During the reversals, the field strength drops significantly and some minor magnetic anomalies (like the South Atlantic Anomaly) are the strongest poles, so there might be four, six or even more weak "poles" during the reversal.
While during normal magnetic fields, part of the charged particles are routed around the Earth into the tail, part of particles are trapped into the Van Allen radiation belts and when the solar wind is strong enough, part of these particles penetrates into the atmosphere, creating aurora borealis/australis. The aurora is visible on a ring around the magnetic poles known as aurora oval
formatting link
The atmosphere quite effectively blocks these charged particles, so no at lest obvious mutations are observed in the area covered by the aurora oval. However, at least some airlines have restrictions how often pregnant flight personnel are allowed to cross the polar region, since above 10 km altitude, the radiation levels are much higher than on the surface of the earth.
During the reversal, there are likely to be aurora rings around the minor poles as well or possibly aurora will be observed on the whole planet.
There are typically several reversals in a million years, but not so frequent extinctions. The atmosphere is quite capable of stopping those charged particles.
Lunar astronauts even survived several days in an aluminum can outside of the protection of the Earths magnetic field, while the Sun was inactive. Granted, they would have been killed, if the Sun had erupted during the flight.
It should be possible to do simulations that would get more precise results than your handwaving. The arctic ions have had their direction changed and the ones from the sun would have come in at an oblique angle anyway, passing thruogh lots and lots of air. Noon on the equator would be a shorter path. Etc. I don't know the answer here but I don't think you do either.
Agreed, we don't have big extinction events nearly as often as we have magnetic reversals. Thank god or whoever.
And the sun has its magnetic reversal roughly every 11 years? So if the earth's reversal takes more than say 12 years we're certain to experience such an eruption.... It would be important to us how long the reversal takes. Of course, this is a long-term concern. In the short run I care more about my job. And compared to the magnetic reversal, we're going to burn all the oil in the short run.
Well... yes, but that's not the entire story. A fairly energetic interaction is taking place "up there" between the high energy particles and the atmosphere. The most well known is probably the interaction between High Energy stuff and Nitrogen. The result is C14. This is radioactive and drifts slowly down to the ground where some of it gets ingested by living things. When they stop living, they stop ingesting it and it decays and we have a neat way of measuring how long ago it happened.
Now crank up the impacts a few thousandfold (as might happen during a reversal -- or a partial reversal called an "excursion".) We now have a "rain" of radioactive Carbon. Oh, and some other radioactive stuff like Strontium and Iridium and Berrylium. BTW the KT layer contains these plus others.
It is left as an exercise for the student to discuss the likely effects of "rains" of radioactive elements on the life expectancy of existing life forms as well as the likelihood of mutations.
NASA satellites are currently exploring the "bow wave" where the solar wind is in approximate balance with the magnetosphere. After some exciting pictures of *very* powerful explosions (their term) and "magnetic ropes," the literature seems to have been (oddly?) silent about the nature of these explosions and what kinds of particles (if any) that have been generated.
See below.
Agreed. But what about the atmosphere's ability to stop the *results* of theses charged particles that impact -- and change -- the elements? Empirically, we know that a light "rain" of C14 drizzles more-or-less constantly onto us all. IOW the atmosphere may great at shielding us from direct damage, but is less effectivein shielding us from fallout.
As far as reversals go, this is "sorta" correct. But magnetic excursions are far more common.
The Earth precesses with a period of about 23,000 years. The half-period of
11,500 years seems to correlate with numerous "recent" magnetic excursions
*and* with layers of sediment containing the above-mentioned elements. Here is a representative list: (KYA = Kilo Years Ago) The names represent areas where the magnetic anomalies were first seen .
11 KYA Gothenburg Magnetic Excursion. 70% of Large Mammal Species extinct. Spikes in C14, Beryllium-10, Iridium. Glaciation starts and ends abruptly.. Major vulcanism and flooding.
23 KYA Mono Lake Magnetic Excursion. Euro Forest Elephant disappears, Spikes in Be and C14. Glaciation starts. Major Vulcanism.
34 KYA Lake Mungo Magnetic Excursion, Neanderthal disappears. Spikes in Be and C14, Short term Ice buildup then ends abruptly. Major vulcanism.
43 KYA Laschamps Magnetic Excursion. Spikes in Be and C14, Rapid onset of glaciation.
58 KYA No Magnetic Excursion Documented. Spike in Be. Mass extinction of giant pigs, giant baboons, three-toed horses. Ice Age ends. Major vulcanism
69 KYA No Magnetic Excursion Documented. Spike in Be. Ice Age Begins, Yellowstone erupts
80 KYA No Magnetic Excursion Documented, Ice Age Ends,
91 KYA No Magnetic Excursion Documented, Spike in Be. Ice Age Begins abruptly. Heavy vulcanism
103 KYA No Magnetic Excursion Documented. Spike in Be. Ice age ends.
115 KYA Blake Magnetic Reversal. Spikes in Strontium and C14. Ice age starts. Sea levels rise and fall by abot 70 feet in less than a century.
Conclusive? Nope. Causal? Maybe. Reason to look closely at these events and their timing? Naw. Let's just ignore them.
This would be true *if* oil were a fossil fuel. There is emerging evidence that petroleum is a naturally occurring and ongoing phenomenon based on High heat and pressure involving Carbonates, Water and Iron (as a catalyst.) This hypothesis has been replicated in the laboratory. And please recall that, despite many attempts, there has not been any laboratory authentication of the "settled science" hypothesis that petroleum is formed by "regular" organic material that is subjected to heat and pressure. IOW, no Dinosaurs were killed in order to fuel your automobile and heat your house. This will be a great relief to the PETA folks! It's also probably OT. (But that's never stopped me before!0
I'll put that on my list of things to look at when I find the time. My list of interesting science stuff has gotten too long and I have to put most of it aside if I'm going to look at anything in sufficient depth. I'll look for an opportunity to tie it in with something I've already started.
Let's assume for the moment that there's something periodic here. A C14 spike indicates nitrogen exposed to neutrons. Ditto beryllium. This could happen if the magnetic field lets more ionising radiation through, or if there is more ionising radiation in the first place.
Iridium can come from meteorites. There have been theories connecting the carolina bays to a recent extinction event and a proposed extended meteor shower, but dating their formation is still pretty controversial. It doesn't seem particularly plausible to me that an increase in ionising radiation could trigger a magnetic reversal, but I could vaguely imagine great big impacts doing it. Can you get a gyroscope to flip over if you hit it with a big enough hammer? I think there may be room for multiple explanations, assuming there's something here to explain. On the other hand, there's so much new information coming in that I can't process very much of it and there could easily be definitive proof of something-or-other that I simply haven't heard about.
I'd say there's pretty strong evidence that some oil has organic sources. But that doesn't say it all does. If it turns out that oil precursors are formed deeper and then percolate upward through the rock, to sometimes get captured by oil domes where they gradually get converted into polycyclic forms -- we might be able to collect more of it in the precursor form, beyond just getting it from existing domes. There are more exciting possibilities than I can keep track of, and I have no idea to tell which handful of them will actually pay off.
The physical orientation of Carolina Bays looks a *lot* like a spray of "stuff" originating somewhere over Canada. But there appear to be no meteors anywhere in or near any of them. There is strongly held opinion that they are aeolian (wind) artifacts but this is unconvincing (to me) given their orientation and quantity. Dating seems to rely on C14 of detritus found in the bays. But if they were formed in conjunction with some type of ionization in the upper atmosphere, then C14 dating becomes highly problematical. There are also some near Perth, Australia. Dating unknown. Shapes essentially identical. It's almost as though a flock of fairy tale giants flew in formation from north to south while blowing.
Hmmm... Here's a thought. There appears to be temporal linkage with the elimination of the Ice Shield over Canada and the Carolina Bays event(s). What if something "blasted" into the Canadian Ice Shield?. The result might be something like a flock of flying icebergs that then impacted the ground over a widespread area? They hit at an angle, causing oval shaped holes with a "lip" at the edge furthest from the impact point. Then they melt, leaving no residue. (Sorta like the classic mystery murder weapon -- an icicle.)
The reverse seems more likely.
The hammer might not need to be very big. In Beltrami's text, "Mathematics for Dynamic Modeling," he considers two different models for the Earth, and shows that it takes a very small "nudge" to set things chaotically awry.
Multiple explanations seem likely. But the past seems to be full of evidence (like iridium at the KT layer) or 'buckyballs" and radioactive material at the Clovis layer for which conventional explanations seem lacking.
It appears that the Russians may be doing just this. It can't be an accident that WWII era Russia was extremely oil-poor, and they are now one of the world's leading exporters. It seems that they suddenly learned where to look!
Yep. The most fascinating for me are associated with Mills' controversial hydrino (blacklightpower.com) concepts. If he's right, then it may not matter where oil comes from!
Our solar system makes a full period around the galaxy in about 200 million years, so if the orbital plane is inclined against the galactic plane, our solar system will cross the galactic plane about every 100 million years.
On the other hand, there has been 2-4 polar flips in a million years.
So what? The discussion is not about the rotational speed of the galaxy, and the rotational speed of the galaxy has nothing to do with how often we pass above or back below the galactic equator.
Excpt that you logic is flawed. The arm of the galaxy we are in does not follow a path that matches the rotational period of the galaxy. It never did. The arm itself rotates as a whole at that speed, but the place the arm sits with respect to the galactic equator rises and fall above and below that equator at a vastly different rate.
You're an idiot. The arm of the galaxy our solar system is in follows a sinusoidal trail and that trail rises above and falls below the galactic equator about once every twenty six thousand years. That, by the way, matches the cycle rate of pole reversals. That, by the way, is a known fact as well. The galaxy forms a disc like shape, but the "thickness" of that disc is nebulous. ALL of the arms of the galaxy move through this "thickness" differently, but the real equator of the galaxy as a whole is a very thinly defined disc from an energy POV. So, as we near that more energetic equatorial disc, we WILL be affected more by it, and our planets poles will be performing a reversal as a result, and that result will be held in place by our new position with respect to said equatorial plane.
I find it very funny that so many folks that claim to have a great depth of knowledge about physics still find it so hard to believe that the forces at the center of our galaxy can affect us so far away.
I find it impossible to ever consider that it would not. After all, it IS the same force that holds all the arms of the galaxy where they are. If it were as weak a force as you idiots portray it, there would be no galaxies anywhere in the universe. It would ALL be a homogeneous distribution
Where did he mention the rotational speed of the galaxy? Indeed there is no such thing anyway - it's not a solid object. You might as well talk about the rotational speed of the solar system.
While this comment does not affect you, it may be interesting for others reading this thread to look at
formatting link
and notice that the galactic year is currently assumed to be 225-250 million years, thus slightly more that I learned a few decades ago in the school.
The claim that there are about 2.7 oscillations above and below the orbital plane is new to me, so we are talking about 50-100 million years. How is this possible ? By applying gravity forces or some postulated dark energy or dark mass assumptions ?
Which is about 2 orders of magnitude less compared to the crossing of the galactic plane so there is not even a weak correlation between the events and even harder to claim that the galactic plane crossing caused the magnetic field flips or mass extinctions of some spices.
Thank you. That is your opinion, I doubt that I could do anything to change that attitude and why should I even care :-)
Rotating around what ? Some hypothetical dark matter or dark energy ? Or are you trying to create some pre-keplerian epicyclic theory ?
Yes, and the "Galactic Year" and the period which our solar system AND the arm of the galaxy we are in rises above, and falls below the galactic equator are two VERY different figures.
This end of this arm of our galaxy rides a sine wave with a period of about 52,000 years. That means we are due for a pole reversal about once every 26,000 years.
Guess what is due, and guess where we are with reference to the rest of the galaxy.
When we get to the other side of that equator, which will take some time before the effect rears its ugly head, we will see that our position in the galaxy DOES have much to do with our planets own magnetic field.
It is a known fact that this end of this arm of the galaxy rides a sinusoidal path.
Why do you think that nearly every astronomer on the planet is aware that we are passing from below (or above) the galactic equator to above (or below) it.
They, like the Mayans, also know the period of that path. It is not the same as the rate at which the entire galaxy spins, nor is it the same as the rate which the Earth and this solar system orbits the galactic center.
"We" never said any such thing. Neither did any of the "we" that makes up the astrological community.
They, in fact, state that all the elements of the galaxy rotate about its center at the same rotational rate, despite them thinking it would not. And yes, dark matter, and dark energy are contributors.
It is like the foam on a cup of tea. Stir it, then disturb the spin and remove the stirrer. Done right, one can see that all the foam swirls in a slurry of foam and tea.
The tea is the dark matter. The tea is the part we do not see. The tea is also spinning at the same rate, carrying all of our "known" mass along with it. That slurry is the part we are only now becoming aware of.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.