Astrophysicist says our solar system is entering an interstellar energy cloud that will bring global

reply to post by eriktheawful

Nice LOGIC.
Good Post! Split Infinity

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

Sorry but the Pressures associated within a Mass of Earth's quantity would not allow for the formation of a Deep Central Core of Plasma. Also if this was so...it would mean the Earth would have a much lesser mass than is currently easy to calculate based on Earths Gravitic Effect. As well as Earth not being able to generate it's current Magnetic Field with a Plasma Core. Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


Iron loses magnetism when molten or subjected to high temperature.Which calls for alternative explanations.To me Plasma core hypothesis seems to be a good start ,though flawed it explains many things which the high temperature Plasma is magnetic in nature too.If the sun's core is hydrogen plasma,the earth core could be highly compressed plasma too.

Like I said before when the fundamental assumptions are wrong ,the conclusions will be wrong too.

to a magnet, but when you heat the iron to a high enough temperature (called the Curie point), it loses its ability to be magnetized. Heat energy scrambles the iron atoms so that they can't line up and create a magnetic field. Here is a simple demonstration of this effect.
www.exploratorium.edu...

Has the earth's core been observed in direct experimentation ?Not.Which is why useless theortical pseudoscience explanations are given that Earth has an high temperature iron core,considering that iron loses its magnetism at high temperatures.

The universe is 99 % plasma.

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

All Magnetic Fields or Effects are generated by Matter's Nucleus Orbiting Electrons and their ability to either have a Full Outer Orbit which does not lend itself to take on or share another Elements Orbital Electrons or Have an Orbit of Electrons that can share or release unneeded Electrons after a Chemical Reaction.

In any Case...Magnetism is based on an Elements number of Electrons that it has in it's outer orbit and if they can be shared to create a Chemical Reaction. Split Infinity

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

Check your Math...First off...what Type of Plasma are you talking about?

Second...Since the definition of Plasma is simply Ionized Gas...even if you use the Highest Density Gas that can exist in a state as Plasma...it would STILL NOT EQUATE to Earth's Gravitational Effect. This is a FACT that cannot be disputed. Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


So now you are saying that the earth is powered by chemical reactions

Most mainstream physicist believe its due to radioactive decay.Then there is a earth fusion core hypothesis too.Plasma core hypothesis which explains many anomalies.Now where did this chemical core hypothesis come from?

reply to post by SplitInfinity

The new model has given rise to macroquantum laws for the Earth. Its outer core is clamed to be made up of a quasiplasma substance with ultra-high density atomic hydrogen as the basic component. The potential energy released in the compression of this substance turns into the kinetic energy of the Earth’s rotation, the kinetic energy of the Moon’s rotation round the Earth, the ocean water movement, and into the thermal energy responsible for the heating of the mantle. The Earth’s climate is determined, along with the solar light energy, by the wave movement in the Earth’s outer core. Through induction interaction, these waves transfer the energy to the mantle, the crust, the oceans, and the atmosphere.
metagalactic.net...

Enough said.The earth's core is believed to be high density hydrogen by many physicists.

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003


books.google.com...

Total rejection of your concept. Split Infinity

In my last post I provided a link that is a long term study of a possible High Density Hydrogen Plasma Core existing inside Planet Earth. It has been disproven many times as well as the Math simply does not add up. One GLARING FACT OF CONTRADICTION is in the way the Earths Magnetic Field would present itself if we had this form of core you advocate. It would not allow for the necessary Electromagnetic Generation to protect the Earth with a field that now exists. The Field derived from your concept and Computer Models have been made...would be much too weak to prevent Solar Radiation as well as Cosmic Rays to be deflected to the point of the earths Oceans not separating into Hydrogen and Oxygen Gasses.

This is what happened to Mars when Mars...a smaller planet than Earth with a Core that cooled and slowed down in it's Molten State to a point that this molten core cooled and eventually stopped spinning which caused Mars to loose it's Large Oceans as without a Spinning Molten Core...Solar Radiation as well as Cosmic Rays would cause a Chemical Reaction in the Martian Oceans as the water would split into Hydrogen and Oxygen Gasses and quickly be lost to Space as just like Earth...a planets atmosphere where water is present simply looses that water quickly by Solar UV-Radiation breaking it down to separate gasses.

Any life there would also be killed off as if earth did not have a magnetic Field...the Solar Radiation alone would kill everything like a Giant Microwave with a bacteria covered tennis ball inside. Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


You have not provided the mathematical basis .Macroquantam laws on the other hand suggest otherwise.

The Earth’s Macroquantum Laws The Earth is known to be made up of an inner core; an outer core; a mantle; and a solid core, or crust. The inner core has a radius (1) of 1217.1 km. It probably consists of a gaseous substance resistant to cross-cut seismic (acoustic) waves. Its gas pressure is 3.6324 · 102 GPа. The outer core has a radius 2 of 3485.7 km. It is made up of a liquid substance with a temperature evaluated at 6200K and a density level of 13.012 g/cm3 [4]. Located farther on is a liquefied mantle with a radius 3 of 6031 km covered with a thin solid crust with a 4 of 340 km. Fig.1 The Earth’s inner structure Let’s suppose that the Earth’s outer core, just like the Sun’s [5], is nothing but quasiplasma governed by the macroquantum electromagnetic laws. Then there may be waves along its surface moving at a speed of: 1 = (1) Where is a thin structure constant and c is the speed of light. This wave’s kinetic energy will correspond to a temperature of : (2) where k is the Bolzman constant, and me is the electron mass. This temperature (2) corresponds to the one in the Earth’s center [1] and matches the coloring temperature in the middle of the Sun’s disk [4].

The wave (1) has a round-the-core rotation period of:
= 17.523 sec. (3)
The wave (1) shaped as a spectral peak is easily registered by all ocean seismic stations in the Pc3 (10-45sec.) range. Land-based stations, in addition, can detect a second peak with a period of 8.7sec. in the Pc2 (2-10sec.) range [6]. These peaks previously defied any theoretical reasoning, although the aggregate wave power within these ranges is dozens of times as great as that of all the Earth’s seismic waves.

metagalactic.net...





Fig.2. The Earth’s Sun-Like Core

The wave (1) has a round-the-core rotation period of:
= 17.523 sec. (3)
The wave (1) shaped as a spectral peak is easily registered by all ocean seismic stations in the Pc3 (10-45sec.) range. Land-based stations, in addition, can detect a second peak with a period of 8.7sec. in the Pc2 (2-10sec.) range [6]. These peaks previously defied any theoretical reasoning, although the aggregate wave power within these ranges is dozens of times as great as that of all the Earth’s seismic waves.


Fig.3. The Earth’s Acoustic Noise

One should keep in mind that the Earth’s electromagnetic field [7] oscillates in the immediate Pc3 frequency range. In other words, the energy of a wave moving in the Earth’s outer core should have an impact on both the crust and the ionosphere and affect the Earth’s climate dramatically. This influence can be traced to the ocean behavior.

Some waves in the Earth’s outer core seem to be moving in different directions. This may trigger the induction flow of the ocean waters, the Gulf Stream being a good case in point. One can find, getting back to the Earth’s distant past, that the average ocean temperature was 23° С and the water level was 500 m higher than the prevailing one some 110 million years ago [9]. This couldn’t have been accounted for by the fall of huge space objects as blast-motivated dust clouds dissipate within a few years. Nor could it have been the reason for the dinosaur extinction that were dying out in the course of millions of years. It is apparent, therefore, that the probable source of the Earth’s climatic changes could be either the long-term processes within the terrestrial core or the cosmic origin of the changes themselves. One knows for a fact, however, that the Sun’s light intensity has been unchanged within the last 3 billion years and couldn’t possibly affect the Earth’s climate [9]. Let us get back to our model. Suppose that the movement of quasiplasma along the Earth’s outer core’s inner surface also triggers the movement of its electrostatic field [5]. In this case, the tips of the vectors of this field cannot move in the condensed environment (the mantle) faster than c. If so, then the tip of the radius-vector of such a field will be located at a distance of = 6101.64 km. (4) In other words, the radius-vector ends within 270 km from the Earth’s surface.

reply to post by SplitInfinity


again you base your theory on the fallacy that solid iron at ultra high temperature remains magnetic which it does not.

When the fundamental assumption is wrong you get the wrong conclusion.

reply to post by SplitInfinity


Let us prove now that the quasiplasma waves inside the Earth provide energy to the oceans in the way of tides and ebbs.
It has been considered, since Newton’s times, that tides and ebbs on the Earth are triggered by the Moon: the kinetic energy of the Moon’s rotation turns into the kinetic energy of the water movement on the Earth. If the above is true, then the Moon should be nearing the Earth [12]. Besides, according to Laplace, the Earth should have two wave water humps. It was found, however, that the humps were shifted 2.16° ahead against the Earth-Moon axis.


Fig.6. The Moon’s Lagging Movement

It follows from the above that it is not the Moon’s kinetic energy but the kinetic energy of the Earth that impacts the Moon, so the Moon should become increasingly distant. Numerous meticulously accurate measuring experiments have shown, however, that the Moon is neither becoming closer nor drifting away from the Earth. Moreover, upon closer consideration, the phase patterns of the ocean tides behave very much like resonator waves discarding the Laplace tide theory as even the first approximation to describe the tide and ebb phenomenon [12].
This paradox can be happily resolved by assuming that the Moon is positioned against the Earth at a strictly determined macroquantum distance [5].
Let us suppose that along the outer core’s inner surface, besides the fast wave mode (1), there is a slow wave mode moving at a rate of

3 = (5)

This wave’s spreading period will be as follows:

= 26.103 days. (6)
This period is 4.67 percent shorter than the actual sideric period (27.32166 days) of the Moon’s rotation round the Earth. The period matching can be achieved by assuming that the wave itself should spread a bit deeper than the Earth’s outer core surface. This wave should be bent toward the Earth’s equator surface in accordance with the Moon’s orbit.
A conclusion is evident, therefore, that the quasiplasma wave (5) induces, on the Earth surface, the movement of the ocean waves in the way of two humps (tides and ebbs) that move at a bit faster rate than the Moon itself.
metagalactic.net...

reply to post by SplitInfinity


like picking on the earth's iron core and magnetic field because it is one of those dogmas of science, very similar to those in religion, i.e., strongly help while unprovable. One sort of gets the same reaction from science as one gets from religion, if you dare question the unprovable that is accepted as truth.

If you look at the history of this dogma it is at least 200 years old and could have been deduced in Faraday's time. First of all, lodestone has been known to have magnetic properties for thousands of years. By the iron age it was probably known to contain iron. Little pieces of lodestone had been used to help navigate ships and was the basis of the first compasses for centuries before Faraday.

When Faraday experimented with magnetic field and saw how they were aligned around a magnetic, the logical speculation was that maybe the earth was a big magnetic made of lodestone. The lodestone we find on the surface came from the bowels of the earth, maybe from its magnetic center. From that the iron core magnetic theory was born, but still sort of censored by religion. This was was the abode of hell. But in sciences defense, war is hell, and Mars the god of war is equated with the metal iron. It hasn't really been questioned since then. It has been refined with nickel to keep it in vogue with the better nickel magnets we can make in the lab. But also to add some extra kick to address insulation considerations.

The dogma is so well protected that once flaws are found and can't be just ignored, alternate explanations appear to help protect it from harm. A simple earth formation from a cloud of dust has the problem of iron oxidation like all the minerals in the crust. So we cheat oxidation with asteroids. But are asteroids pure magnets? And would serious collisions with the earth, heating these magnets, sort of mess up their magnetic properties?

www.physforum.com...

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

Well the black hole theorists are here with their pseudo science propaganda.Occam's razor is good evidence for electric universe and electric universe explains all anomalies in a much easier way.

Electricity is a force several magnitudes stronger than gravity.When your assumptions are wrong,the conclusions will be wrong too.

EU can't even explain a 3 body systemlet alone the universe.

Gravity is on the other hand explains the solar system's dynamics to incredible accuracy.

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

In high temperatures ,iron loses its magnetism.Has it occured to you that the earth's core could be plasma based.

Iron loses its magnetism above the Curie point. Another good example why EU is a failure.

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

Krauss is an mainstream physicist .His link was from wired. Please explain your black hole BS propaganda.There is no photographic evidence for black holes and mathematical pseudo science is used to justify them.

A black hole is only one of the objects explained by the math. Other objects have been detected that are explained by the math.

EU on the other hand can't explain even a 3 body system. Probes in the solar system show that there are no EM fields strong enough to affect the motions of the planets. EU is completely lame.

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003


Just what on that hoax site is worth reading? Do you want to point to anything exceptionally ridiculous on that site?

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

the earth's magnetosphere and ionosphere have electric charge.

And that has been measured and shown to be incredibly minuscule as I already pointed out.

reply to post by stereologist


Curie point for iron is 770 centigrade.Core temperature is 5000 C. Go figure.