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

Re: David

Expand Messages
  • David
    ... I haven t heard the name before, but I ll see what I can find out about him. The solar wind speed is only part of the equation. There s the solar wind
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 1, 2005
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Doran"
      <narodaleahcim@a...> wrote:
      > A gentleman by the name of Jim Hughes has recently been discussing
      > space weather with me. Perhaps you know of him.
      >
      > He contends that when the wind speeds drop below 500 that tropical
      > storms form--over that speed they don't. I saw real time this was
      > true with respect to Dennis and Emily.
      >
      > Do you have any thoughts about this?

      I haven't heard the name before, but I'll see what I can find out
      about him.

      The solar wind speed is only part of the equation. There's the solar
      wind density, and the interplanetary magnetic field. The
      interplanetary magnetic field is actually an extension of the sun's
      magnetic field that is carried along by the solar wind. The IMF can
      be either north or south-pointing. If it's south-pointing, the IMF
      will essentially collide with and weaken Earth's magnetic field, and
      allow the solar wind to penetrate deeped down. That has the effect of
      enhancing geomagnetic activity.

      So, while a high-speed solar wind will pack a harder punch into
      Earth's magnetic field, that's only part of the story. I would be
      interested to know how Mr. Hughes factors in the IMF, and also the
      solar wind density.

      I would also be curious if there is any data concerning tropical storm
      formation in relation to the 11 year sunspot cycle. During the period
      of time around the cycle peaks, there would be more days during which
      the solar wind speed would be > 500 km/sec due to the increased
      sunspot activity. If Mr. Hughes's theory is correct, it seems that it
      would translate to fewer tropical storms around the solar max, and
      more around the solar minimum.

      It's a shame we don't have any tropical storm data from the time of
      the Maunder Minimum!
    • Mike Doran
      David, Here is a conversation that I had with him that really is a conversation that we ve been perculating here for years. Jim Hughes wrote: The size of the
      Message 2 of 4 , Aug 1, 2005
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        David,

        Here is a conversation that I had with him that really is a
        conversation that we've been perculating here for years.

        Jim Hughes wrote:

        "The size of the eruption...magnetic field...location etc. play a
        much bigger role then the flares x-ray size. Even a smaller class C-
        flare can bombard the earth with more particles than then the bigger
        ones sometimes. "


        I wrote:

        There is an electron belt (-), a proton belt (+)--the so called van
        Allen belts, and then the upper ionosphere (-), the lower ionosphere
        (+), and ground (-) and a notion that opposing charges are attracted
        to each other. A proton wind can essentially distort orders brought
        about by a living earth. Interestingly, I learned from you space
        weather people that the distortion in the van Allen belts following
        rapid changes in SSTs at the end of the 1997-8 El Nino were triggered
        by a solar wind change:

        Quote:

        "[A]round May 8, 1998, there were a series of large, solar
        disturbances that caused a new radiation belt to form in the so-
        called "slot region" between the inner and outer van Allen belts. The
        new belt eventually disappeared once the solar activity subsided.

        http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Dictionary/RADIATION_BELTS/DI1
        60.htm

        The cloud behaviors changed so dramatically that incredibly rapid SST
        changes occurred:

        For SST changes, see:

        http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climo_archive/anom.5.9.1998.gif

        http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climo_archive/anomnight.6.9.1998
        .gif

        http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climo.html

        Electrical change later equates to a thermal change. How does this
        happen? What is occurring? There is a device in electronics called a
        capacitor. Picture two 'T's head up against each other. Capacitors
        are used to pass alternating currents like the kind of electrical
        current in the plug that drives your computer. Capacitors are NOT
        designed to pass a direct current. One cool thing about EMFs is that
        they pass in space. Particles, too, move in space. BUT, electrical
        currents, direct ones, do not. Confused? Did you know there is a
        difference between materials as insulating to an ELECTRICAL CURRENT
        but not to a MAGENTIC FIELD? Still confused?

        When a capacitor has an applied direct current of a positive voltage
        to one end, this will cause the other end, the plate, to have the
        opposite charge. That is because the flux lines created by the ions
        on the plate, or the magnetic field of the electrical current, will
        pass across the capicitor even though the current will not.

        When it comes to an alternating current (think sine wave) in a
        perfect capacitor the signal will pass as the electrons on either end
        of the plates will always go the other way, so you get an output
        signal that they say is 180 degrees out of phase of the input signal.

        In the case of earth's belts and ionosphere, they act as coincentric
        spheres that trap conductive particles in shapes much like a virtual
        plate to a capacitor. Since a hurricane moves, and its clouds act to
        focus the field due to the differences in dielectric constants
        between air (eye) DC=1, clouds DC=80 and cold clouds DC=88, you have
        a wave features to the capacitor behaviors. Strikes in regions near
        tropical storms then act to 'power' that capacitive coupling--and
        impacts the cloud microphysics that conform to the electrical orders
        brought about by the barotropical orders.


        . . .



        http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/essd23sep98_1.htm

        Quote:

        "Rarely seen lightning fields and purple sprites were detected in the
        eye of the hurricane by the ER-2 pilot as he flew more than 19.8 km
        (65,000 ft) above the Atlantic."


        That would be the capactive state. The direct currents, or the
        strikes, are rare:

        Quote:
        "Surprisingly, not much lightning occurs in the inner core within
        about 100 km or 60 mi of the tropical cyclone center. Only around a
        dozen or less cloud-to-ground strikes per hour occur around the
        eyewall of the storm...."


        http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/G10.htm

        Consistent with this, Burke et al. [1992] has reported the detection
        of keV electrons and large electric field transients above a
        hurricane. These various observations all suggest that what is
        occurring at the ocean surface couples to the ionosphere. The
        coupling mechanisms was said by them not to be well understood, but
        it seems probable that "capacitive coupling" through the displacement
        current may drive conduction currents within the ionosphere [Hale and
        Baginski, 1987].

        Let me see if I can put this into English. Say there is a huge
        relatively positive charge above an eye in a hurricane. This is what
        has been observed, BTW by Burke et al.--because negative electrons
        charges implies nearby positive charges, and overall the ionosphere
        is positively charged relative to the surface. Now, lightning does
        not occur much inside a tropical storm. So those charge accumulations-
        -that huge, have to be held there by some force. In this case, the
        topology of the hurricane itself both prevents the charges from
        moving and at the same time provides magnetic flux lines that hold
        the charges in place.

        In this case, the ocean below the tropical storm provides a
        conductive area where opposing charges are held on the ocean surface,
        and held the more due to the fact that as the surface low roils and
        depressurizes the oceans, CO2 comes out of solution and rises to the
        surface, where it runs back to ion form, increasing the surface
        conductivity by an increased ion count in the context of the same
        electrical fields that influence the chemical equillibrium constant
        toward the production of more ions.

        Now, what does this have to do with space weather? Well, the fact is,
        after the lower ionosphere, which is positively charged, there is the
        upper ionosphere, then the proton and electron containing van Allen
        belts, also which would hold by the same capacitive couplings
        opposing charges above each successive layer. If space weather comes
        and distorts these fields, which it does, it impacts the stability of
        the ionosphere above the tropical storm, and then that instability
        impacts the cloud microphysics which are impacted by the DC coupling
        in the eye and storm convection edges, feeder bands. Again, the self
        organization is due to the fact that water has a greater dielectric
        constant over air.


        . . .

        I have a question for you.

        High frequency light would tend to cause O2 to be split into ozone at
        a higher rate. So after a period of solar activity, which may by
        itself disrupt the capacitive couplings that organize a storm, should
        the space wind drop and the event wane, there is still then a
        remaining relatively increased level of ozone, which is of course
        conductive, that may increase the conductivity of the ionosphere and
        increase the ability for an intense capacitive coupling to occur that
        has the degree of power to cause the cloud microphysics changes
        required for a tropical storm to form.

        In any event, with the next storm to come I will point out some
        specific mesovortices bahaviors tied to lightning, which but for an
        EMF connection should have NOTHING to do with such a behavior from a
        purely barotropical standpoint (especially if the strikes are in the
        CONUS in the afternoon when the tropical storm is on the night side
        of the planet. There is no other reasonable explaination.) Occum's
        razer, baby. Just sliced you.


        Then Jim Hughes wrote back:

        "Yes Mike you can have an increase in ozone production during
        increased solar activity.. not sure about the exact numbers... but
        you can also have a reversed relationship occur during large proton
        flares.

        I think I recall reading that the one last January , second only to
        the October 1989 proton flare reduced the ozone by approximately 1%.
        That's pretty big in the whole scheme of things....Major stratwarm
        followed down the road a bit at the 30 hPa level I believe it was
        also related to the QBO / solar hemisphere origin. "


        I wrote back:

        "Now, the question is is that reduction due to the proton flow
        UNIFORM. No way it is. The protons run along the closing isobars of
        the earth EMF whereas the high freq light runs to the tropics. If
        anything, the lack of ozone in the temp zones with its increased
        levels in the tropics produces capacitive couplings to a greater
        organized degree in the tropics!!!
      • David
        ... He s got it right. X-ray flux is only part of the picture. A long-duration C-class flare can pack a bigger CME wallop than a short-duration M or even X
        Message 3 of 4 , Aug 4, 2005
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Doran"
          <narodaleahcim@a...> wrote:
          > David,
          >
          > Here is a conversation that I had with him that really is a
          > conversation that we've been perculating here for years.
          >
          > Jim Hughes wrote:
          >
          > "The size of the eruption...magnetic field...location etc. play a
          > much bigger role then the flares x-ray size. Even a smaller class C-
          > flare can bombard the earth with more particles than then the bigger
          > ones sometimes. "

          He's got it right. X-ray flux is only part of the picture. A
          long-duration C-class flare can pack a bigger CME wallop than a
          short-duration M or even X flare.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.