It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"Almost" a connection? They then go on to say:
almost a connection between the number of sunspots and the occurrence of the earthquakes.
The result indicates that the presence of the sunspots effects as EEE, into the time of the earthquakes of the West Iran, USA and Japan which are linked to a solar activity cycle. Increasing number of the earthquakes has been directly related to increasing of the number of the sunspots.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by rickymouse
It sounds sort of like it is a catalystic or synergetic relationship.
Or none at all.
Or a matter of shoehorning and cherry picking data to fit the hypothesis.
Across a range of earthquake magnitude thresholds, we find no consistent and statistically significant distributional differences. We also introduce time lags between the solar-terrestrial variables and the number of earthquakes, but again no statistically significant distributional difference is found. We cannot reject the null hypothesis of no solar-terrestrial triggering of earthquakes.
It's going to take a careful and unbiased examination of data to find a link.
It is going to take people with open minds to find a link.
Did Einstein or Tesla follow protocol when they formed their ideas?
Yes. He was a very good engineer and inventor. Didn't really come up with much in the way of "new" science though. Didn't really disturb the scientific community much (not like Einstein did).
Did Edison follow conscensus of the time.
So how many variables does it take before it becomes absurd to look for a direct correlation?
Not every variable has been researched or thought of yet.
Not sure what you mean by that. The Earth's magnetic field does vary in strength (it's currently declining) what do you mean "bigger and smaller"?
Earths magnetic fields get bigger and smaller with an inverse relation to field strength also.
Not sure what you mean by that either. If solar activity influences earthquakes there would be a statistical correlation between them. If there are "too many variables" for such a correlation to appear...what's the point?
The last sentence is why we do not get as much noticable variability from solar cycles.
What "energy" are you talking about? The magnetosphere is not affected by electromagnetic radiation but it is affected by the charged particles of the solar wind. Those particles carry remnants of the magnetic field of the Sun through interplanetary space. It's called the interplanetary magnetic field.
When earths magnetic field is hit by extra energy, it gets bigger, moving farther from the earth but it weakens the farther out it gets, the energy of it is less per square foot because there is more square feet of field.
Actually, what happens is the fat in the burger melts and forms a film between the pan and the burger. There is nothing being repelled by anything.
The same is true when frying something in a pan, cold sticks to the metal until the cold meat gains enough energy to repel the pan, then you can flip the hamburger without it being stuck.
Ok. I thought about it. It isn't related.
I know this sounds irrevelent but it is somewhat related to the earths fields if you think about it..
No indication that increased solar activity results in an increase in earthquake activity. No indication that any particular solar event results in an earthquake.