Electric Venus

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Does Venus Resemble Europa?

Unread postby Lloyd » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:52 pm

Do you think the surface markings on Venus resemble somewhat those on Europa?
http://www.tivas.org.uk/solsys/images/venus_magellan.jpg
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Does Venus Resemble Europa?

Unread postby saturnine » Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:07 pm

Not really... I would say that pic of Venus more resembles Ganymede in this pic:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/image/planet ... 961007.jpg
Just my opinion.
saturnine
Guest
 

Re: Does Venus Resemble Europa?

Unread postby Steve Smith » Thu Feb 05, 2009 1:30 pm

I would say that all the planets resemble each other to some extent, since they all experienced catacylsmic plasma phenomena sometime in the recent past.

Aphrodite's Cicatrix

Ganymede is a good example (as a moon larger than Mercury with a magnetic field, it is more like a planet) of those scarring effects, as is Europa. Ariel, Miranda, Triton, Callisto, Rhea, Enceladus, etc. also exhibit formations that look like welding seams, plasma torch channels, uplifted fulgamites, cathode whiskers, braided swaths, etc.
Steve Smith
Guest
 

EU mentioned in Venus Discussion

Unread postby psi » Sun Feb 08, 2009 8:10 pm

This site is popularly regarded as one of the best science sites on the internet: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/08/v ... /#comments

In response to a rather inane article on CO2 causing Venusian warming, two posters (one being me!) have posted links and content to the Thunderbolts site.

Enjoy.
psi
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: EU mentioned in Venus Discussion

Unread postby Drextin » Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:59 pm

That was a really great discussion with a lot of lively responses. I liked how no one there could readily disprove EU so most just acted as though the subject had not been raised. That to me speaks volumes on just how valid the EU theory must be. I've read too many discussions over the years and visited many alternative science sites so if this theory was based on quack science that group would have jumped on it and picked it apart. I hope I don't offend anyone by calling it a theory I just find it prudent to refer to all matters dealing with the Universe a theory given our meager and fairly recent status as a space faring species. It by no means is undercutting the science behind it I just like to leave room for future refinement.

After reading all the comments on the Venus discussion I feel like I've taken a crash course on the composition of Earth's and Venus's atmospheres. Basically it boils down to....Earth good......Venus bad. I did have a problem with Anna the super scientist though and felt compelled to let her know. In retrospect I probably should have let it go but her actions to me are the epitome of all that is wrong with most of the scientific community.

By the way. I'm new here. I was sold within 5mins of reading the first page on the main site. Everyone around here seems exceptional at being able to NOT limit themselves to mainstream academia. I myself am a high school drop out who barely made it 3 months into my freshman year. While I might not be able to convey my thoughts as eloquently as some of you I can assure you your thoughts will not be lost on me.

Great site folks it's a real pleasure to be here.
Drextin
Guest
 

Re: EU mentioned in Venus Discussion

Unread postby MGmirkin » Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:31 pm

Drextin wrote:I hope I don't offend anyone by calling it a theory


No offense taken. All things science tend to be theories until disproved. Even long-held beliefs are simply theories which could potentially be falsified if the right data comes along (assuming the scientists are willing to critically examine their models and declare them falsified when applicable; granted it's difficult to give up an idea, but necessary to science). Gravitation-only cosmology should have crumbled long ago with Zwicky, Rubin, et al. But instead they invented new hypothetical epicycles (dark matter) to explain away the failure of the gravitational model to account for gross galactic structure and motions. Now that fairy dust gets sprinkled everywhere.

But, I digress and will leave it at that.

Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law
User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA

Venus, Hurricanes & Barotropic / Diocotron Instabilities

Unread postby MGmirkin » Tue May 19, 2009 9:43 pm

Well, a colleague accidentally sent me off on an internet dumpster diving expedition. Off-hand comments sometimes do that to me. You look up one thing, go "hey, wait a minute!" and then have to look up 5-10 other things.

So, someone asked a question about whether the double-eyed storm on Venus had any corollary at the poles of Earth. I vaguely recalled mention that in fact "once in a while" sometime similar might crop up but disappear relatively quickly. A rare / transient effect. But, in looking for the article (I never did find it), I happened across something a bit more peculiar and interesting. The relationship between the fine structure of Venus's double-eyed polar vortices and the structure of the eye of a hurricane.

It seems that the eye of a Hurricane can form a pattern not unlike the Venusian double-eyed vortices' fine structure and that of sigmoids on the sun. The latter (sigmoids) is has now been surmised are electrical in nature, composed of filaments and ribbons / sheets of electric current. Likely (in my opinion), so is Venus' structure. Tentatively, so may be Saturn's polar structure (preliminary CIRS data cites by Wal Thornhill seems indicative, though not yet conclusive). And VERY TENTATIVELY Hurricanes on Earth may have an again similar structure to the aforementioned.

Now, the meteorological explanation seems to frequently use the term "Barotropic Instability" to explain the duality in a Hurricane's eye. Thus they want to apply that model to Venus. I'm not sure that's a correct assessment. Maybe so, maybe not.

Anyway, I decided to dig further... So, I Googled "barotropic instability" and hurricanes. While it didn't quite net me the cache of information I was hoping for, I did run across another interesting article on hurricanes (since it mentioned the barotropic instability). This item was about Hurricane Isabel. In particular I was interested in figures 2 & 3 (3 being a computer model version of 2, nearest I can figure). What it shows is the eyewall of the hurricane incorporating 8 vortices, which consolidate down into 4 vortices.

For a minute it looked very familiar but I couldn't quite place it (well, I placed it since it was quite familiar, I just couldn't remember the name of it). Then as I was paging through Wal's site (before I found it), I recalled the plasma instability called a "diocotron instability."

Then it kind of seems like things fell into place (for me anyway).

If anyone recalls, Wal explained Saturn's central polar hot spot (inside the larger polar vortex) as interacting Birkeland currents (field-aligned currents).

(The 'Spiral Galaxy' at Saturn's Pole)
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=4egjus1n

Wal Thornhill wrote:The image [of Saturn's polar hot spot in IR], while being incomplete, supports the electrical model. At around 300˚ we see the yellow-reddish cusp feature of one Birkeland filament. At intervals, heated gas from that filament is 'squirted' in a thin jet into the central 'sump,' indicated by the reddish patch over the pole. The inward jets alternate between the two filaments so we may expect the pattern to be repeated where the infrared data is missing.


If they recall that, they might also recall Wal's explanation of the circumpolar hexagon...

(2008 -- Year of the Electric Universe)
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=66b0jzyh

Birkeland current filamentation can be seen best in the top quadrants of Saturn's blue auroral ring. The cylindrical auroral beam is subject to vortex formation, known as 'diocotron instabilities.' Historically, vortex structure and vortex interactions in charged particle beams have been known since the turn of the 19th century when Kristian Birkeland first photographed the passage of particle beams through low vacuum in his terrella cathode experiments. Neighbouring vortices are subject to long-range attractive and short-range repulsive forces, which result in a departure of the discharge pattern from a circle to a polygon.

Image
The diocotron instabilities in the inner current cylinder are forcing the cloud pattern to form the distinctive hexagonal shape. The polar hot spot is heated by the Birkeland current discharge in the core of the Z-pinch.


So, it seems like at Saturn we've [probably, assuming Wal is correct] got the case of a central sigmoidal (s-shaped) feature caused by interacting current filaments and a circumpolar hexagon caused by a diocotron instability.

Lest one require even more evidence, I was recently reminded by mine papa of the discovery of Saturn's "mysterious new aurora," strangely coincident upon the polar hexagon! Could they be related? Gosh, who'd have thought it? *Raises a hand* :geek:

One wonders whether hurricanes on Earth operate on similar principles, as it seems they can have both an inner s-shaped core and an outer polygonal shape that very closely resembles the morphology of a diocotron instability. Keeping in mind that in "plasma gun" / "dense plasma focus" experiments, you tend to get a cylinder of filaments, and the filaments will tend to evolve over time by merging in pairs. Is it any surprise under a tentative electrical explanation then that the vortices in the eyewall region of Isabel apparently merged from 8 down to 4? Not really...

One is tempted to point out that extremely strong electric fields were detected over the so-called "electric hurricanes" of 2005. Apparently the lightning was "mysterious" to researchers as well (hurricanes apparently rarely have lightning?).

One is also tempted to point out that it was recently discovered that lightning is a good predictor of hurricane intensity...

(Lightning Helps Predict Hurricane Fury)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28675422/

Initially packing winds of 90 miles per hour, Nargis caught forecasters by surprise when it suddenly intensified until winds reached 130 miles per hour just hours before landfall on May 2. New research is suggesting forecasters could have seen the danger coming, if only they had been watching the storm's lightning patterns carefully.

[...]

a team of researchers found that with Nargis, large spikes in lightning activity occurred near the eye wall 36 hours before its deadly intensification.


(Lightning Warns of Hurricanes' Most Intense Moments?)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... canes.html

"The lightning and wind speeds are fairly well correlated, with the lightning peaking [about 30 hours] before the maximum wind," said Colin Price, a lightning researcher at Tel Aviv University in Israel.

"The lightning gives you a precursor to the development of the hurricane."


So, apparently there's some strong correlation between heightened electrical activity and heightened physical wind speed, with approximately a day and a half lag time between. The specific mechanism / relationship isn't yet known.

(New Lightning Sensors Warn of Hurricane's Power From Far Away)
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hurri ... icane.html

The above article alludes to a report to be filed later that year (2007) discussing research on Katrina / Rita with relation to lightning distribution. I believe this is the article:

(The Morphology of Eyewall Lightning Outbreaks in Two Category 5 Hurricanes)
http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?req ... 7MWR2150.1

So, it seems like there's some distinctly electrical factor that's not yet being included in forecasters & modelers simulations.

Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law
User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA

And, Did I Forget to Mention "Hot Towers"? Yeah, Them Too!

Unread postby MGmirkin » Tue May 19, 2009 10:24 pm

So, as I was looking further into hurricanes and barotropic instabilities I apparently fell even further down the rabbit hole and stumbled across yet another odd feature of hurricanes called "Hot Towers."

(A "Hot Tower" Above The Eye Can Make Hurricanes Stronger)
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/new ... louds.html
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsro ... p?id=24163

Kelley and Stout define a "hot tower" as a rain cloud that reaches at least to the top of the troposphere, the lowest layer of the atmosphere. It extends approximately nine miles (14.5 km) high in the tropics. These towers are called "hot" because they rise to such altitude due to the large amount of latent heat. Water vapor releases this latent heat as it condenses into liquid.


A particularly tall hot tower rose above Hurricane Bonnie in August 1998, as the storm intensified a few days before striking North Carolina. Bonnie caused more than $1 billion damage and three deaths, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Hurricane Center.


After compiling the statistics, Kelley and Stout found a tropical cyclone with a hot tower in its eyewall was twice as likely to intensify within the next six hours than a cyclone that lacked a tower. The "eyewall" is the ring of clouds around a cyclone's central eye. Kelley and Stout considered many alternative definitions for hot towers before concluding the nine-mile height threshold was statistically significant.


It's interesting to note the the presence of "hot towers" seems to coincide with storm intensification in a similar way to how a lightning surge tends to precede storm intensification. Don't know if there's a relationship between the two or not...

(NASA Looks at Hurricane Cloud Tops for Windy Clues)
http://www.physorg.com/news67007594.html

By looking at how high up the rain is forming within clouds, scientists can estimate whether the hurricane's surface winds will strengthen or weaken. They have found that if rain is falling from clouds that extend up to 9 miles high, and that rain continues for at least one out of three hours, a hurricane's surface winds are likely going to get stronger.


Hot towers are one window into the mystery of how hurricanes grow stronger. A single hot tower does not tell you much about a hurricane, but a rapid sequence of towers suggests that something unusual is going on deep inside the hurricane.

By combining measurements from many hurricanes, statistics show that if hot towers exist in the eyewall at least 33% of the time during a three-hour period, a hurricane's destructive surface winds have an 82% chance of intensifying. Otherwise, the chance of wind intensification drops to only 17%. The bottom line is that if several hot towers are present in a hurricane over a period of time, there's a higher probability of a storm intensifying.

Kelley is still searching for a more complete explanation of what causes these bursts of hot towers. Radar observations have shown conclusively that these bursts happen, but further research is needed to explain why and how.


(NASA's Close-Up Look at a Hurricane's Eye Reveals a New 'Fuel' Source)
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hurri ... ource.html
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsro ... p?id=32712

(Hurricane Hot Towers [streaming video of NASA's interpretation])
http://learners.gsfc.nasa.gov/mediaview ... HotTowers/

Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law
User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA

Re: Venus, Hurricanes & Barotropic / Diocotron Instabilities

Unread postby Drethon » Wed May 20, 2009 8:15 am

I wonder if that "hot tower" is distributed randomly throughout hurricanes or if the path of the hurricane always follows the "hot tower". If it is following it, it would seem possible that the hot tower could be a focused area where charge is moving up from the surface of the earth and the hurricane is just a side effect of this...
Drethon
 
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:20 am

Re: Venus, Hurricanes & Barotropic / Diocotron Instabilities

Unread postby redeye » Wed May 20, 2009 10:48 am

it would seem possible that the hot tower could be a focused area where charge is moving up from the surface of the earth and the hurricane is just a side effect of this...


I like your thinking. I have been thinking about low pressure systems and their ability to raise the surface of the ocean by a few feet. Fluctuations in air pressure are caused by the deformation of the troposphere, which also causes winds. I believe hurricanes, tornadoes and lightning are simply "charge equalisation events" and the hot tower within the hurricane is the flow of charge, could be why hurricanes die quickly when they encounter land. I'm wondering if the fluctuations in sea level are caused by the Earth's magnetic field deforming rather than changes in air pressure or the passage of the moon.

Cheers!
"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind."
Bob Marley
User avatar
redeye
 
Posts: 394
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:56 am
Location: Dunfermline

What's with Venus' "White Spot"?

Unread postby neilwilkes » Sat Aug 01, 2009 8:43 am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8179067.stm

Too specific to be a storm system, too big for a volcano.
Any EU topics I need to read up on to understand this please?
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.
User avatar
neilwilkes
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England

Re: What's with Venus' "White Spot"?

Unread postby Mallas » Sat Aug 01, 2009 8:59 am

Wow my prediction came true!

I predicted that the so-called 'experts' would be puzzled!

:lol:
Mallas
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 9:57 am
Location: London

The Venus' "White Spot"

Unread postby FS3 » Sat Aug 01, 2009 5:20 pm

As possibly this is connected - see from the Jupiter-Thread:

Jupiter finally goes "electric"!

...the part with the announcement by StevenJay...

...and me adding the frist pics from observer Frank Melillo at...

Solar System is breaking out in spots....

This could be a reaction of our whole Solar System.

FS3
User avatar
FS3
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:44 pm
Location: Europe

Re: What's with Venus' "White Spot"?

Unread postby seasmith » Sat Aug 01, 2009 8:17 pm

by neilwilkes on Sat Aug 01, 2009 10:43 am
Any EU topics I need to read up on to understand this please?



From the forehead of Zeus / Jupiter to the fontanel of Athene / Venus

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1026&start=0

~
seasmith
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: What's with Venus' "White Spot"?

Unread postby nick c » Sat Aug 01, 2009 10:57 pm

hi neilwilkes,
Too specific to be a storm system, too big for a volcano.
Any EU topics I need to read up on to understand this please?
Nothing specific, with regard to the current bright spot on Venus, but a few holoscience and TPOD's on Venus might be the place to start, if you haven't already:

http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=9aqt6cz5
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=jej1t3c2
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/ ... bleeye.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/ ... cvenus.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/ ... -venus.htm

nick c
Last edited by nick c on Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: corrected links
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2400
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest