North magnetic pole position shifts

Posted: December 11, 2009 by tallbloke in climate, solar system dynamics
Tags: , , , , ,

Here’s another interesting correlation. The Position of the north magnetic pole has been shifting rapidly over the last several decades. The rate of change of it’s declination correlates with the variations in Earth’s length of day and the motion of the sun relative to the centre of mass of the solar system which we discussed in my first post.

North Pole rate of change of declination vs LOD vs SSBz

North Pole rate of change of declination vs LOD vs SSBz

More interesting information on Earth’s magnetism and it’s relationship with the sun here: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/EarthMagneticField.htm

If the changes in Length of Day are related to changes in the circulation of currents of molten material beneath the Earth’s crust, we could speculate that magnetic  iron ores are shifting their predominant accumulations and this affects the location of the magnetic north pole.

Comments
  1. Graeme from Melbourne says:

    Hi Tallbloke,

    Congratulations on getting your own blog up and running. I have enjoyed your posts over at WUWT.

    Cheers G

  2. Tenuc says:

    As I understand it LOD changes in rapid a rapid step-like manner?

    Perhaps magnetic field and LOD are caused by changes in the topography of the boundary D-layer?

    I find it surprising that after all this time we still only have a smattering of real knowledge as to what is going on under our feet.

    Plenty of theories but few facts.

  3. Tenuc says:

    Here’s a good link to Beatty 1990 thoughts on internal Earth structure.

    http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/earth/images/earthint_image.html&edu=high&nl=10l

  4. tallbloke says:

    Interesting.
    If the Earth is 1.0 then the mass of the Moon relative to the earth is 0.012.

    The distance from the Earth’s center to the Earth-Moon barycenter D is

    D = M(moon)d(moon)/(M(earth) +M(moon)
    0.012 x 384405/(1.00 + 0.012
    4641 kilometers

    Now, the radius of the Earth is 6,378 kilometers, so that means that the barycenter is located INSIDE the Earth about 1707 kilometers below its surface. Does anything weird happen there? There will be an area of low gravity travelling around the inside of the Earth daily. That must create some sort of ‘tide’ in the Mantle, which will be modulated by closest approach of Jupiter etc…

  5. Tenuc says:

    I expect the effect of the Moon/Earth barycentre can’t be felt until it reaches the more liquid part of the mantle. Here’s what the ‘standard’ model says about the internal structure (in km):-

    1. 0- 40 Crust (solid)
    2. 40- 400 Upper mantle (solid)
    3. 400- 650 Transition region (semi-solid)
    4. 650-2700 Lower mantle (semi-solid)
    5. 2700-2890 D” layer (liquid)
    6. 2890-5150 Outer core (liquid)
    7. 5150-6378 Inner core (solid)

    So the main gravity effect will probably start at the D” layer and be felt all the way down to the core?

  6. Tenuc says:

    This is a good read, if you’ve not come across it before, about Dan Lathrop’s experiments to build an artificial earth to measure magnetic field effects.

    http://blackandwhiteprogram.com/interview/dr-dan-lathrop-the-study-of-the-earths-magnetic-field/1

    There are 3 linked pages.

    Enjoy.

  7. tallbloke says:

    Thanks Tenuc, nice read as you said. They goosed some of the figures up though, should be 6000km not 16000.

    Interesting that Earth’s magnetic field has got 2% weaker in the last 160 years while the temperature has risen about 0.15% in Kelvin terms.

  8. Tenuc says:

    The 0.15% increase really makes one wonder what all the CAGW crap is about!

    By my reckoning that’s a change of 0.4 deg C, which must be well inside the error bars for the calculation a global average temperature which attempts to use a sparse network of inhomogeneous thermometers for a system which displays deterministic chaos?

    I’ve always been a sceptic regarding the accuracy of the outputs of climatologists – more so since the Climategate scandal!

    Even if the figures you have quoted can be proved to be correct, we are still left with the problem of deciding cause and effect.

  9. tallbloke says:

    The list of possible causes is getting quite long 🙂
    Another problem is that a lot of the same candidates can live on the list of effects depending on your hypothesis…

    Regarding your earlier comment about the ‘steppiness’ of changes in LOD. There is a seasonal component due to energy exchange between atmosphere (GLAAM) and the surface (LOD). There is also a quasi-biennial component which Paul Vaughan might come and tell us about. These are relatively small and short term cyclic changes which ride on top of the bigger longer term changes in LOD.

    The cause of those is somewhat mysterious. Richard Gross of NASA says they are due to changes in the sub crustal current flows in the semi molten mantle of Earth’s interior. I think that might tie in with the changes in the declination of the magnetic north pole.

    Paul Vaughan tells me I ned to read some Yuri Barkin papers, but hasn’t summarized them for me, and I haven’t found time yet…

  10. Tenuc says:

    tallbloke: January 3, 2010 at 10:16 am
    The list of possible causes is getting quite long 🙂
    Another problem is that a lot of the same candidates can live on the list of effects depending on your hypothesis…

    Couldn’t agree more with you. I’ve felt the same for the last few years and come to the conclusion that it is not a single big effect that tips climate between cool and warm modes, and vice versa, rather it is the sudden affect of a large number of small, seemingly unimportant changes which sometimes coincide in time to kick Earth’s chaotic climate into a bifurcation – ‘the perfect storm’. Hence my particular interest in anomalous short-term high energy events.

    I’m starting to get my thoughts down on paper when I can find the time. Most of what I have done so far is qualitative, due to the difficulty of estimating the energy change for each of the myriad of small processes, and lack of real knowledge about how the total system is integrated. I’m slowly starting to see a blurry pattern emerging as each tiny bit of the jigsaw goes into place, but still much to be done.

    Chaotic quasi-cyclic systems don’t give up their secrets easily!

  11. Tenuc says:

    Just found a bit more on Dan Lathrop’s large experiment to build an artificial earth dynamo.

    http://www.geotimes.org/oct04/technology.html

  12. tallbloke says:

    I’m slowly starting to see a blurry pattern emerging as each tiny bit of the jigsaw goes into place, but still much to be done.

    The joy of discovery is seeing that blurry picture come into focus. Keep going.

  13. Paul Vaughan says:

    tallbloke wrote: “Richard Gross of NASA says they are due to changes in the sub crustal current flows in the semi molten mantle of Earth’s interior.”

    tallbloke, I’m organizing some research proposals and need the references for this – (the burdens of formal communications). If you can help out, I’ll reciprocate by sharing some notes on QBO that might help people condition their analyses.

    Tenuc: We’ve barely begun conditional analyses, so we’re a very long way from being down to residual chaos & measurement noise.

  14. tallbloke says:

    Paul, here’s the JPL article link. I don’t know whether Gross has published the same analysis in the literature.

    http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/features.cfm?feature=15

    Cheers

  15. Paul Vaughan says:

    I’ve seen that science-news article. Without a formal reference, I won’t be able to reiterate your claim in formal communications. I’m familiar with Gross’s publications; perhaps you are interpreting some of his claims a little differently than I am (…so we can drop this matter).

    Regarding QBO:
    I’ve found phase-relations involving SAM/AAO (Southern Annular Mode / Antarctic Oscillation) and north-east Pacific precipitation (which is spatially correlated with precipitation on a much broader scale) that reverse phase-contrast every ~13 years. You may recall that I also find time-integrated cross-correlation best-lag patterns showing harmonics & subharmonics of ~13 years. I think you are also familiar with my work on terrestrial polar motion phase-relations. Until recently I had not accepted suggestions that the QBO period was twice the Chandler wobble period. That has changed since I’ve (recently) spent some time challenging misguided literature speculation on QBO. Detailed analysis using spectral, wavelet, cross-wavelet, & harmonic cross-wavelet analyses on several variables, in conjunction with awareness of winter hemispheric-annular-mode (AAO/SAM, AO/NAO/NAM) correlations with geomagnetic activity and the works of N.S. Sidorenkov, has caused me to start thinking about 1 year & ~6.4 year north-south ‘echoes’ and their beats. Want to take a stab at the acoustics before I go any further? Here’s a clue: I estimate the QBO period to be 28.45 months using a boxcar-kernel method. One more hint: What is the highest-frequency jovian synodic beat? A third tip: If a wave originating nearby takes one year to reach a mountain, how long before you hear the echo?

  16. tallbloke says:

    Thanks for that. Yes, Jove spoke as soon as I reached “~6.4 year” in your post.

    The Jupiter Mercury synodic period would be about a 1/4 of the chandler wobble period too.

    Food for thought, I’ll post again when I’ve been awake longer. 🙂

  17. Paul Vaughan says:

    I am suggesting that not only are the inner planets (as a group) in resonance with JN, but that furthermore, internal components of the inner planets (e.g. terrestrial polar motion, QBO, & related oscillations [e.g. interannual LOD, GLAAM, … & others]) are also in resonance (on average) with JN. My focus is on co-phasing and I am finding *many categorically nonrandom patterns.

    These problems are interdisciplinary. It is up to physicists to investigate mechanisms. My contribution is to be clear that there are simply *too many things that fit like a glove to entertain the notion of randomness.

  18. Paul Vaughan says:

    Note: I left some comments regarding Barkin on your SST-modeling thread.

  19. tallbloke says:

    Paul, many thanks. It’s certainly my impression that these correlations can’t be random chance, and you have brought some much needed statistical rigour to showing that they are not.

    One thing which needs to be remembered is that while there are near resonances in these relationships, the recurrences of planetary configurations revolve with respect to the wider galactic setting. This is yetanother aspect which needs investigation, how does changing orientation towards the galactic centre affect the situation?

  20. tallbloke says:

    Here’s what the NASA article says about longer term changes in LOD:

    The longer patterns in changes of the length of the day can last for decades. “These are caused by processes within Earth’s core,” says Gross. “The core is a fluid. Its motion generates Earth’s magnetic field. Changes in its motion can change the rotation of solid Earth. Observing the magnetic field at the surface gives us an idea of how fluid is moving within the core. These changes in the fluid motion inferred from the magnetic field match the longer period changes we see in the length of the day.”

  21. Paul Vaughan says:

    Re: 8:57
    Galactic orientation is on my radar and I have run extensive, related analyses.

    Re: 4:11
    I’m in no way convinced that Gross has paid the Russian literature the attention it deserves. The core-based models of LOD don’t match LOD very well, but Sidorenkov’s work on atmospheric hydrology, in contrast, is quite impressive. Barkin gives the links that connect Gross’s ideas about the core with Sidorenkov’s ideas about the hydrologic cycle. There’s reason to not expect perfect decadal phase-concordance, but If you follow Barkin and condition on both the annual cycle & the QBO, you may take a different view on the nature of solar-magnetic influences.

  22. Paul Vaughan says:

    I’ve dropped further notes (including images & calculations) on JN, QBO, & terrestrial polar motion here:
    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/meet-the-new-kepler-p-a-semi/

  23. tallbloke says:

    See my reply on that thread.

  24. tallbloke says:

    I’m getting very busy with writing other posts at the moment. I’m going to leave this in yours and Vukevic’ far more capable hands. I’ll try to get him to pay another visit with special reference to this thread, as well his own unused one.

    Rog

  25. P.G. Sharrow says:

    After examining http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/EarthMagneticField.htm I noticed atmospheric surface warming due to magnetic field flow compression at the north pole area and cooling due to decompression in the southern area. Lines of force flow up and away in southern area and toward and down in the north area. A clue to magnetic flow causing atmospheric effects.
    While the main fields are polar, there actually local field ares that move, pulse and change polarity.
    Lines of force flow energy as if they were wires of electric current.

  26. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Oh yes, by the way, this also causes the(flattened egg)oblatesphereoidal shape of the Earth and may as well cause the continuets to slide down hill to the mid-northern latitudes.

  27. According to the EU guys we are living on a cathode, so there is no need of anything else but magnetite Fe3O4 and a electric coil. (like an RF coil)
    OT:Dear Tallbloke: Fix this page as to allow links to open in a different tab.

  28. tallbloke says:

    So that means the sun is an anode?

    Just use right click and open in new window.

  29. tallbloke says:
    July 9, 2010 at 1:27 pm
    Yes:
    http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

  30. Tomas says:

    What is the North Magnetic (and South) Poles position? Even after intensive web search I did not find any newer data since 2005. Is it so secret now? Why its not even on NGDC or Geological Survey of Canada´s web.
    Any one know hwere to learn it? Thanks.

  31. Roger Andrews says:

    Going back a few years here, but I just came across this graph

    It shows a remarkably close correlation between the shift in the N magnetic pole and post-1975 N Hemisphere warming. It also shows a flattening after 2000 that matches the recent period of no warming.

    It’s also a near-perfect hockey stick. 😉

    Anyone have any ideas?.

  32. P.G. Sharrow says:

    That bright shinny thing in the daylight sky, or my efforts at farming! Both changes happened at the same time, but I doubt that my efforts had anything to do with it. Mars also has had the same changes so I doubt that anything on this planet was the cause. So at present the shinny thing is my best bet! 😎 pg

  33. Roger Andrews says:

    OK PG, there’s enough here to go for a warrant to search your farm.

    Calling the Norfolk Constabulary right now.