Earth - tectonics and geology

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: Geophysics

Unread postby starbiter » Sun Feb 15, 2015 11:01 am

nick c wrote:
I personally do not see how the observations of earth science are incompatible with EU theory.
Agreed, of course. It is not necessarily observations that are disputed. What is disputed is the interpretation and conclusions drawn from those observations, within the context of a paradigm.


I'm a catastrophist. I believe legend to be historic. Legend describes a complete resurfacing of the Earth within the last 10,000 years. Because of the description of oil raining down like precipitation for days and nights it appears the depth of this resurfacing was quite deep. The lakes of oil we find today would have been at the surface at one time, instead of a mile or more deep in some instances.

IF this is true there would be no time for the San Andreas fault to slip to the North.

http://www.nps.gov/pinn/naturescience/index.htm

"Pinnacles National Park, located near the San Andreas Fault along the boundary of the Pacific Plate and the North American Plate, is an excellent example of tectonic plate movement. The Pinnacles Rocks are believed to be part of the Neenach Volcano that occurred 23 million years ago near present-day Lancaster, California, some 195 miles (314 km) southeast. The giant San Andreas Fault split the volcano and the Pacific Plate crept north, carrying the Pinnacles. The work of water and wind on these erodible volcanic rocks has formed the unusual rock structures seen today."

I've been to Lancaster CA looking for the other half of the volcano. It's not there. Just similar minerals.

It seems to me the Pinnacles were created by a filament of red hot dust. This is not mentioned as an option at the park.

If this scenario is correct, NOTHING being taught today in geology is correct. Sorry. One model is billions of years old, the other closer to 3,500 years.

Maybe legend is a bunch of crap. Maybe there were no catastrophes with oil raining down like water from the sky. But if the legends are historic, EVERYTHING taught in geology and geophysics using a billion year model is crap.

I mentioned earlier about the trauma of wasting time and money by studying a flawed model. Max's response to the catastrophic model is a perfect example. Instead of asking questions and trying to educate yourself You wrap Yourself in an "open mind" defense. It seems believing in a catastrophic model equals a closed mind. Then i'm guilty of having a closed mind.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCj9L8_ ... VBYDtml5hg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDbDMlEWIIY

If the videos linked above are accurate, NOTHING concerning the geologic process as taught in universities is close to accurate.

The standard geologic model and the catastrophist model have NOTHING in common. The magic elevator might need repair, or more likely abandonment.

Maybe Worlds in Collision should be required reading for geology 101.

The areas beneath the recently resurfaced Earth might be billions of years old, with everything moving up, down and sideways. Just trying to keep an open mind.

michael steinbacher
I Ching #49 The Image
Fire in the lake: the image of REVOLUTION
Thus the superior man
Sets the calender in order
And makes the seasons clear

www.EU-geology.com

http://www.michaelsteinbacher.com
User avatar
starbiter
 
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:11 am
Location: Antelope CA

Re: Geophysics

Unread postby Dotini » Sun Feb 15, 2015 3:22 pm

seasmith wrote:spheroid transforming coils
spheroid transforming coils.jpg

http://www.google.com/patents/US4210859
Dotini
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 7:44 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Geophysics

Unread postby viscount aero » Sun Feb 15, 2015 4:04 pm

starbiter wrote:
nick c wrote:
I personally do not see how the observations of earth science are incompatible with EU theory.
Agreed, of course. It is not necessarily observations that are disputed. What is disputed is the interpretation and conclusions drawn from those observations, within the context of a paradigm.


I'm a catastrophist. I believe legend to be historic. Legend describes a complete resurfacing of the Earth within the last 10,000 years. Because of the description of oil raining down like precipitation for days and nights it appears the depth of this resurfacing was quite deep. The lakes of oil we find today would have been at the surface at one time, instead of a mile or more deep in some instances.

IF this is true there would be no time for the San Andreas fault to slip to the North.

http://www.nps.gov/pinn/naturescience/index.htm

"Pinnacles National Park, located near the San Andreas Fault along the boundary of the Pacific Plate and the North American Plate, is an excellent example of tectonic plate movement. The Pinnacles Rocks are believed to be part of the Neenach Volcano that occurred 23 million years ago near present-day Lancaster, California, some 195 miles (314 km) southeast. The giant San Andreas Fault split the volcano and the Pacific Plate crept north, carrying the Pinnacles. The work of water and wind on these erodible volcanic rocks has formed the unusual rock structures seen today."

I've been to Lancaster CA looking for the other half of the volcano. It's not there. Just similar minerals.

It seems to me the Pinnacles were created by a filament of red hot dust. This is not mentioned as an option at the park.

If this scenario is correct, NOTHING being taught today in geology is correct. Sorry. One model is billions of years old, the other closer to 3,500 years.

Maybe legend is a bunch of crap. Maybe there were no catastrophes with oil raining down like water from the sky. But if the legends are historic, EVERYTHING taught in geology and geophysics using a billion year model is crap.

I mentioned earlier about the trauma of wasting time and money by studying a flawed model. Max's response to the catastrophic model is a perfect example. Instead of asking questions and trying to educate yourself You wrap Yourself in an "open mind" defense. It seems believing in a catastrophic model equals a closed mind. Then i'm guilty of having a closed mind.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCj9L8_ ... VBYDtml5hg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDbDMlEWIIY

If the videos linked above are accurate, NOTHING concerning the geologic process as taught in universities is close to accurate.

The standard geologic model and the catastrophist model have NOTHING in common. The magic elevator might need repair, or more likely abandonment.

Maybe Worlds in Collision should be required reading for geology 101.

The areas beneath the recently resurfaced Earth might be billions of years old, with everything moving up, down and sideways. Just trying to keep an open mind.

michael steinbacher


Yes--declaring that one is close-minded because they seriously consider theories outside of the establishment is a flawed logic. It is a non-reasoning.
User avatar
viscount aero
 
Posts: 2378
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California

Re: Geophysics

Unread postby seasmith » Sun Feb 15, 2015 7:51 pm

Dotini wrote:

seasmith wrote:
spheroid transforming coils
spheroid transforming coils.jpg


http://www.google.com/patents/US4210859



Coils ARE Antennas
Earth's diameter is approx. π x wavelength, of that corresponding to the "Schumann fundamental frequency ".
Are Sun and Earth in Inductive power resonance? i.e. 'resonant inductive coupling' ?

Is that a NIaMI board question ?


Dual Tetra.jpg
Dual Tetra.jpg (7 KiB) Viewed 3275 times
seasmith
 
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Cookie cutter process ('80s news)

Unread postby Omni » Sun Feb 22, 2015 7:46 am

I found this stumbling through YouTube.

EDM? (Electrical Discharge Machining)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxpBc64mtYE

Notice the depression in the immediate area from the initial helicopter view.

No comment on the Cosby commercial clip on the end ( it was uploaded In 2007).
Omni
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:16 pm

Re: Geophysics

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Thu Feb 26, 2015 2:43 am

King David wrote:Any fellow geophysicists here?

Would you and/or Max Photon be willing to review my paper on volcanoes? (Click the "Volcanoes" link in my signature.) If you'd like to discuss it, we need to fire up a thread on the NIAMI forum, since this forum is just for discussion of the EU model. While my model is EM, it is distinctly different from the EU model.
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: 1728
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Re: Geophysics

Unread postby 601L1n9FR09 » Tue Mar 10, 2015 1:01 pm

Hi CC,
I tried messaging you but for the life of me I do not see a send button so please excuse this massive off topic :oops:
Having trouble nailing down current geomagnetic coordinates on south pole. Lots of predictions and projections. Exactly how difficult can it be to monitor the current position of the magnetic south pole for crying out loud?!?!? Anyhow if anyone I know can straighten me out on this it would be you. What I am trying to do is project a line from magnetic N to magnetic S and see how far off it comes from the center of the globe. Thanx in advance.
601L1n9FR09
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 10:24 am

Re: Geophysics

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Tue Mar 10, 2015 2:06 pm

601L1n9FR09 wrote:I tried messaging you but for the life of me I do not see a send button...

There should be a "submit" button. Let me know if there isn't -- I have PMs enabled, so this should be working.

601L1n9FR09 wrote:Having trouble nailing down current geomagnetic coordinates on south pole.

Are you after the "geomagnetic" poles, or the "magnetic" poles? There's a difference -- the "geomagnetic" field is the best-fit dipole field, averaged from all of the field lines, all over the Earth, with the poles derived from the model. The "magnetic" poles are where the magnetic field lines are actually perpendicular to the surface. Since the field isn't a perfect unperturbed dipole, the calculated N/S poles don't match the measured N/S poles. Anyway, the South geomagnetic pole was calculated (in 2005) to be located at 79.74°S 108.22°E, while the South magnetic pole is at 64.497°S 137.684°E.
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: 1728
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Re: Geophysics

Unread postby seasmith » Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:23 pm

seasmith
 
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Gravity anomalies and tectonics

Unread postby Pi sees » Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:22 pm

Below is a global snapshot of the Earth's gravitational anomalies. Areas with unusually high gravity are in red, while areas with unusually low gravity are in blue:

Image

Now compare the above map with this map of tectonic plate boundaries, with subduction zones highlighted in white:

Image

The following stands out to me:

1) Subduction zones tend to be areas with unusually high gravity.
2) The Hudson Bay is an area of unusually low gravity. This area was under the Laurentide Ice Sheet until about 9kya.
3) The Gulf of Bothnia has a less pronounced low gravity anomaly than Hudson Bay. The Gulf of Bothnia was the last bastion of the (much smaller) Scandinavian Ice Sheet, which also disappeared about 9kya.
4) The southern part of the Indian Plate (i.e. the part of the plate furthermost from the Himalayan subduction zone) is another area of unusually low gravity.
5) The south-western part of the Australian plate has unusually low gravity, and is also the furthermost part of the plate from the Indonesian and western Pacific subduction zones.
6) Unusually high-gravity subduction zones in Tibet, Persia and Turkey are flanked by unusually low-gravity areas.
7) The Azores Plateau, which is in the vicinity of a triple-junction where there is both a spreading seafloor and subduction, has unusually high gravity.
8) The south-east part of the North American Plate has unusually low gravity. This part of the plate is located right between the unusually high gravity areas of the Azores plateau/triple junction and the Central American subduction zone.
9) The Mid Atlantic Ridge also has unusually high gravity in the vicinity of Greenland and Iceland. Again this is a region of spreading seafloor, but it is also situated right between the recent Laurentide and Scandinavian ice sheets.
10) Active volcanic regions not located near tectonic plate boundaries (such as Hawaii and the Yellowstone Caldera) have unusually high gravity.

Based on these observations, my inference is that the low gravity anomalies are being caused by an upward thrusting of those areas (e.g. due to isostatic rebound at that location, or being tipped upwards like a see-saw while another part of the plate undergoes subduction), while the high-gravity anomalies are being caused by a downward movement of crust (e.g. due to subduction of the crust at that location, or being "bent" downward as a result of being sandwiched between two upward-thrusting areas).

What do you make of it?
Pi sees
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 7:04 am

Re: Gravity anomalies and tectonics

Unread postby comingfrom » Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:10 am

Thank you Pi sees.

I would be looking for reasons for variations in charge.
Charge is more likely to vary, and being in opposite vector to gravity, causes the appearance of slight variation in gravity.

The map reminds of the diagrams used in this video, showing "hots spots" and I expect there will be a correlation
Bruce Leybourne: Earth as a Stellar Transformer

While looking for that video, I found another in which I could see correlations with the G anomaly map.
Ben Davidson: An Introduction to Earthspots

~Paul
comingfrom
 
Posts: 533
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm

Re: Earth - tectonics and geology

Unread postby seasmith » Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:51 am

G
eologists Find Largest Exposed Fault on Earth

An international team of geologists from the Australian National University and Royal Holloway University of London has for the first time documented the Banda Detachment fault in eastern Indonesia and worked out how it formed. The research is published in the journal Geology.


Image

http://www.sci-news.com/geology/largest ... 04405.html
seasmith
 
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Earth - tectonics and geology

Unread postby webolife » Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:40 am

Pi Sees,
Good correlations. I think you have the isostatic features correct here. Subduction is possible, but unnecessary.

Coming from,
"Charge" is just a name for "load", which could be synonymous with "gravity"... but I'm wondering how the charge gradient in your conception could be a stable configuration?
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2341
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Earth - tectonics and geology

Unread postby seasmith » Tue Dec 20, 2016 5:18 pm

Image

Researchers Discover Jet Stream in Earth’s Molten Iron Core
Dec 20, 2016
Launched in 2013, the three Swarm satellites are measuring and untangling the different magnetic fields that stem from Earth’s core, mantle, crust, oceans, ionosphere and magnetosphere.
...
The accurate measurements by Swarm satellites allow the different sources of magnetism to be separated, making the contribution from the core much clearer.

....
Swarm data have revealed these changes are actually caused by a jet stream moving at more than 25 miles (40 km) per year — three times faster than typical outer-core speeds and hundreds of thousands of times faster than Earth’s tectonic plates move.

“We can explain it as acceleration in a band of core fluid circling the pole, like the jet stream in the atmosphere,” said lead author Dr. Phil Livermore, from the University of Leeds.


http://www.sci-news.com/featurednews/je ... 04466.html
seasmith
 
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Earth - tectonics and geology

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Tue Dec 20, 2016 6:45 pm

Researchers Discover Jet Stream in Earth’s Molten Iron Core

Very interesting -- nice scoop, seasmith!

Now, how do they explain it?

“We can explain it as acceleration in a band of core fluid circling the pole, like the jet stream in the atmosphere,” said lead author Dr. Phil Livermore, from the University of Leeds.

The jet flows along a boundary between two different regions in the core. When material in the liquid core moves towards this boundary from both sides, the converging liquid is squeezed out sideways, forming the jet.

“Of course, you need a force to move the fluid towards the boundary. This could be provided by buoyancy, or perhaps more likely from changes in the magnetic field within the core,” said co-author Prof. Rainer Hollerbach, also from the University of Leeds.

That falls short of an explanation.

In my model, tidal forces drive an electric current of sorts that could fit the bill. Basically, at high tide, pressure at depth is relieved, allowing rock that had been forcibly ionized to get neutralized. So that's electron uptake. At low tide, it's the opposite -- pressure at depth is restored, which forcibly ionizes the rock, expelling electrons. Where do those electrons go? The natural destination would be in the direction of wherever electron uptake is occurring. So electrons are flowing from the low tide areas toward the high tide areas. This means that as the Earth rotates, there is a large batch of electrons that is stationary with respect to the Moon, always chasing after the parts of the Earth currently at high tide, while moving with respect to the Earth due to the rotation. And the direction of this relative motion is retrograde (since the Earth rotates on its axis faster than the Moon orbits the Earth), which is what they found.
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: 1728
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest