good idea.

"The sun's magnetic field extends all the way to the edge of the solar system," explains Opher. "Because the sun spins, its magnetic field becomes twisted and wrinkled, a bit like a ballerina's skirt. Far, far away from the sun, where the Voyagers are now, the folds of the skirt bunch up."
Big Surprise (bubbles, 200px)
Magnetic bubbles at the edge of the solar system are about 100 million miles wide--similar to the distance between Earth and the sun. [more]

When a magnetic field gets severely folded like this, interesting things can happen. Lines of magnetic force criss-cross and "reconnect". (Magnetic reconnection is the same energetic process underlying solar flares.) The crowded folds of the skirt reorganize themselves, sometimes explosively, into foamy magnetic bubbles.

"We never expected to find such a foam at the edge of the solar system, but there it is!" says Opher's colleague, University of Maryland physicist Jim Drake.

Theories dating back to the 1950s had predicted a very different scenario: The distant magnetic field of the sun was supposed to curve around in relatively graceful arcs, eventually folding back to rejoin the sun. The actual bubbles appear to be self-contained and substantially disconnected from the broader solar magnetic field.

Energetic particle sensor readings suggest that the Voyagers are occasionally dipping in and out of the foam—so there might be regions where the old ideas still hold. But there is no question that old models alone cannot explain what the Voyagers have found.

Says Drake: "We are still trying to wrap our minds around the implications of these findings."

The structure of the sun's distant magnetic field—foam vs. no-foam—is of acute scientific importance because it defines how we interact with the rest of the galaxy. Researchers call the region where the Voyagers are now "the heliosheath." It is essentially the border crossing between the Solar System and the rest of the Milky Way. Lots of things try to get across—interstellar clouds, knots of galactic magnetism, cosmic rays and so on. Will these intruders encounter a riot of bubbly magnetism (the new view) or graceful lines of magnetic force leading back to the sun (the old view)?
Big Surprise (oldvsnew, 550px)
Old and new views of the heliosheath. Red and blue spirals are the gracefully curving magnetic field lines of orthodox models. New data from Voyager add a magnetic froth (inset) to the mix. Larger images: old, new.

The case of cosmic rays is illustrative. Galactic cosmic rays are subatomic particles accelerated to near-light speed by distant black holes and supernova explosions. When these microscopic cannonballs try to enter the solar system, they have to fight through the sun's magnetic field to reach the inner planets.

"The magnetic bubbles could be our first line of defense against cosmic rays," points out Opher. "We haven't figured out yet if this is a good thing or not."

On one hand, the bubbles would seem to be a very porous shield, allowing many cosmic rays through the gaps. On the other hand, cosmic rays could get trapped inside the bubbles, which would make the froth a very good shield indeed.

"We'll probably discover which is correct as the Voyagers proceed deeper into the froth and learn more about its organization1," says Opher. "This is just the beginning, and I predict more surprises ahead."


Author: Dr. Tony Phillips | Credit: Science@NASA
More Information

Footnote:1So far, much of the evidence for the bubbles comes from the Voyager energetic particle and flow measurements. Proof can also be obtained from the Voyager magnetic field observations and some of this data is also very suggestive. However, because the magnetic field is so weak, the data takes much longer to analyze with the appropriate care. Thus, unraveling the magnetic signatures of bubbles in the Voyager data is ongoing. "
Here's one of NASA's studies.



Too bad they can't use their resources better, open their minds and eyes, and look at earth's most likely thermostat. Earth's magnetic field.
They're blinded by their devotion to AGW.
In case you think the magnetic field of the sun is boring, insubstantial, meaningless, and thus by inference, so is earth's magnetic field, better think again.

How much power would be required to power an electromagnet could radiate a magnetic field, you could detect bubbles in, 9 billion miles away?
A weak magnetic field? Weak 9 billions miles away, yeah! (9 billion is roughly 100 AU)
(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_unit=The astronomical unit (symbol au, AU or ua) is a unit of length, roughly the distance from Earth to the Sun)

Obviously stronger than earth's magnetic field electromagnet.
but even so, earth has a huge powerful electromagnet, though clearly dominated by the sun's more powerful magnetic field.

This stuff isn't 400 parts per million minutiae.
We're talking REAL power!

 

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/30oct_ftes/

" Magnetic Portals Connect Earth to the Sun

+ Play Audio | + Download Audio | + Join mailing list

Oct. 30, 2008: During the time it takes you to read this article, something will happen high overhead that until recently many scientists didn't believe in. A magnetic portal will open, linking Earth to the sun 93 million miles away. Tons of high-energy particles may flow through the opening before it closes again, around the time you reach the end of the page.

"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."

Indeed, today Sibeck is telling an international assembly of space physicists at the 2008 Plasma Workshop in Huntsville, Alabama, that FTEs are not just common, but possibly twice as common as anyone had ever imagined.

Right: An artist's concept of Earth's magnetic field connecting to the sun's--a.k.a. a "flux transfer event"--with a spacecraft on hand to measure particles and fields. [Larger image]

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.


Sign up for EXPRESS SCIENCE NEWS delivery
"We used to think the connection was permanent and that solar wind could trickle into the near-Earth environment anytime the wind was active," says Sibeck. "We were wrong. The connections are not steady at all. They are often brief, bursty and very dynamic."

Several speakers at the Workshop have outlined how FTEs form: On the dayside of Earth (the side closest to the sun), Earth's magnetic field presses against the sun's magnetic field. Approximately every eight minutes, the two fields briefly merge or "reconnect," forming a portal through which particles can flow. The portal takes the form of a magnetic cylinder about as wide as Earth. The European Space Agency's fleet of four Cluster spacecraft and NASA's five THEMIS probes have flown through and surrounded these cylinders, measuring their dimensions and sensing the particles that shoot through. "They're real," says Sibeck.

Now that Cluster and THEMIS have directly sampled FTEs, theorists can use those measurements to simulate FTEs in their computers and predict how they might behave. Space physicist Jimmy Raeder of the University of New Hampshire presented one such simulation at the Workshop. He told his colleagues that the cylindrical portals tend to form above Earth's equator and then roll over Earth's winter pole. In December, FTEs roll over the north pole; in July they roll over the south pole.

Right: A "magnetic portal" or FTE mapped in cross-section by NASA's fleet of THEMIS spacecraft. [Larger image]

Sibeck believes this is happening twice as often as previously thought. "I think there are two varieties of FTEs: active and passive." Active FTEs are magnetic cylinders that allow particles to flow through rather easily; they are important conduits of energy for Earth's magnetosphere. Passive FTEs are magnetic cylinders that offer more resistance; their internal structure does not admit such an easy flow of particles and fields. (For experts: Active FTEs form at equatorial latitudes when the IMF tips south; passive FTEs form at higher latitudes when the IMF tips north.) Sibeck has calculated the properties of passive FTEs and he is encouraging his colleagues to hunt for signs of them in data from THEMIS and Cluster. "Passive FTEs may not be very important, but until we know more about them we can't be sure."

There are many unanswered questions: Why do the portals form every 8 minutes? How do magnetic fields inside the cylinder twist and coil? "We're doing some heavy thinking about this at the Workshop," says Sibeck.

Meanwhile, high above your head, a new portal is opening, connecting your planet to the sun."

Is this just a caress, or handshaking?
Or an intermittent control circuit?
Anyway, do you doubt the sun's magnetic field influences earth's magnetic field?
I don't think there is any basis to feel ignored!

 

What a load of diverting rubbish.

 

Don't want you to get confused, myark

 

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/29dec_magneticfield.html

"In 1904, Roald Amundsen found the pole again and discovered that it had moved--at least 50 km since the days of Ross.

The pole kept going during the 20th century, north at an average speed of 10 km per year, lately accelerating "to 40 km per year," says Newitt. At this rate it will exit North America and reach Siberia in a few decades.

Keeping track of the north magnetic pole is Newitt's job. "We usually go out and check its location once every few years," he says. "We'll have to make more trips now that it is moving so quickly."

Earth's magnetic field is changing in other ways, too: Compass needles in Africa, for instance, are drifting about 1 degree per decade.
And globally the magnetic field has weakened 10% since the 19th century"
says NASA.

I predict a weaker magnetic field means geothermal warming. about 200 years of it, 19th to 21st century.

Here below is what 1814 looked like on the 19th century Thames River in England.

And let's look at a temperature graph since the 19th century, while the magnetic field has gradually decreased 10%.

 

Yob
To keep it simple, why did you say "WE" the major majority of the USA are climate denialist and majority rules.
When in fact you are by far the minority in the USA
Its a fine example of your denial behavior as you could not even read a simple picture poll chart a child could easily understand and in your mind you actually thought it meant the opposite.

 

Wow! That was post 415! We're up to 607 now.
But I don't want you to be confused that you WON that argument.



I can get along with everybody except the 27% fanatics.
I'm part of the 73% NOT fanatic about AGW.



But, since you want to include yourself with the larger 34% group that thinks man and nature are about equally responsible for global warming, do you now resign from the 27% fanatical believers in man is the MAJOR cause of warming group?

If so, welcome back to sanity!

 

So you have changed your mind all of a sudden and are now saying humans cause global warming which is 34% and 27% = the majority.
You claim you are the 8% plus the 22% = 30% from your past rants.
Do you know how to read a picture chart ?

 

You keep confusing yourself.
Stop trying to put words in my mouth. Read carefully and you will not confuse yourself as to my position. I have not changed MY position in the least.
There are really ONLY two groups on that pie chart.
The 27% red fanatical group that believes MAN is the major cause of global warming.
and
The greens/grays who all have various opinions, but do NOT believe man is the major cause of global warming. The sub factions of the non-fanatics, together, is total 73%.
I do NOT accept man is the major cause of warming. I'm with the 73% who would agree with that statement.

I don't see how you can claim those who believe man has some MINOR effect on climate, as being on the side of the fanatics who believe man the MAJOR cause of warming.
They don't vote alike!

And I'm finished with this rehash of a post from page 28.
If you haven't understood my position by now, it's only because you REFUSE to.
Are you masochistic?

 

http://www.geomagnetism.org/?p=128

"The strength of the Earth’s magnetic field is falling
Posted on March 14, 2011 by NeilSuttie

One of the most fascinating questions in geomagnetism concerns the strength of the Earth’s magnetic field. It is well-known (by those who know it well) that the direction of the field varies with time. You can see an estimate of how it is changing locally by looking at an OS map. These give the magnetic variation and the rate at which it changes each year, which is important if you are navigating with a magnetic compass. The strength of the field also varies from place to place and changes over time too, but you won’t notice this because it is pretty tricky to actually measure it. So tricky in fact that it wasn’t until the 1830s that the great mathematician and physicist C.F. Gauss, came up with a method for measuring the field strength. He did this by a crafty arrangement of magnets , suspended by torsion threads. In recognition of this great achievement, the units of magnetic flux density are called Gauss. (Actually, these days we tend to use the SI equivalent , the Tesla, named after another giant of electrodynamics. No need to feel too sorry for Gauss – he still has the ubiquitous Gaussian distribution, a celebrated theorem in vector calculus and a whole host of other mathematical machinery named after him).

The really interesting thing is this: ever since Gauss first measured the strength of the field, it has been dropping. Over the 170 years or so since the first measurements, the main field has decayed by some 8 or 9% and this has led to all sorts of speculation as to whether we are heading for some big geomagnetic event, like a reversal. It is true that this is quite a large drop- if the geodynamo suddenly stopped the field would only decay quite slowly- about 1% per century- but it is also likely that this sort of variation is not uncommon. The big question is how long was this going on for before people were first able to measure it?

To try and estimate this we have to use things like archaeomagnetism. In my last post I talked about how it was possible to use the direction of the “fossil magnetism” in heated archaeological structures to estimate the date at which they were fired. Well, it is also possible to estimate the strength of the field at the time they were fired, although the method is fraught with difficulties. People often use sherds of pottery of known date for this sort of work. Quite a lot of data has been amassed over the years, with over 300 “archaeointensities” spanning the period 1600-1840. Most people think that there is little evidence to suggest that there was any great drop in the field strength over this period.

I’ve always found this a bit unlikely. It just seems to be too much of a coincidence that the long term trend in the behaviour of the field changed at just the time we started measuring it. I’ve been looking at all the available data again, and I think there is evidence of a trend showing that the present decay has been going on since before 1700. The results of my analysis have just been published in Earth and Planetary Science Letters. So, I would argue that it seems likely that the Earth’s magnetic field has dropped by about 15% since 1700, but I think the arguments will go on for some time yet."

I wish we could know the strength of the magnetic field over last 140 thousand years.
simply not possible.

 

Again you have openly stated humans are the cause of climate change by claiming to be in the polls 34% which is both equally environmental and human caused climate change, meaning 50/50 not the twisted majority environmental you claim if you can understand what equal means.

How ever you claim to be in the "not happening" 22% meaning climate change is not happening at all when you contradict your self by stating 50% humans and 50% environment is causing climate change.

Even more confusing you also claim to be the 1% that do not know what is causing climate change, but on the other hand you give endless contradicting rantings that you do know.

You also claim climate change are natural changes in the environment which is not human caused that is just a 8%.

Then you claim you are not sure if happening that is the 8% poll answer and maybe the best poll answer for you as you as you are not sure of anything including how to read a simple drawing poll chart that you have contradicted your self over and over and can understand why you wish to avoid the subject that in reality are the 1% in the poll "don't know."

61% state humans cause climate change as well as smaller % of the 61% also agree environment is combined equally with human cause climate change, meaning you are now insisting you are part of the human and environment that are equally causing climate change

 

I'm finished with you. Go lick your wounds.

 

Rethinking the Airplane, for Climate’s Sake | New York Times

 

Prediction.
Twenty years from now, kids will ask: "Dad, you didn't REALLY believe CO2 was a pollutant, did you?