Earth - electric oceans

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

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby celeste » Sun Jan 26, 2014 5:25 pm

CharlesChandler wrote: Positive charges in the atmosphere are attracted to the negatively charged surface, but repelled by the positively charged interior, so they hit an equilibrium at some distance from the surface. Thus there is a resting potential, but discharges only occur if things are moved rapidly within the gradient.

Which does explain the 26th picture here? http://www.weather.com/news/science/nev ... r-20140117
This is not a discharge between Challenger and environment, but Challenger and ground? What is going on?
celeste
 
Posts: 780
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby Lloyd » Sun Jan 26, 2014 6:28 pm

Any Takers Yet?
Charles, has anyone else besides me said they find your CFDL model plausible yet?

Peter James is the first one I noticed to theorize that the Moho layer is plasma. Then I found that Cardona theorized that continental drift occurred due to sliding over the nearly frictionless Moho layer. And that Mike Fisher explained rapid continental drift in a similar way sliding over the friction-free Moho. Earlier I noticed that the Kola peninsula deep borehole project ended because the rock at 7 miles deep was too plastic to drill through, because the hole tended to close on the drill. Then you explained that ionization makes rock plastic, which normally is very brittle, and you explained the compressive ionization model to support the ionization theory.

Do people realize that Thornhill explained gravitational ionization in the Sun in the same way as you? He didn't call it compressive ionization, but that's what he described in one of his online articles on his site. He said electrons would tend to move to the outer portions of atoms and become detached and move in electric currents toward the surface, leaving a positive core.

Have you developed a thorough illustration for your model? One that includes the Moho, the CFDLs, the ionosphere etc? Do you think some good illustrations would help convince others?
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4209
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Sun Jan 26, 2014 6:32 pm

celeste wrote:This is not a discharge between Challenger and environment, but Challenger and ground? What is going on?

Do we know for a fact that it's a discharge, and not just a smoldering remain of the craft, which left a trail of smoke as it fell?
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms
User avatar
CharlesChandler
 
Posts: 1786
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby celeste » Sun Jan 26, 2014 7:49 pm

CharlesChandler wrote:
celeste wrote:This is not a discharge between Challenger and environment, but Challenger and ground? What is going on?

Do we know for a fact that it's a discharge, and not just a smoldering remain of the craft, which left a trail of smoke as it fell?

If I'm not mistaken, the two "trails" wrap around each other? If these are two pieces of craft,don't they appear to make equal numbers of twists on the way down? This looks like a B.C. to me. Perhaps the smoke coalesced on these paths, but I can't see a way to explain these otherwise. I'm just asking, but if this trail was from two pieces on the way up, would each piece be guided along the same path and spiral at the same rate? Not two separate pieces on the way down either. Nor any evidence of the craft spinning on the way up, at a rate that would then at least explain the two in synch trails. Again, I'm open, but I don't see a way to explain these without resorting to electric discharge.
At least, that does give us a mechanism for what happened too?
celeste
 
Posts: 780
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Sun Jan 26, 2014 8:49 pm

Lloyd wrote:Charles, has anyone else besides me said they find your CFDL model plausible yet?

I dunno -- maybe they're all just lurking... :) But more tellingly, I haven't heard any legitimate disproof yet, and not for want of attempts. So I still have my foot on the gas... ;) But things sure move faster with collaboration. Your questions and suggestions have been extremely well focused, and thus extremely valuable.

Lloyd wrote:Peter James is the first one I noticed to theorize that the Moho layer is plasma. Then I found that Cardona theorized that continental drift occurred due to sliding over the nearly frictionless Moho layer. And that Mike Fisher explained rapid continental drift in a similar way sliding over the friction-free Moho. Earlier I noticed that the Kola peninsula deep borehole project ended because the rock at 7 miles deep was too plastic to drill through, because the hole tended to close on the drill. Then you explained that ionization makes rock plastic, which normally is very brittle, and you explained the compressive ionization model to support the ionization theory.

I agree with all of that. I believe that the Moho is at the transition between the positive interior and the negative shell. As such, it has arc discharges going through it four times a day, as the crust flexes due to tidal forces. (Two ebbs and two flows equals four currents per day.) When the pressure is relaxed, charge recombination occurs. When it increases again, electrons are expelled. Either way, powerful electric currents move through that region, and yes, that could be an extremely hot layer, meaning frictionless plasma.

Lloyd wrote:Do people realize that Thornhill explained gravitational ionization in the Sun in the same way as you?

He described the Pannekoek-Rosseland field, which is simply a consequence of protons being 1836 times heavier than electrons, and thus 1836 times more subject to gravity. This would produce a smooth gradient, with more +ions in the interior, and more -ions toward the surface. I didn't consider the Pannekoek-Rosseland field to be powerful enough, and I ultimately settled on electron degeneracy pressure as a proven force that has the right properties. Combined with the surface and helioseismic data, this yielded a model with 5 distinct layers of charge (3 positive and 2 negative), bound tightly together by the electric force.

Lloyd wrote:Have you developed a thorough illustration for your model? One that includes the Moho, the CFDLs, the ionosphere etc?

I should do that. I'll let you know.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms
User avatar
CharlesChandler
 
Posts: 1786
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby Metryq » Mon Jan 27, 2014 3:18 am

celeste wrote:If I'm not mistaken, the two "trails" wrap around each other?


From photo 26 alone, that is very hard to tell. The white trail appears to be in the foreground at both points where the two cross over. (The third crossover is out of sight just at the bottom of the frame.) Are the trails even near each other, or only in perspective? How do we know that the debris causing each trail fell at the same rate? I'd say it's quite a reach to call that a Birkeland current.

I find EU and these arguments that ocean tides may be a polar effect in water very compelling, but EU isn't the answer to everything.
User avatar
Metryq
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:31 am

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby Sparky » Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:43 am

Lloyd wrote:Charles, has anyone else besides me said they find your CFDL model plausible yet?



Charles,:I dunno -- maybe they're all just lurking... :)


:oops: sorry, don't mean to lurk... :oops:

But i contracted terminal Lurkites while in training to be a CIA spook... :?

Oh, I am adopting CFDL for now..... 8-)
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire
Sparky
 
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:25 am

Lloyd wrote:Have you developed a thorough illustration for your model? One that includes the Moho, the CFDLs, the ionosphere etc?

I completed my write-up on the Moho, including the CFDLs and related info, so that's ready for review. I'm still studying up on tides.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms
User avatar
CharlesChandler
 
Posts: 1786
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby celeste » Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:17 am

CharlesChandler wrote:
Lloyd wrote:Have you developed a thorough illustration for your model? One that includes the Moho, the CFDLs, the ionosphere etc?

I completed my write-up on the Moho, including the CFDLs and related info, so that's ready for review. I'm still studying up on tides.

Have you considered the effect of the electric field in causing dethermalization? You have discussed the effect of temperature on the speed of sound,but with dethermalization, it is a bit different. Instead of changing the speed of sound uniformly in all directions (as with just a temperature change), dethermalization can cause an increase in speed of sound in one dimension, while decreasing the speed of sound in others. Specifically,in your model of charge separation, we would have a higher speed of sound up and down through the charge separated layer,than we do across that layer . Would that not cause a refraction of seismic waves at those boundaries?
I'm not familiar with the seismic data. Does it support refraction in this direction? Again, since and electric field takes all that random motion (temperature),and gets it moving along field lines, it works like an increase in temperature along the field lines (as far as increasing the speed of sound), and an effective temperature decrease in the transverse directions (decreasing sound speed)
I don't know if this helps? It does seem that we could explain significant refraction by having a sudden increase in speed of sound direction up through your charge separated layers (lower across it), with a more uniform spread of sound elsewhere?
celeste
 
Posts: 780
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:35 pm

@celeste: I made a note to myself to research this. Yes, electric fields cause dethermalization, and no, I hadn't really thought about what that would do to the seismic waves. One thing that I have always wondered in why the waves curve toward the surface. Normally, sound waves are deflected in the direction of the greater density, which means that they should curve downward. So why do they curve upward? Is this related??? I dunno... ;)
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms
User avatar
CharlesChandler
 
Posts: 1786
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby johnm33 » Tue Jan 28, 2014 2:54 pm

I was wondering about Aardwolfs insight into the tides being bigger sometimes when the moons on the opposite side of the planet than overhead, is declination the reason? http://www.moontracks.com/moon-declinations.html
johnm33
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 4:43 am

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby celeste » Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:41 pm

CharlesChandler wrote:@celeste: I made a note to myself to research this. Yes, electric fields cause dethermalization, and no, I hadn't really thought about what that would do to the seismic waves. One thing that I have always wondered in why the waves curve toward the surface. Normally, sound waves are deflected in the direction of the greater density, which means that they should curve downward. So why do they curve upward? Is this related??? I dunno... ;)

If it helps,I'll sum up quickly what we know from the threads on thunder: Researchers expected to find that thunder propagates spherically but found that thunder propagates cylindrically from a lightning bolt. There is lots of evidence that lightning is a Birkeland current, with a strong radial electric field. In other words, we can think of it as the extreme case of rather than sound traveling at a uniform speed in all directions (spherical propagation), we have gone to almost exclusive propagation in the radial (electric field) direction. I don't think the effect in thunder, is unrelated to the effect you are describing in the Earth (soundwaves bending upwards towards the surface,in the direction of your electric field).
celeste
 
Posts: 780
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:18 pm

celeste wrote:Researchers expected to find that thunder propagates spherically but found that thunder propagates cylindrically from a lightning bolt.

Was that because of the electric field, or was it just because the sound came from an axial source? In other words, sound from a point source will propagate spherically, but sound from a linear source is going to be cylindrical. Or course, a lightning bolt is highly irregular. But the irregularities cancel out, and what propagates is the superposition.

celeste wrote:There is lots of evidence that lightning is a Birkeland current, with a strong radial electric field.

The field that causes the strike is vertical (typically from a negative charge in the cloud to an induced positive charge in the ground). Then, during the strike, there is an EMP that propagates radially (i.e., cylindrically). But by the time the thunder starts, the discharge is long gone. The local electric field has been neutralized, though a couple of kilometers away there might still be a vertical field, like the one that initiated the strike.

I'd have to read the references, to find out exactly what they're talking about. Otherwise, we'd have to go back and forth a few times, to get in sync on all of the terms, observations, conclusions, etc.

As concerns the refraction of seismic waves inside the Earth, I had an idea. Sound waves are refracted toward the greater density -- this is (sorta) true. But it would be more true to say that they are refracted toward the medium with the lower speed of sound. In the atmosphere, this tends to be the cooler, denser air. But density isn't the issue -- temperature is the critical issue in the speed of sound. So if the Moho is hotter than the overlying rock (because there is a heat source there, and because the surface is cooled by radiative heat loss), the waves will travel faster near the Moho, and slower in the cooler rock above, differences in density under pressure notwithstanding. I don't know why it isn't explained that way, but it sure sounds correct. ;) I'll see if I can find literature to confirm/deny that such is the case.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms
User avatar
CharlesChandler
 
Posts: 1786
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:34 pm

Along the same lines, I always wondered how radio waves "bounce off" the ionosphere. I never heard a mechanical explanation of that. But if photons in the upper atmosphere are anything like in the lower atmosphere, they're deflected toward the denser medium (as is the case in a mirage). (With photons, it is the density that matters, because the issue is the mean free path, not the particle velocity.) Since the atmosphere thins out with altitude, especially from the temperature inversion in the stratosphere on up, the waves should get refracted toward the denser air below. So is it really that the waves are bouncing off the ionosphere, or is it like a mirage, where the waves are getting refracted by the density gradient? Anybody?
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms
User avatar
CharlesChandler
 
Posts: 1786
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Re: Tides on tides off

Unread postby celeste » Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:42 pm

http://physics.aps.org/story/v3/st14 Not what I was looking for, but maybe an interesting reference anyways
celeste
 
Posts: 780
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest