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

Question for b-1

Expand Messages
  • pawnfart
    Have you seen this link? http://www.sec.noaa.gov/SWN/ Also, do you have a cool space weather picture we could put up for the club?
    Message 1 of 6 , May 22 1:02 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Have you seen this link?

      http://www.sec.noaa.gov/SWN/

      Also, do you have a cool space weather picture we could put up for
      the club?
    • b1blancer_29501
      Yep, I know the link. Its where I get the solar wind pressure data from. For pictures, I can offer a few suggestions. This is a false color image from the
      Message 2 of 6 , May 22 10:38 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Yep, I know the link. Its where I get the solar wind pressure data
        from.

        For pictures, I can offer a few suggestions.

        This is a false color image from the SOHO satellite taken in the
        extreme UV range. It shows the progression of a large solar flare
        explosion and CME.
        http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/bestofsoho/PAGE2/eit004G_b.gif .

        Or this one, that shows the relationship between the sun, the earth,
        and earth's magnetic field.
        http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/bestofsoho/PAGE2/magfieldG_b.gif .

        If you want some realtime stuff, you could go with this one, which
        shows the X-RAY flux as measures by the GOES 8 and GOES 10 satellites.
        This will show you when a solar flare is happening.
        http://sec.noaa.gov/rt_plots/Xray.gif .

        Or how about this one from the link you gave, which shows realtime
        solar wind data.
        http://www.sec.noaa.gov/SWN/images/200205230533sw_dials.gif .
      • michael cook
        I was wondering if any one in this club might be able to help me with an answer to a question? For the past month I have been reading all of the e-mail for
        Message 3 of 6 , May 23 12:13 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          I was wondering if any one in this club might be able
          to help me with an answer to a question? For the past
          month I have been reading all of the e-mail for
          methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com. I am currently
          taking a class, Geology of the Northwest, at my local
          community college. For this class we have to write a
          10 page paper on some aspect of Northwest geology. I
          have chosen methane hydrates as my subjuct. I think I
          have a fairly elementary grasp of the subject matter
          as it applies to the formation of methane hydrates on
          the ocean floor. I also have a basic understanding of
          methane hydrate's role in global warming. However,
          what is confusing me is the scope of this club's
          discussion. Most of this club's discussion concerns
          weather patterns, solar activity, carbon cycling, and
          a whole lot more which completly goes over my head. So
          the question is: Is there a unifying theory under
          which you guys operate? In layman's terms, how is all
          of these discussions tied together around methane
          hydrates?

          Thank you very kindly for any assistance.

          forestman345@...


          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
          http://launch.yahoo.com
        • pawnfart
          Is there a unifying theory under ... Well, I am not sure everyone agrees, but since this I started this bb I can speak for myself that I think there is a
          Message 4 of 6 , May 23 3:18 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            Is there a unifying theory under
            > which you guys operate?

            Well, I am not sure everyone agrees, but since this I started this bb
            I can speak for myself that I think there is a unifying theory and
            that is why I put the board up.

            In a nutshell, the idea is Gaia earth, or a living planet. By
            living, I mean capable of life sustaining feedback loops. That means
            that part of the earth that you might not think of as biological
            really is, to include all these different things we are talking about
            to include the chemical methane frozen with water!

            Let's take the hair on a dog. You can cut it and the dog does not
            yelp in pain. Is that fur dead or alive? Some would say that the
            fur is not "alive". But if it is cold enough, goose bump like
            features form on the dogs skin, and its hair stand up straighter and
            this provides more insulation. The dog stays warm. This is an
            example of a feedback loop.

            With the discoveries of modern biology, like viruses and such, it is
            very difficult to decide exactly what is life. Sometimes a virus
            will sit on your window blind and not change, not feedback anything.
            It acts dead in all ways, like a chemical. But then expose it to a
            person and they may get a cold--with all the feedbacks that leads to
            the survival of the virus. The key defining feature of life, I
            submit, is feedbacks.

            Now, I realize that there are a number of microbrial symbiotic
            relationships here, but the primary creature we are involved with is
            called a methanogen. It makes methane, and has done so for billions
            of years. There are two Gaia earth links with the group's links you
            may want to check out in this regard, and while they are good, I
            disagree with the feedback they describe, which is that methane
            worked as a green house gas.

            In my view, the feedback is electrical. It works through the fact
            that methane hydrates are electrically INSULATING. This then changes
            the way cirrus clouds behave and how they feedback IR (infrared)
            radiation. You can see that this may be true by reading the Lindzen
            iris paper and figure in that he did not include direction of
            current, where ocean currents turn out to be conductive and hold
            inductive properties! Flaring itself is very electrical, such that
            if hydrology is modulated, which itself will modulate CO2, then
            climate and ocean chemistry can be modulated by the biosphere,
            fedback, if you will, in a manner that leads to survival of the
            methanogens, and along the way, everything else biological.

            Here is a good link to show its implications to Washington:

            http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/releases2001/agu_cayan_water.html

            In layman's terms, how is all
            > of these discussions tied together around methane
            > hydrates?
            >
            > Thank you very kindly for any assistance.
            >
            > forestman345@y...
          • fredwx
            I tend to agree with Mike except I have yet to be convinced that the feedback with methane hydrates is electrical. The Lindzen paper quoted did not attempt to
            Message 5 of 6 , May 24 5:35 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              I tend to agree with Mike except I have yet to be convinced that the
              feedback with methane hydrates is electrical. The Lindzen paper
              quoted did not attempt to measure electrical charges or there
              influence on cirrus clouds. The paper only examined the relationship
              between sea surface temperatures (SST) and the cloud cover and found
              that the warmer the SST the less cirrus cloud coverage occurred. The
              electrical aspect (if any) is (in my opinion) negligible.


              In my view, the feedback is electrical. It works through the fact
              that methane hydrates are electrically INSULATING. This then changes
              the way cirrus clouds behave and how they feedback IR (infrared)
              radiation. You can see that this may be true by reading the Lindzen
              iris paper and figure in that he did not include direction of
              current, where ocean currents turn out to be conductive and hold
              inductive properties! Flaring itself is very electrical, such that
              if hydrology is modulated, which itself will modulate CO2, then
              climate and ocean chemistry can be modulated by the biosphere,
              fedback, if you will, in a manner that leads to survival of the
              methanogens, and along the way, everything else biological.






              --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
              > Is there a unifying theory under
              > > which you guys operate?
              >
              > Well, I am not sure everyone agrees, but since this I started this
              bb
              > I can speak for myself that I think there is a unifying theory and
              > that is why I put the board up.
              >
              > In a nutshell, the idea is Gaia earth, or a living planet. By
              > living, I mean capable of life sustaining feedback loops. That
              means
              > that part of the earth that you might not think of as biological
              > really is, to include all these different things we are talking
              about
              > to include the chemical methane frozen with water!
              >
              > Let's take the hair on a dog. You can cut it and the dog does not
              > yelp in pain. Is that fur dead or alive? Some would say that the
              > fur is not "alive". But if it is cold enough, goose bump like
              > features form on the dogs skin, and its hair stand up straighter
              and
              > this provides more insulation. The dog stays warm. This is an
              > example of a feedback loop.
              >
              > With the discoveries of modern biology, like viruses and such, it
              is
              > very difficult to decide exactly what is life. Sometimes a virus
              > will sit on your window blind and not change, not feedback
              anything.
              > It acts dead in all ways, like a chemical. But then expose it to a
              > person and they may get a cold--with all the feedbacks that leads
              to
              > the survival of the virus. The key defining feature of life, I
              > submit, is feedbacks.
              >
              > Now, I realize that there are a number of microbrial symbiotic
              > relationships here, but the primary creature we are involved with
              is
              > called a methanogen. It makes methane, and has done so for
              billions
              > of years. There are two Gaia earth links with the group's links
              you
              > may want to check out in this regard, and while they are good, I
              > disagree with the feedback they describe, which is that methane
              > worked as a green house gas.
              >
              > In my view, the feedback is electrical. It works through the fact
              > that methane hydrates are electrically INSULATING. This then
              changes
              > the way cirrus clouds behave and how they feedback IR (infrared)
              > radiation. You can see that this may be true by reading the
              Lindzen
              > iris paper and figure in that he did not include direction of
              > current, where ocean currents turn out to be conductive and hold
              > inductive properties! Flaring itself is very electrical, such that
              > if hydrology is modulated, which itself will modulate CO2, then
              > climate and ocean chemistry can be modulated by the biosphere,
              > fedback, if you will, in a manner that leads to survival of the
              > methanogens, and along the way, everything else biological.
              >
              > Here is a good link to show its implications to Washington:
              >
              > http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/releases2001/agu_cayan_water.html
              >
              > In layman's terms, how is all
              > > of these discussions tied together around methane
              > > hydrates?
              > >
              > > Thank you very kindly for any assistance.
              > >
              > > forestman345@y...
            • pawnfart
              ... the ... While Fred and I don t see I to eye on Lindzen s failure to include direction of current into his analysis, this isn t the only area where I see
              Message 6 of 6 , May 24 11:49 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                > I tend to agree with Mike except I have yet to be convinced that
                the
                > feedback with methane hydrates is electrical.

                While Fred and I don't see I to eye on Lindzen's failure to include
                direction of current into his analysis, this isn't the only area
                where I see electrical processes, from the movement of the QBO, the
                mechanism of the monsoons and coriolis right turning cold air from
                the mountains, to even something like the difference ELECTRICALLY
                from a typical run of the mile tropical storm and a 'cane with a pin
                hole. I could go on and on. But where I really find my assumptive
                roots is in genetic evidence.

                In the wake of Crick and Watson's work on DNA, it becomes difficult
                to distinguish between life and non-life. The reason feedback loops
                are interesting in this context is that it helps to define the
                symbiotic relationship man should have with the biosphere in order to
                survive himself, as well as the evolutionary context of Gaia and how
                just looking at the relationships we see in genes with life that
                exists now we can tell a great deal about climate over the timescales
                that are meaningful. That is because if feedback loops overlap and
                are in conflict, or not symbiotic, then that genetic aspect will not
                be expressed as that part of the biosphere which lost out.

                What is most interesting is the research by Olsen et al research
                (tree of life mapping by genes) about the archae-the methanogens,
                salt lovers--haliophiles, and sulfur loving archae. What the studies
                have shown, like Olsen and so forth, is genetic distance that
                indicates degree of symbiotic relationships that MUST exist given the
                MASSIVE timescales between life that is genetically close.

                There are fields of hydrates and areas in the ocean of biological
                activity. There are prevailing currents and places where up welling
                occurs, where a food chain starts and rots. That these fields have
                mil timescale of substantial variability. And then there is the idea
                of pH and O2 content in the "dead zone". All modulated.

                How is this modulation demostrated genetically over long timescales?
                There are always electrical variabile signals from the sun or other
                changes to the ecology in the oceans, the hydrate fields, the dead
                zones, that require that the feedbacks of electrical insulation
                evolve by how they alter hydrology toward conditions that favor
                them. So, essentially, you have pH, temperature, salinity, hydrology
                all varied electrically by the sequential methane hydrate field
                insulation values. What the Olsen research shows is genetic distance
                between the archae, for
                instance, with the salt loving closer then the sulfur loving to the
                methanogens. This makes sense because the hydrology feedbacks as
                they
                favor biological activity with hydrology necessarily favor salt
                regions
                created electrically by drying out that occurs adjacent to the
                enhancement.

                The sulfur loving microbes are connected to Gaia, but not as well due
                to the manipulation of tectonics that occurs as the biosphere
                rich near land oceans is scraped off the continental plates and
                builds
                near shore mountains, keenly the subject of river erosion. Hence, as
                the
                volcanic processes with life are favored, so too is the relationship
                between the sulfur loving microbes, but that relationship is not as
                close
                as the fairly direct relationship that salt loving microbes would
                hold
                with hydrology controlling methanogens.

                Think of it this way, if climate
                were just unmodulated and simply global and certainly not regionally
                modulated, then there would be over huge timescales conditions where
                there are not regions of salinity. Perhaps something like the oceans
                everywhere with salinity not high but uniform, or just fresh water,
                with no extreme levels of salinity anywhere--in which case the salt
                lovers all die. You would have an extinction event for sure over
                these kinds of timescales, or certainly incredible genetic complexity
                to survive, and a lacking seen genetic closeness between the
                methanogens and the haliophiles.



                Where, further, genetic complexity has been found it has been with
                the methanogens has been over metabolic processes that guess what--
                always end with H2 and CO2 forming CH4. Again, there IS complexity in
                the methanogens and enzyme activity--but
                related to metabolism. That metabolism is a basic unit of life on
                this
                planet upon which all other life is dependant. There IS NOT
                complexity
                to, say, cause photo synthesis. Because the methane producing
                activity
                is at the bottom of the metabolic food chain, they requires that
                there BE
                a metabolic food chain to exist for them to survive. But if they do
                not
                feedback the hydrology to the places and other createres where this
                chain
                can exist, with links that interconnect, then they themselves perish
                and
                those conditions which do not favor the food chain are less favored
                as
                well. ATP is H2 based. That is one example of the tie in to
                metabolism where live as a whole has evolved to match the sum of its
                parts.
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.