Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Methane Hydrate Club] Solar Activity Report for 7/10/02

Expand Messages
  • foryeshua1@juno.com
    B1, The answer that I have is that the very first evidence of the SE that I found was that as a pilot flew over the North pole he had a magnetic compass that
    Message 1 of 12 , Sep 12, 2002
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      B1, The answer that I have is that the very first evidence of the SE
      that I found was that as a pilot flew over the North pole he had a
      magnetic compass that spun when he went over rocks that were still not
      covered by ice, which was surprising to him because of the much snow that
      had fallen in the area. (I think this snow didn't cover the rocks because
      the SE flow resisted its falling upon them.) Applying the right hand
      rule to the motion of the compass needle (a trick of remembering which
      way the needle spun as I watched his large six inch needle spin) shows
      that a current is indeed going out of the North Pole. Walter

      On Sun, 14 Jul 2002 02:44:30 -0000 "b1blancer_29501"
      <b1blancer1@...> writes:
      --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., foryeshua1@j... wrote:
      > B1, When I was studying the SE and its presence I decided that the
      path
      > it took as it went into and out of the earth was a path of current flow
      > which the coronal ejections lit up, which I began to recognize as the
      > aurora.

      The mechanism for aurora has more to do with Earth's magnetic field
      than anything else. Contrary to popular belief, the Earth's
      magnetospere shields us quite effectively from a CME blast and from
      the solar wind. What happens is that when a CME impacts the
      magnetosphere, it causes electrons trapped in the magnetosphere to be
      accelerated down Earth's magnetic field lines. When those electrons
      go crashing into the upper atmosphere, they cause it to light up light
      a giant flourescent light bulb.

      At one time a year or so ago the aurora came and went in a cone
      > shape at certain times of the year, that was obviously showing that the
      > SE was coming into and out of the earth in that axis position
      fanning out
      > and forming a funnel shape broadening out and going around the caps
      as it
      > came in the South pole (which it still is, I think)(at certain axis
      > positions). When going out of the North pole it also went around the
      cap
      > and formed a funnel that narrowed as it went out, on the way back to
      the
      > Sun.

      Now see, this is one problem I have with the whole SE idea. I've
      never seen one piece of evidence that anything is flowing back into
      the sun. Quite the opposite is true, in fact. The sun constantly
      blowing out a stream of particles in all directions.





      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

      Click here to find your contact lenses!

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • foryeshua1@juno.com
      B1, One more idea. The blowing nature of the Sun is due to the flares of the CME. If you take a look at all pictures of the Sun you can see magnetic flow
      Message 2 of 12 , Sep 12, 2002
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        B1, One more idea. The blowing nature of the Sun is due to the flares
        of the CME. If you take a look at all pictures of the Sun you can see
        magnetic flow lines going out from both poles. I choose to define these
        lines as being SE going out of the South and into the North. If the SE
        causes the Sun to rotate like it does the planets, it would be expected
        to be present to rotate the Sun, by the way, it would have to also be
        flowing the opposite direction of it going through the planets. Which
        would cause the Sun to rotate oppositely of the earth. I do not have the
        info to check this out. Recently I found that one of the planets does
        not go the same direction as the earth. This is a phenomena I will have
        to find an excuse for if my assumptions about the SE causing rotation
        according to the right hand rule of the flowing SE are correct. It is
        true that it rotates very slowly, perhaps the conductive materials on
        this planet react negatively to the flowing direction of the SE.

        On Sun, 14 Jul 2002 02:44:30 -0000 "b1blancer_29501"
        <b1blancer1@...> writes:
        --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., foryeshua1@j... wrote:
        > B1, When I was studying the SE and its presence I decided that the
        path
        > it took as it went into and out of the earth was a path of current flow
        > which the coronal ejections lit up, which I began to recognize as the
        > aurora.

        The mechanism for aurora has more to do with Earth's magnetic field
        than anything else. Contrary to popular belief, the Earth's
        magnetospere shields us quite effectively from a CME blast and from
        the solar wind. What happens is that when a CME impacts the
        magnetosphere, it causes electrons trapped in the magnetosphere to be
        accelerated down Earth's magnetic field lines. When those electrons
        go crashing into the upper atmosphere, they cause it to light up light
        a giant flourescent light bulb.

        At one time a year or so ago the aurora came and went in a cone
        > shape at certain times of the year, that was obviously showing that the
        > SE was coming into and out of the earth in that axis position
        fanning out
        > and forming a funnel shape broadening out and going around the caps
        as it
        > came in the South pole (which it still is, I think)(at certain axis
        > positions). When going out of the North pole it also went around the
        cap
        > and formed a funnel that narrowed as it went out, on the way back to
        the
        > Sun.

        Now see, this is one problem I have with the whole SE idea. I've
        never seen one piece of evidence that anything is flowing back into
        the sun. Quite the opposite is true, in fact. The sun constantly
        blowing out a stream of particles in all directions.





        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

        Click here to find your contact lenses!

        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • David
        ... that ... because ... Rocks at the North Pole?? Seeing as how the North Pole is in the middle of an ocean, wouldn t that be a bit unusual?
        Message 3 of 12 , Sep 12, 2002
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., foryeshua1@j... wrote:
          > B1, The answer that I have is that the very first evidence of the SE
          > that I found was that as a pilot flew over the North pole he had a
          > magnetic compass that spun when he went over rocks that were still not
          > covered by ice, which was surprising to him because of the much snow
          that
          > had fallen in the area. (I think this snow didn't cover the rocks
          because
          > the SE flow resisted its falling upon them.) Applying the right hand
          > rule to the motion of the compass needle (a trick of remembering which
          > way the needle spun as I watched his large six inch needle spin) shows
          > that a current is indeed going out of the North Pole. Walter
          >

          Rocks at the North Pole?? Seeing as how the North Pole is in the
          middle of an ocean, wouldn't that be a bit unusual?
        • foryeshua1@juno.com
          David, The North pole before it started to melt was a triangle shape because there were three main conductors of SE there on the corners of the pole area.
          Message 4 of 12 , Sep 13, 2002
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            David, The North pole before it started to melt was a triangle shape
            because there were three main conductors of SE there on the corners of
            the pole area. Before the short smaller poles were put in around the
            North pole area to keep the SE from seeking and finding a new place to
            shift the Rotating position of the North pole to, the pole was triangle
            because of these three naturally SE conductive places. (btw the pole is
            now melting because the shifting of the SE to several conductive spots
            causes each pole to get cold while the SE is there but because it doesn't
            stay there long enough, the ice melts when the SE goes to the next pole.
            This is why we need one pole in the center to keep the pole from melting,
            to be able to control the speed of earth's rotation, and to possibly
            control the orbital path of our earth.) Our earth was shifting to each
            of these three points as it rotated thus its shape. These areas are
            somewhat mountainous with rocks. When I said the pilot was over the North
            Pole I was not talking about the Geocentric North. The center is an
            ocean, and if we were to drill a large enough hole and put in a conductor
            to be the ground that it would need to be with a controllable switch, we
            would have to do it from a platform. Keeping it insulated from the SE
            from breaking through upon the drilling rig before it is all set up to
            operate might be a problem unless an insulating dome down into the sea is
            covering them.
            This answer leaves a lot of holes. If interested you might
            consult http//www.vorbitz.com/electrojet// . Thank you for your
            question. Oh btw. I appreciate your "No problem" but I do not know what
            it is specifically referring to. Thanks anyway. Walter
            On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 20:10:51 -0000 "David" <b1blancer1@...>
            writes:
            --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., foryeshua1@j... wrote:
            > B1, The answer that I have is that the very first evidence of the SE
            > that I found was that as a pilot flew over the North pole he had a
            > magnetic compass that spun when he went over rocks that were still not
            > covered by ice, which was surprising to him because of the much snow
            that
            > had fallen in the area. (I think this snow didn't cover the rocks
            because
            > the SE flow resisted its falling upon them.) Applying the right hand
            > rule to the motion of the compass needle (a trick of remembering which
            > way the needle spun as I watched his large six inch needle spin) shows
            > that a current is indeed going out of the North Pole. Walter
            >

            Rocks at the North Pole?? Seeing as how the North Pole is in the
            middle of an ocean, wouldn't that be a bit unusual?



            Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            ADVERTISEMENT




            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • David
            First of all, let me address the rocks incident you referred to. I don t think that s its all that unusual for a megnetic compass to deviate or even spin
            Message 5 of 12 , Sep 13, 2002
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              First of all, let me address the rocks incident you referred to. I
              don't think that's its all that unusual for a megnetic compass to
              deviate or even spin around when in the presence of magnetic rocks. I
              can show you on aeronautical navigation charts where the issue
              warnings that state that magnetic compass readings will be inaccurate.
              If the pilot's compass that you mention did indeed spin around, then
              I would suggest that it was either because he was in the presence of
              magnetic rocks, or very close to the magnetic pole itself. I imagine
              a compass would do all kinds of weird things when in direct proximity
              to the magnetic pole.

              Now as far as Earth rotation, why is it necessary to have some
              external force causing it? Newton's first law of motion says that an
              object in motion will remain in motion. You talk about some kind of
              artificial magnetic poles being installed. Do you have any evidence
              of that?

              Sorry, but the whole SE idea makes no sense at all to me.
            • foryeshua1@juno.com
              David, The poles in place I mentioned is that I found in the news a pole in place somewhere in Alaska I believe,which was left sticking up above ground.
              Message 6 of 12 , Sep 14, 2002
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                David, The poles in place I mentioned is that I found in the news a
                pole in place somewhere in Alaska I believe,which was left sticking up
                above ground. When I saw that the aurora was shifting wildly around the
                North pole area I knew that the only way it could do that is if the
                source of the SE were coming from that area and being there to be lit up.
                That meant many more in place poles.
                As far as being close to the magnetic pole, it wasn't. It was
                over the proximity of the geocentric North pole. The three areas
                mentioned before on the corners of the triangle North ice cap were the
                most likely places. The approximate place of the North Mangnetic pole at
                that time was somewhere down toward Canada. Walter

                On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 04:45:48 -0000 "David" <b1blancer1@...>
                writes:
                First of all, let me address the rocks incident you referred to. I
                don't think that's its all that unusual for a megnetic compass to
                deviate or even spin around when in the presence of magnetic rocks. I
                can show you on aeronautical navigation charts where the issue
                warnings that state that magnetic compass readings will be inaccurate.
                If the pilot's compass that you mention did indeed spin around, then
                I would suggest that it was either because he was in the presence of
                magnetic rocks, or very close to the magnetic pole itself. I imagine
                a compass would do all kinds of weird things when in direct proximity
                to the magnetic pole.

                Now as far as Earth rotation, why is it necessary to have some
                external force causing it? Newton's first law of motion says that an
                object in motion will remain in motion. You talk about some kind of
                artificial magnetic poles being installed. Do you have any evidence
                of that?

                Sorry, but the whole SE idea makes no sense at all to me.



                Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                ADVERTISEMENT




                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.