Electric Weather

[Dotini]

which suggests that the amusing video is false.

Thanks, dc. I'd delete the video if I could still edit my post!

[CharlesChandler]

Jim & Steve, thanks for your kind words. I'm still plugging away. Recently I've been filling in the math wherever possible. That's a steep uphill grade (especially for me!), as it's EMHD. You can't just look up in a textbook and grab formulas for correlating fluid dynamic and electromagnetic data. But it's gratifying when I can get another solid block into place.

[MrAmsterdam]

Lightning Storm Timelapse Video Jupiter Beach Florida

http://stormvisuals.com/blog/2011/10/11 ... orida.html

As you can see in the movie, it seems like the discharges stay at the same location and also looks like that the clouds are growing in size near the discharges.

Has that been noticed before? Or is just coincidence?

[jjohnson]

Really nice. Beautifully photographed, and yes; the lightning activity does seem to stay concentrated just above the dark diagonal line in the foreground over most of the period, despite the obvious flow of clouds from right to left (north?).
It is interesting to see what you can see and compare using very high speed phots or videos that "stop" lightning and all its details, and time-lapse photography, where time is compressed into seconds or minutes and you can grasp a whole series of events. Two different pictures, both useful.

Thanks!

Jim

[shadowmane]

Its funny how all of the rotation seems to stay in one area, and that the lightening also seems to come from that area.

This is a good visual on the electrical cause of storms. If you really look, all of the clouds seem to be drawn to the rotation in the center of the video where all of the lightening is coming from.

[Ion01]

I have often wondered about the extreme size that hail can get too in storms. We are told that it is vertical winds in storms that keep these large chunks of ice aloft in the clouds. I am not sure I am convinced it is purely vertical winds and, if nothing else, I think we realize that the vertical winds that are present are moved through electromagnetics. So, although we know that if we observe vertical winds of a certain speed in a storm we get hail stones of a certain size that does not mean that the vertical winds are sufficient to keep the stones aloft. Has any study been conducted to determine the terminal velocity of a hail stone and whether or not the vertical winds speeds we find are sufficient for this task? If they are not sufficient then we would assume another force is aiding this processes which, considering the electrical nature of storms the next step would be to investigate what else is needed.
Although not directly related I recently found that hailstones can have spikes. I didn't know this. Here is a picture of one such hailstone.

Knowing the the dipole nature of water and the effects of electromagnetics on fluids I can't help but think that it is the electromagnetic influence that results in the spikes as I cannot imagine how a hailstone can move through a cloud and contact water in such a ways as for it to not be evenly distributed.

Any thoughts on this?

[ElecGeekMom]

This type of hail has puzzled me, too. I am a 4th generation Okie. We lived a couple of hours from OKC when I was growing up. My grandparents were in the OKC area. They always had bigger hail than we did. They used to save samples in their freezer for us to see the next time we visited them. None of that hail had spikes.

A couple of years ago we had a hail storm where the hail was spikey. It surprised me. It wasn't as big as the hail in the storm earlier this week. Also, the hailstones from a couple of years were flatter, not as spherical as the recent hail. The flat hail looked sort of like a cog. It left some pretty impressive dings in my car.

I have been wondering if the lumpy hailstones get that way from having smaller stones mashed together, or from the sort of impulses that cause spikes to rise in ferromagnetic fluid under electrical stimulation.

I have also wondered about the influence of emissions from broadcast towers on hail behavior and shape. I would tend to think that having lots of active broadcast towers would lead to more and bigger hail, because my OKC grandparents lived near lots of broadcast towers, while we did not.

While I'm on the subject, I have also begun wondering if these new, more powerful radar systems might also have an influence on storms. Earlier this week, while I was watching the live radar of the storms in the Texas panhandle, I noticed that when they reached the vicinity of a line from, say, Amarillo to Dodge City, the color of the image changed to a less threatening color. As the storm continued to move past the line, the color resumed its more threatening color. It almost seemed as if there was a strong EMF signal between those two towns that was temporarily reducing the intensity of the storm. Could that be? Or could it be that the EMF signal was just obscuring the radar's ability to correctly register the intensity of the storm?

[Ion01]

I have lived in okc my whole life and had never seen spikes but I have seen the lumpy stones where it looks like a lot of smaller stones coagulated together. There is so much we don't know and have to consider about storms its pretty amazing we don't know more than we do. It is interesting as I have seen plots and I believe it has been discussed here that tornados actually have trends of following the same/ similar paths which, I think it was mentioned that there were some sort of electromagnetic links to the earth in those areas or something like that.
Also, in consideration with the possible effect radars may have: I know nothing of the strength of such radars as to whether they could have an effect or not but it is worth consideration I think! Especially when you consider what is really powering a storm which is electricity! Here is a great article about a method for increasing rainfall by ionizing air. http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=9eq6g3aj
When you really look at the facts we ultimately find that clouds are suspended due to electric effects and rain falls due to electric effects. I think this is one of the reasons when rain is seen from a ways off it falls in strands not one big lump due to heavy air falling through. http://wallpaperstate.org/wp-content/gallery/wallpaper_rain_03/rain_cloud_9374_1024_768.jpg
I think often times the effect is confused with the cause such as the winds causing a tornado which cause electric fields vs electric fields cause a tornado and wind.

[kiwi]

Interesting read Ion01 .. cheers .... not sure where to put this clip .... looking for a thread with ice in it somewhere http://vimeo.com/33451801

[4realScience]

Looking at Internet weather view site showing highs and lows across United States.

We know that convection theories are probably wrong due to probes to the outer planets showing the highest wind speeds are on Neptune (or Uranus?).

Weather view sites show highs and lows. Do these correspond to electric current? With a Low being a place where air is rising and a high being a place where air is descending towards the surface? Is a Low a place where electrons are going up, thru a big circuit, dragging neutral matter with them, then descending into a positively charged region? Like the CMEs we witness now on the Sun via the Stereo probes?

Should we be able to see this with the same equipment that is on the Stereo probes if turned towards Earth?


Just wondering. And wondering what Michael Mozina (TheSurfaceOfTheSun.com) would say about this.

[601L1n9FR09]

Hi 4real,
I have often wondered along these lines. We are told scientists believe the weather makes electricity. I have been thinking the other way around since I got here. There are some posters here with plenty of knowledge and patience. I hope Charles weighs in on this as well as MM.

JD

[katesisco]

I have been thinking about the slow solar wind issuing from the equator of the sun from null points (this is mentioned in the pic of the day 12/26) and how this can relate to a change of solar magnetic poles.
I asked NASA how the old magnetic field was replaced by the new, the explanation out there is it 'flakes off'. If the sun actually 'grabs' magntic fields that don't go too far, like now when the activity is less energetic, then how does the old magnetic field get changed?
I am particularly fascinated by the description of the slow solar wind as a web with streamer-like energy. Wasn't there on the net a pic in a discussion of electric theorists showing a rock with 'metal-like webbing' embedded? Of course I cannot find it now. Extending this idea of a web would allow us to view the ley lines and other applications of good/bad energy such as Fengshu (?) and Tao. Is it possible that the spent magnetic field is actually blown off in toto not piecemeal and impacts the planets (Earth) as a new set of energy lines?

Currently reading Canadian physists (died 2005) paper on----- http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hydrogen/index.html
and is clear and for me decisive. This is what is behind our not seeing matter & mass---they are cold not seen. They are the starless darks which are spent galaxies. Which extrapolates into the universe is very old.

[ElecGeekMom]

I have been wondering about this ever since I noticed that 3-D radar images of some storm fronts on earth look a lot like some magnetic loops on the sun.

[sjw40364]

Its only too bad they cant map the magnetic field as quickly as they can weather, then one could compare the two. I think the only thing the Sun has to do with weather is to cause turbulance and stop high wind bands from forming. The less turbulance caused by the Sun, the greater the wind speed. It is an event caused by the current flowing through the planet, IMO.
The Earth sits at a fortunate spot, too far and no turbulance (vast wind bands form). Venus is unique because of it's spin, poles reversed compared to the other planets, which combined with the turbulence actually helps wind bands form, but not like on the outer planets. More broken and widespread. Too much a stretch? Venus is a conundrum sometimes.

[katesisco]

NASA SAYS CAUSES CORONAL HEATING D UE TO ION CYCLOTRON WAVES

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/p ... ode51.html
The dispersion curve for a right-handed wave propagating parallel to the equilibrium magnetic field is sketched in Fig. 10. The continuation of the Alfvén wave above the ion cyclotron frequency is called the electron cyclotron wave, or sometimes the whistler wave. The latter terminology is prevalent in ionospheric and space plasma physics contexts. The wave which propagates above the cutoff frequency, $\omega_1$, is a standard right-handed circularly polarized electromagnetic wave, somewhat modified by the presence of the plasma. Note that the low-frequency branch of the dispersion curve differs fundamentally from the high-frequency branch, because the former branch corresponds to a wave which can only propagate through the plasma in the presence of an equilibrium magnetic field, whereas the high-frequency branch corresponds to a wave which can propagate in the absence of an equilibrium field.


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 3/abstract
says magnetic 'holes' in the sun's equator play a role in the pressure balance in the Earth's magnetosphere.
Nasa's press release says I think we found it,” he says. “The source of the heating in the solar wind is ion cyclotron waves.”
A search of the net has reports of this since 12/12 by many. I am not sure but this is similar to the butterfly wing holes. Amplification. Quantum dots spaced with holes amplify light/non light. Sound works too, it seems.
http://pof.aip.org/resource/1/pfldas/v2 ... horized=no
1980 Huba et al.
http://www.agu.org/books/gm/v044/GM044p ... 0289.shtml
1988 Chen et al.

Miles Mathis charge recycling taken in at poles and reemitted at equator :http://milesmathis.com/sunhole.html