New user here, first-time post; actually came for an entirely different topic, but I'll throw down my two cents on this somewhat outdated thread.

I flew a mission called the Space Experiments Support Package; a sun-sync LEO primary concerned with mapping the near earth magnetic, radiation, and ionic environment. Needless to say, the SAA was of significant interest and impact. We called it the 'SAMA' (South Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly), and so did NASA at the time - although 'Magnetic' fell out of favor owing to evolving theories.

Besides its scientific value, I can tell you it was a real PITA for the operators, since it often messed up a lot of things (instruments, cals, measurements, etc.) at least four times a day: two consecutive passes ascending, then later two descending. While the community had been aware of the SAA well before the mission ever launched (Wiki says 1958), the experimenters didn't realize it would cause as much of an impact as it did. After a while, we figured out how to enter a pre-canned series of stored commands to reset stuff every time we passed through. Worked pretty well, but since we only had 4K of memory (early 70's technology), it cramped our style a bit. And, a few of the instruments got fried early on.

While I don't purport to be either a geophysicist or an ET theorist, it seems WAAAYYY less than plausible that this could be man-made. That would be on the scale of massive planetary engineering, and altering the inner-core (as opposed to the surface) at that.

It never seemed satisfactory to me that the effect is caused solely by - as Wiki puts it - the 'non-concentricity of the Earth and its magnetic field' - i.e., the center of the magnetic dipole being offset from the center of mass. If that were true, wouldn't we see a stronger magnetic field opposite the SAA? After having watched the data for years, I can assure you we don't. Nor can I entirely accept that the Van Allen Inner is simply 'closer to the earth' at the SAA than anywhere else. This discrepancy in the explanation is alluded to in the 'Singapore' portion of the Wiki explanation, and has been referred to by some as the 'Singapore Sling' Theory.

The mere fact that the Earth's magnetic axis is a) titled 11 degrees off the spin axis; and b) wanders from year to year; would tend to indicate the inner core is non-uniform - as if there is perhaps a big chunk of something inside different from the rest of the molten iron - although this cannot borne out by variations in the gravitational field. And yes, there are daily and annual variations in the shape and intensity of the SAA, but that can be fairly easily explained by the solar wind.

So what it is then? I suggest this may be a (quasi-spherical) vortex of iron inside the core, kinda-sorta analogous to the Great Red Spot on Jupiter, or a hurricane here on Earth, only on the inside. Our Sun exhibits similar phenomena, with wildly complex flux variations that wrap, warp, converge, diverge, and ultimately 'snap', releasing massive outbursts of both energy and particles - CME's and solar flares - taking out the power grid in Ontario, Dresden, or Buenos Aires every few decades.

Of course, we could postulate that advanced-race-type visitors deliberately engineered this eons ago, creating a homing beacon, an underwater-landing worm hole, or a launch-boost mechanism, but like I said, I'm not an ET theorist, so I don't roll that way.

It is intriguing to propose that we could take advantage of the SAA by utilizing the extra energy in this region, but I'm not sure we have the proper technology to do that just yet.

I'm still waiting for the poles to flip so we won't have to worry about it anymore. j/k.

I wonder if that Secret USAF space plane is playing around in this anomaly ? If there is high energy there it would make a great place to put a space based laser for intercepting missles in flight.

truth1000 mentioned a box that the 'agencies' lofted up to ascertain whether these particles could be converted into stored energy enabling a more efficient satellite power source rather than carrying 'nuclear batteries'.

both of you above have interesting points indeed!
best wishes fakedirt.

Originally posted by fakedirt
truth1000 mentioned a box that the 'agencies' lofted up to ascertain whether these particles could be converted into stored energy enabling a more efficient satellite power source rather than carrying 'nuclear batteries'.

both of you above have interesting points indeed!
best wishes fakedirt.

Hmm.

I wonder, if not antiprotons---but creating/charging up metastable nuclear isomers for use in a "nuclear battery"?

If you were to make energy collectors that mimicked a feather, it could collect the energy that is in this anomaly. As a bird flies it collects this energy and the design of the wing excites the air above because of the shape of the wing. Planes use a very inefficient system to do this but the upper curve does create this dome.

The feathers of the bird moving creates a high energy field. By observing the humming bird you see that their wings blur out the wings, same with a prop on a plane. This high energy field causes a lessening of the magnetic pull from the earth. Half the energy of a bird comes from the air itself, all it has to do is propel itself forward, not cause lift. The exact structure of the feather can be constructed on metal using certain combinations of minerals along with some of the DNA information of a feather. I am sure science can figure out how to do this. Maybe a composite would be better.

In this area the energy is higher so gaining energy would be easier. A person who works with metal, a blacksmith, knows of the properties of the designs that form on metals. They can see this to figure out strength and temper. It should not be hard to figure out if they are aware of the principle. This system is used in designing house wrap for homes also. Layered paper can help hold a charge and help lower heating bills and allow moisture to escape but not come in. Science is well aware of the nature of an electric charge to protect from heat loss, it is incorporated into many products but the information is sort of patented so noone can do it on their own.

Back to the feathers. The ink or fluid of the feathers may have something to do with conversion of this energy. I have no way to test this. The initial process would require a little energy input but could help to overcome gravity. I am sure NASA is aware of this principal, if they are not than something is wrong. They may rely on others to build their stuff, a trade secret that will not be released. The marks on the metal can be ground off, the structure of the metal itself is full of this pattern and can be incorporated into everything. Leaving the design on the metal will not cause any more drag, in fact the drag may be less as the energy field is what air actually touches. When a person touches something, you do not actually touch it. The energy field touches it. If we did touch the material we would get stuck to it, as touching something like iced metal with our tongue. Welding occurs till energy is returned to push the bond away.