The Moon may play a major role in maintaining Earth’s magnetic field

Posted: April 5, 2016 by oldbrew in moon, solar system dynamics
Tags: ,

Earth from the Moon [image credit: NASA]

Earth from the Moon [image credit: NASA]


ScienceDaily points to new research saying ‘We suggest the Moon as a necessary ingredient to sustain the Earth’s magnetic field’.

They believe ‘The Earth continuously receives 3,700 billion watts of power through the transfer of the gravitational and rotational energy of the Earth-Moon-Sun system’.

The Earth’s magnetic field permanently protects us from the charged particles and radiation that originate in the Sun.

This shield is produced by the geodynamo, the rapid motion of huge quantities of liquid iron alloy in the Earth’s outer core. To maintain this magnetic field until the present day, the classical model required the Earth’s core to have cooled by around 3,000 °C over the past 4.3 billion years.

Now, a team of researchers from CNRS and Université Blaise Pascal suggests that, on the contrary, its temperature has fallen by only 300 °C. The action of the Moon, overlooked until now, is thought to have compensated for this difference and kept the geodynamo active. Their work is published on 30 March 2016 in the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters.

Analysis

The classical model of the formation of Earth’s magnetic field raised a major paradox. For the geodynamo to work, the Earth would have had to be totally molten four billion years ago, and its core would have had to slowly cool from around 6800 °C at that time to 3800 °C today. However, recent modeling of the early evolution of the internal temperature of the planet, together with geochemical studies of the composition of the oldest carbonatites and basalts, do not support such cooling. With such high temperatures being ruled out, the researchers propose another source of energy in their study.

The Earth has a slightly flattened shape and rotates about an inclined axis that wobbles around the poles. Its mantle deforms elastically due to tidal effects caused by the Moon. The researchers show that this effect could continuously stimulate the motion of the liquid iron alloy making up the outer core, and in return generate Earth’s magnetic field.

The Earth continuously receives 3,700 billion watts of power through the transfer of the gravitational and rotational energy of the Earth-Moon-Sun system, and over 1,000 billion watts is thought to be available to bring about this type of motion in the outer core. This energy is enough to generate the Earth’s magnetic field, which together with the Moon, resolves the major paradox in the classical theory.

The effect of gravitational forces on a planet’s magnetic field has already been well documented for two of Jupiter’s moons, Io and Europa, and for a number of exoplanets.

Since neither the Earth’s rotation around its axis, nor the direction of its axis, nor the Moon’s orbit are perfectly regular, their combined effect on motion in the core is unstable and can cause fluctuations in the geodynamo. This process could account for certain heat pulses in the outer core and at its boundary with the Earth’s mantle.

Over the course of time, this may have led to peaks in deep mantle melting and possibly to major volcanic events at the Earth’s surface. This new model shows that the Moon’s effect on the Earth goes well beyond merely causing tides.

Source: The Moon may play a major role in maintaining Earth’s magnetic field — ScienceDaily

Daily Mail version: Did the MOON help create Earth’s magnetic field?

Comments
  1. BoyfromTottenham says:

    Hi from Oz.
    Thanks TB – there is so much to learn about our wonderful, mostly benign Universe, every day. I love it. Keep up the good work.

  2. P.A.Semi says:

    One important thing in Earth-Moon system is, that the Moon orbit is tuned to Sun spin, so that Earth during it’s orbit pulses in and out from the eliptical orbit just synchronously with Sun rotation at arround 40° heliolatitudes (as the Sun rotation profile is irregular), just the place, from where each sunspot cycle starts to move slowly toward equator…

    The _creation_ of Moon is described in Gn2 chapter (Gn2:21), chapter titled “this is history of heaven and the Earth” in verse Gn 2:4, where that chapter begins… The name of the “fiery one” (or “woman”?), taken from “side” of the “red one” (or “adam”?), is actually “Luna”, not “Eve”, which only occurs in next chapter, and obviously the human wife is not taken from man’s rib, whereas Luna _was_ taken from the glowing-red Earth’s “side”, as evidenced by the rocks, brought from Moon by Apollo crews…

    There are too many too good chances in Solar system to preserve Earth’s life for them to be random… (And if they were random, it would mean, that another such a good but random chance for other such life in galaxy would be very very small…)

    The Earth orbit is synchronized by double resonance with Venus planet, to keep constant orbit distance from Sun. 13:8 with Venus orbit, 12:8 with Venus spin. When the planets meet, they attract each other to the common meet-point and synchronize orbit periods, which than oscilate in Milankowitch cycles arround that resonance synch. The Mars, which is not that well synchronized, is much more irregular (as detected from JPL ephemerides)…

    Similarly, the outer planets are locked in 5:2, 7:1, 14:1 resonances, so that they do not in-spiral… In the early times of solar-system creation, the planets traveled significantly – that is why they need to be locked by resonances safely outward…

  3. P.A.Semi says:

    While analysing Chandler wobble
    http://semi.gurroa.cz/Chandler/Chandler.html
    I found, the the wobble behaves almost exactly opposite, in short variations and in long terms, from what one would expect by influence of planets and Sun onto assymetry of continental masses on geoid shape (America is counter-balanced by Himallay, but Africa is not counter-balanced by Pacific)…

    But the influence on outer assymetries would not make inner axis (projection of rotation axis on planet surface) wobble, it would wobble the outer axis (polar direction on the sky).

    Then if you think, the planet would not spin on an asymetrical axis – the axis would soon align to be rotationally symmetric. Which means, that in the core there must be a counter-balance of continental mass assymetry (just few percent), the assymetry of the core, which makes the spin rotational axis into that direction, where it is now… And this assymetry of core mass is a probable explanation of orbital energy transfer to core – because if the Earth was a symetric sphere, no gravitational energy transfer could occur, it works only by assymetries from the spherical shape – both outer (to move polar direction, projection of rotation axis onto sky) and inner (to move projection of rotation axis onto planet surface) — and to _mix_ the core fluids to sustain magnetic field…

  4. Paul Vaughan says:

    Semi, one of the deal-breaking problems in the climate discussion is that people are unaware of UNCONTROVERSIAL Earth-Venus coupling in the Milankovitch context.

    Worse: They’re not open to having their ignorance eroded and there are for example (in America at least, especially on the west coast) militant groups of online belief police ensuring that COLLECTIVE thinking is never allowed to move truthward. (Allowing free speech and systematically bludgeoning opinions to be suppressed in front of an audience by employing belief-cops on pedestals is regarded as optically & politically superior to censorship.)

    You are a man ahead of your time.

    Or

    Perhaps if you become a master-mind genius at politics and media (and cleaving natural divides), your special awareness of nature can meet a wider audience sooner than otherwise. I suggest that this demands an EASTERN mindset and that it is impossible within the narrow limits of western approaches to politics & media.

    The thing that upsets me most is ignorance of the SPATIAL dimensions. Again here in this article we see evolving equator-pole gradients and their impact on flow and resultant distribution of SURFACE WATER (including land ice AND sea ice) completely IGNORED, as if this plays no role in isostacy.

    It’s so f****d up one’s initial reaction is just to walk away from these people who are SO unwilling to be sensible, thinking “What the f**k is their game???” But maybe we can calm down and see this through. (Are you ready to grow in new directions?….)

    Maybe they are deliberately triggering us into that reactive mindset and we need to transcend their underhanded tactics…

    The best way to balance such nasty western political & optical tactics is with the eastern tactics that have baffled western scholars for as long as they have existed.

    If you have other naturally insightful quotes from the bible I say you are a genius communicator and I will be watching the talkshop with zeal for your profoundly wise contributions. It is through the eyes of God that all appears SIMPLE …and simple is happy…

    The spirit & the science are one and as we travel in a straight line we discover that vacuous connection. From the invisible circle springs the particular type of wisdom and guidance we need to resist western-style political oppression at this particular juncture in time AND SPACE…

    When transcultural misunderstandings get thick sometimes people want to call a time-out, but my advice is let’s call a space-out instead…

    Yes it’s the timing of solar cycles that drives these POLEWARD WAVES of water IN SPACE, as I have illustrated here:
    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2016/02/02/paul-vaughan-noaa-corruption-of-sst-records/ (…there’s your daily reminder — hopefully one of these days something actually sinks in…)

    The pacing of the sun spaces the surface water …and Semi suggests the surface is reflected in the core.

    There’s phase-coherence with the 60 year JEV cycle, but there remains an amplitude mystery and that is the final challenge.

    At the Talkshop it’s just another day …and another excellent adventure in mind-bending exploration.

    What people have against ice & poleward waves of suface water, I confess I do not know (but I think it has something to do with corrupted western culture….)

    The thing I think people keep forgetting (doh!) is that the sun’s timing is NOT independent of it’s spacing! I don’t know how people keep forgetting or overlooking this. Sun’s activity moves over the course of the cycle. And so empirically timing is a proxy for spacing …and hence changes in timing are a proxy for changes in spacing of equatorward waves on Sun and poleward waves on Earth. It’s a simple no-brainer. Why the lame resistance?…. It makes no good sense to resist observing, appreciating, & respecting that which is natural, simple, & beautiful.

    Hilariously western economic imaginations prefer abstract models to the real queen of radiance.

    But the smart Earthly money knows:

    It’s Water.
    And Sun.

    …And that’s Life.

    Best Regards

  5. Paul Vaughan says:

    “There’s phase-coherence with the 60 year JEV cycle, but there remains an amplitude mystery and that is the final challenge.”

    I think a lot of people think ENSO prediction is the final challenge (too funny), but that’s an exam you don’t even need to take to pass the program. (It all washes out in central limit. It’s just a bunch of bounces around something reliable.)

    Recommendation: Transcend.
    Step #1: Drop false assumptions.

    …And don’t be a yo-yo!!

    [ :

    Response: “Oh! but look at how the shiny ENSO bounces. I want to chase it!!”

    ENSO Leash 101…

    Woof
    woof

    out in field
    owner throws stick

    dog fetches
    brings back to owner

    owner throws ball
    dog fetches
    brings back to owner

    everybody watching dog
    dog have high energy

    eye catching
    dog run around

    wags tail cutely

    But notice: where dog goes always centered on owner… (lol! maybe too simple for too-complicated western mind to appreciate… hehe…)

    Now what’s left to observe has to do with human nature. To waste time chasing tail OR NAIL 60 amplitude…

    Tail or Nail ??
    [ :

    We’ll see which path the wise & unwise take given the choice. (It’s a sorting exercise — taxonomic sort of thing for our database of online climate discussion characters…)

    Popcorn ready??
    [ :

    …chase that stick boy Woof woof (lol)

    Meanwhile serious people aware of 60 year phase-coherence are working on amplitude? THAT’s the central limit that defines the COMING transition (it’s coming believe me so you better get your money ready… guarantee: the loyal enso dog will be chasing-and-fetching before the transition, during the transition, & after the transition — that’s a given; there’s no risk that won’t be happening before, during, & after the transition)

    Assurance:
    This is your final exam.

    There WILL be a new order timed by anomalous spacing of the cycling hands of The Radiant Queen.

    The exam question:
    What governs the amplitude of Earthly response to the queen’s phasing? (hint: surface water…)

    This post may seem a little too provocative but on the contrary people need a fair chance to get ready for the coming transition and it’s only ethical to advise accordingly.

    If we’re heading into Thucydides Trap there’s always human judgement at every irritant but the frequency of irritation will vary as a function of the amplitude of Earthly response to SCD.

    When the new order roles around the old one might not matter. My advice to emotionally unstable Americans: You may still have a few years left to learn to appreciate mandarin and be a respectful friend.

    60 phase = known
    60 amplitude = ?? (i’ll be watching for (and silently judging for our records) your imaginative ideas…)

  6. Gerry Pease says:

    The tri-synodic period of Jupiter and Saturn is 59.6 years.

  7. E.M.Smith says:

    @P.A.Semi:

    Interesting thoughts…. I need a ponder of a while…

  8. Paul Vaughan says:

    Gerry, every talk-shopper knows about the 61 year Jupiter-Saturn cycle.

    The question is why was the early 1800s terrestrial amplitude response so different from say the 1970s response?

    The phase match is there over the entire record yes.
    What is going on with surface water that makes Earth’s response-amplitude so incredibly sensitive?

    That’s the only interesting question left. (The answer is obviously water.)

    Aside from that it’s all social theory, politics, & media dominance (so long as embroiled parties duly restrain themselves from escalating by an order-of-magnitude to more all-out war, something which is probably preventable east-west, but maybe not or probably not and maybe even almost certainly not in middle case).

    My suggestion is people better sober up and be willing to truth-speak about this while there are still a few years left to prepare. The authorities have dropped the ball, so responsibility is in our hands.

    The American policy of bludgeoning anyone daring to truth-speak about this was engineering a lemming culture that was only going to walk the anglosphere off a cliff, but thankfully the leadership has now shifted elsewhere and there are very serious people in other parts of the world with lucid awareness that it’s actually important to be prepared for the challenge, even if they don’t yet know what to do besides steering wide of and tuning out the viciously hateful american belief-policing.

    _
    EMS: In earlier talkshop discussions we’ve discussed the terrestrial tetrahedron to which Semi alludes.


    http://www.forgottenfutures.co.uk/tetra/tetra.htm

    As I’ve illustrated, the signal associated with the assumption of uniformity is only manifest in southern empirical aggregate:

    In the north only 1 of 3 vertices (Atlantic) defines the geometry of Arctic Ocean flow-inlet (it’s a wind funnel):

    Note the position of Pacific, Atlantic, & Indian Oceans relative to vertices.

    I’ve seen a better illustration somewhere (I pointed it out on some other thread — if I can find it again I’ll link to it here).

  9. Paul Vaughan says:

    Any model worth considering as more than just exploratory provocation has to account for the north-south asymmetry — elaboration:

    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2016/04/02/r-j-salvador-update-on-lod-model-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-115353

  10. ren says:

    Water begins respond to changing solar activity.

  11. oldbrew says:

    Post: ‘For the geodynamo to work, the Earth would have had to be totally molten four billion years ago, and its core would have had to slowly cool from around 6800 °C at that time to 3800 °C today.’

    ‘All ferromagnets have a maximum temperature where the ferromagnetic property disappears as a result of thermal agitation. This temperature is called the Curie temperature.’
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/solids/ferro.html

    The Curie temperature of iron is 1043 K.
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/tables/curie.html#c1

    Interesting.

  12. p.g.sharrow says:

    Ferromagnetics is not all that germane, as the earth’s magnetic field is a creation of circulations of semi-fluid metals in the Earth that are also spinning within the Sun’s magnetic field influence. Conditions of Electro-magnetics is more the case here. These fields are also causing warpage of gravity as well. The Continental Drift is a result of this warpage as the “floating” continents slide downhill. Changes in the induced fields location and strength change the location of the “low spots” that the floating continents head for. The Earth is oblate-spheroid (egg shaped) with the continents occupying the flatter sides of the “North” end. Material “flow” is down under “north” magnetic and up under “south” magnetic field influence lines of force. Sun and Moon tidal tug helps to keep the Earth’s core fluid and circulating, creates the protection from radiation the Earth,s magnetic field affords, as well as the regeneration of atmosphere and ocean created by volcanism…pg

  13. Bitter& Twisted says:

    Oldbrew- Curie temperature refers to loss of permanent magnetism in solid ferromagnetic materials.
    Moving liquid metal, however, has very different properties. This is an electromagnetic, not ferromagnetic phenomenon.

  14. oldbrew says:

    Thanks for the info folks. Another question though: what’s the connection between ‘3,700 billion watts of power’ and ‘gravitational energy’ i.e. does that imply gravity has an electrical aspect?

  15. ren says:

    Solar Dipole.

  16. P.A.Semi says:

    Moving electric charge causes magnetism. Moving _plasma_ – particles with separated protons and electrons (either completelly or partially) – like solar wind or molten earth-core metal, causes magnetism when moving because of moving electric charge, similar to electrons moving in dynamo or motor cables… (and even the dirty water in house heating system – once I needed to solve a problem with induced magnetic noise in computer display, whose cable was too near the house heating pipe-line, which induced magnetic noise due to dirty salt (ie. ionised) water circulating in the heating pipe… helped the iron dish, placed between heating pipeline and computer cable – such a dish / plate, that a magnet holds on, by which you recognize true iron dish from some other paramagnetic metal, that cannot be used for magnetic shielding…)

    The Gigawatts induced by gravity – watt is not a unit of electricity, it is unit of energy, in any form. The gravity has got nothing common with electricity (p.g.sharow will disagree, but not correctly). Just making the molten iron plasma move (or rather change the movement, or sustain movement while loosing energy) requires adding some energy to it, which is here said it is supplied by gravity. Moving plasma causes magnetism and releases the energy by magnetic radiation. Since it looses energy and if it did not receive some other energy, it would cool down, taking the energy, radiated out as magnetism, from heat content – which the authors of that article try to say, that is not the case, that the energy is supplied other way – gravitationally… (Previously I thought it can also be supplied by uranium nuclear fission in the Earth core?)

    Then for the gravity to cause any energy transfer, there must be some irregularity, because absolutelly symmetric sphere makes no “resistence” to gravity and nothing to induce “turning” or “mixing” the material inside the sphere – just any irregularity can transfer energy by gravity.

    And also ellipsoid shape is irregularity from pure sphere, so the equatorial bulge is a kind of such irregularity – and indeed it transfers the torque, which causes precession of equinoxes and nutation – the changes in pointing of rotation axis of Earth onto the sky – i.e. the ellipsoid shape has got no much influence on the inner contents – some other irregularity in the core has to be the cause of energy transfer to Earth core…

  17. Bitter&twisted says:

    Transfer of gravitational energy raises tides- these also occur in the Earth as well as the oceans. This mechanical energy is degraded to heat, which helps keep the outer core molten.

  18. JKrob says:

    @P.A.Semi –

    Thanks for reinforcing my POV to oldbrew

    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2016/04/02/r-j-salvador-update-on-lod-model-performance/#comment-115341

    Maybe he will believe you…I guess he didn’t believe me😦

  19. Paul Vaughan says:

    Is the core in this really a sphere?? (as if!)

    What happens to mantle flow when you load and unload continents with glaciers? (isostacy)

    Contrast continent vs. ocean crust thickness:

    Insolation and the flow resulting from insolation gradients tosses the water around (for example making ice-age continent-scale glaciers), consequently changing the spatial pattern of crust depression, and thus reshaping mantle flow.

    Consideration of insolation alone is insufficient.
    Consideration of insolation gradients is needed to understand flow.

    I remain puzzled as to why people seem to think sense can be made of geomagnetics without consideration of the effect of masses of water (including ice) on mantle flow facilitation & constraint. Like as if isostacy means nothing to mantle flow?? Like come on give me break…

    “No Paul the Moho forms a perfect sphere, don’t you know?” says the dark agent.

    Like yeah, right…

    The moon has a role in variance ok, but come on folks: The sun steers the mean and sense will never be made of that by focusing on insolation while ignoring the role of insolation gradients in poleward flows.

    The moon bounces stuff like a yo-yo, but the sun controls the point (the central limit) about which oscillation occurs.

    Observations tell the story. The coupling is spatiotemporal.

    It’s all about changes in where the surface water is getting firehosed and the resulting surface pressure pattern plays the crust like an instrument that chords through in the mantle’s (geomagnetic) song.

    But that’s not the whole signal. That’s just a component of it. The other thing to keep in mind is that both climate and magnetism have the same spatial axis and are controlled by the same SCD, so there’s also confounding due to parallel input through different physical pathways.

    In any event good luck trying prediction given that it’s spatiotemporal. I mean you would have to work out the mapping of every possible spatiotemporal-chord crossed with every possible currently-existing flow-pattern. (That’s what Piers Corbyn is trying to do.)

    That’s like trying to master a wind instrument with how many keys and mouthpieces?? Like at least dozens. And that’s a discretized simplification of a reality with some parts that are continuous.

    Anyone who thinks the climate discussion should be suspended until that is all worked out for perfect prediction at most points on Earth is (even if not intentionally) effectively a dark agent.

    Knowing what shapes the variance envelope and volatility clusters (the uncertainty bounds) while acknowledging the long-run central-limit ends the discussion right here right now. The law of large numbers isn’t up for debate. Period. I’d show the door to anyone trying to debate such fact with neither delay nor hesitation.

    Those who think the climate debate is on hold until Corbyn can predict everything almost everywhere with almost no fail are misrepresenting how many keys and mouthpieces there are on the wind instrument. The jets can meander and pulse with myriad chord changes. They’re not bolted down in a fixed pattern. So dark agents are silly (and downright annoying) for arguing against the central limit.

    The yo-yo will bounce. You can get some bounds on how far it can bounce and highlight the attractor around which it bounces. No one yet has enough fingers and mouths to master the complex wind instrument at weather-timescale, but central limits and volatility envelopes simplify aggregate structure at climate-timescale and the debate’s over and it’s just a matter of issuing daily reminders and observing and recording who remains unwilling to be sensible.

  20. oldbrew says:

    No harm in asking questions when science itself is still looking for answers.

    ‘Researchers propose another source of energy in their study’ – which suggests the last one wasn’t working out too well, in their view at least:
    ‘The classical model of the formation of Earth’s magnetic field raised a major paradox. ‘

  21. Paul Vaughan says:

    a little background:

    _
    Look how much thicker the crust is where there’s ice:

    Now let me just ask:

    Who here thinks that’s not a boundary condition on mantle flow?

    Uniformity assumptions are pure deception …and later on the deception artists just feign “surprise” whenever it’s learned that nature isn’t the uniform creature needed to make math tractable (the funding administraitors are smugly complicit).

    There’s NO way to realistically model the physics with falsely-assumed model boundary conditions. That’s why I call it “physics” instead of physics. They pretend that the shape of the flow can be realistically modeled while ignoring the geometry. It’s offensive, culturally-corrupt BS.

    I’m sure (100% certain) they don’t have a good (or even barely acceptable) handle on isostacy. It would be refreshing to at least get a clear, candid admission.

    These crust thickness maps convey at least a broad continent-ocean contrast and they point to greenland & antarctic ice mass, but what I really suspect is that these depression & rebound mechanisms aren’t just happening at long timescales and more specifically we know that sea-level & climate have a multidecadal component.

    Where is that water going? What is it depressing? What flows are modulated by that? And probably most fundamentally: What totally BS modeling assumptions are corrupting clearer insight??

    We’re not yet getting the believable answers we’re demanding. My trust of the people giving BS answers to these questions is as close to absolute zero as it gets. Either they don’t have f**k**g clue or they’re lying. Probably both… They probably feel really confused about what to say and so blow the optics of their integrity trying to weasel.

  22. Berényi Péter says:

    3.7 TW is well within the estimated power output range of an eight mile wide nuclear georeactor at the center of the inner core, proposed by Marvin Herndon.

  23. Paul Vaughan says:

    Something I worked out that I never reported is that stratospheric volcanism is playing (as in playing like an instrument) the spatial patterns of ENSO.

    ENSO’s just a spatial contrast. Say the volcano blasts stratospheric optical interference onto one side of the spatial pattern well then it just torques the spatial contrast.

    That’s why the correlations can reverse — it depends on what SPATIAL side gets torqued.

    An agency with a lot of resources could easily model it. The next thing to do then would be to try to find a spatiotemporal pattern in the locations of eruptions and the record gives good reason to suspect a 96 year cycle in the relevant aggregation.

    Never mind trying to sort by latitude or something like that. These are V-shaped & butterfly-shaped patterns on maps and they have changing rather than static shapes.

    Those modeling EOP canNOT succeed with time-only methods. The finger patterns (chords if you like) matter, as does the background flow-state at the time the chord gets played. The coupling is spatiotemporal, not just temporal, so correlations between various geophysical quantities reverse sign depending on which side of a spatial pattern (one or the other) gets torqued by a played note (or torqued in aggregate by chords).

    I would leave this sort of task to an agency with the right combination of background, resources, & good management. It demands too much software development and probably every capable volunteer lone-gun will know not to start a project they know they’ll never have time to take past 2 to 5% completion. The analyses will be very easy once the software is built.

    Meanwhile it doesn’t matter at all in long-run central limit. The central limit isn’t affected by the high-frequency spatiotemporal bouncing. It’s only affected by bouncing limits (and no software needs to be developed to see that — only trivial calculations).

  24. Paul Vaughan says:

    Let’s get these 2 up side-by-side:

    Now – without misinterpreting – don’t you see what I’m saying? (here’s a reminder)

    (Also: Can you imagine the Findlater Jet spraying monsoons over those Himalayas?)

  25. Paul Vaughan says:

    Geomagnetic field shape relates to the shape of the crust?!!!

    “What a crazy idea.
    Pure heresy!
    Burn him at the stake …quickly!!”

    Well, there are some pinch-points governing (and shaping) the flow.
    It’s just like Bill Illis has taught us about Drake Passage & Panama Isthmus open-vs-closed.

    To flow or not to flow …that is the question shaping our thoughts today.

    OK so let’s say the Moon provides 3.7 whatevers of energy.
    OK so let’s say that’s not controversial.
    OK so then what shapes?
    And what changes shapes?

    The solar cycle length differintegral steers poleward firehosing.

  26. Paul Vaughan says:

    Let me be more specific: _1_ ; _2_

    Given any north-south asymmetry (magnetic, climate, whatever), the solar cycle length differintegral will give that multidecadal pattern.

    The solar cycle length differintegral has more than one terrestrial proxy. That’s for sure!

  27. oldbrew says:

    NASA’s New Horizons Fills Gap in Space Environment Observations

    A new study to appear in The Astrophysical Journal Supplement lays out New Horizons’ observations of the solar wind ions that it encountered on its journey [to Pluto].
    http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-s-new-horizons-fills-gap-in-space-environment-observations

    “Speed and density average together as the solar wind moves out,” said Elliott. “But the wind is still being heated by compression as it travels, so you can see evidence of the sun’s rotation pattern in the temperature even in the outer solar system.” [bold added]

    See also: http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2016/04/beyond-pluto-nasa-ventures-into-our-unexplored-outer-solar-system.html

  28. Paul Vaughan says:

    Here, I dug this out:

    You can see all the major kinks with the VEI (volcanic explosivity index) clusters (red spikes in bottom plot), but there’s variation across variables in response-sign (e.g. compare interdecadal polar motion amplitude (red on top plot) & IPO (interdecadal pacific oscillation) (blue on top plot)).

    What we’re seeing there is multivariate spatiotemporal coupling. (It’s NOT just temporal.)

    Some who’ve been with the talkshop for awhile may remember that way back (was it 2009?) when I started looking into VEI & SAOT (stratospheric aerosol optical thickness …which summarizes stratospheric volcanism), geomagnetic aa index at chandler wobble timescale was one of the variables I was exploring.

    The thin blue & red lines on the upper plot are SST (sea surface temperature) from the southern ocean and north atlantic near greenland (the latter flipped upside-down). You can see the phasing & anti-phasing with IPO and at higher frequency VEI clusters.

    Those are the spatial chords flipping the coupling signs in time. Beware: The currently-dominant paradigm (a) falsely assumes uniformity and (b) falsely assumes temporal-only where coupling is spatiotemporal.

  29. oldbrew says:

    PV: does the Moon come into that somewhere?

  30. Paul Vaughan says:

    OB I would really strongly suggest that it’s imperative that we take it to a higher level philosophically.

    I mean yes we can frame this way and that way and whatever, but there’s grounding to be found in simpler, more universal framing. Let me try to explain…

    One way of looking sees an Earth-Moon system and we see every day that people want to talk about “the moon”. Please consider that maybe this sort of conceptual compartmentalization — as though the moon is something independent of Earth, Sun, & solar system — isn’t helping. It’s about reorienting open eyes…

    At the end of the day, it always comes back to the same thing that people stubbornly ignore:
    solar cycle length.

    Let’s walk to there once again (how many more times before people clue in, I cannot tell you…)

    Let’s start by once again entertaining “the moon” — specifically draconic = nodal:

    (27.212221)*(27.03) / (27.212221 – 27.03) = 4036.561832 days = 11.05131147 years
    (11.05131147)*(9.932517933) / (11.05131147 – 9.932517933) = 98.11224871 years

    27.03 is long-run-average solar equatorial rotation rate and the 98 year beat depends sensitively on it such that 27.03024058 days (an increase of less than 21 seconds and like as if (!) we have such measurement precision to rule out that possibility) gives 97 years so I think you’ll get the point that there’s no sensible reason to rule this out as a candidate root of an asymmetric centennial geothermal potential cycle. Certainly the observations do not allow us to rule out this possibility. (Please keep in mind there’s no shortage of other things giving 97, so they look like a set — a connected framework …and we should be awakening from multiperiod to interperiod to transperiod-level awareness…)

    Are people ready for Semi’s luminary-level of open-minded perception?
    Semi’s aware (are others, I wonder?) that solar cycle length is a proxy for sunspot rotation rate changes as the sunspot belt migrates equatorward.

    Maybe there’s no advice that can be given to help people think more openly & clearly like Semi. He was born a luminary.

    Regards

  31. Paul Vaughan says:

    To clarify: This is about the intersection of earth-tide potential with the water cycle. The water has to get firehosed there to be available to be melted geothermally (antarctic south of southeast pacific & greenland anti-phased) and flow is a function of insolation gradients. Keep in mind that the BDO is hitting extremes every half-Jupiter-Saturn-cycle.

    ren linked to a helpful illustration on another thread. JoNova had an article way back (no time to dig for it).

  32. oldbrew says:

    GEOMAGNETIC STORM: On April 7th, Earth crossed a fold in the heliospheric current sheet, plunging our planet into a region of space filled with “negative-polarity” magnetic fields. This sparked a G1-class geomagnetic storm and bright auroras around the Arctic Circle. “Suddenly, the sky exploded in color,” reports Janne Maj Nagelsen, who took this picture from Stamnes, Vaksdal, Norway [open the link]:
    http://spaceweather.com/archive.php?day=08&month=04&year=2016&view=view&PHPSESSID=nd07tjk1j8qdav24smb11ljfb1

    Talkshop 2014: https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2014/10/19/whoa-solar-blast-on-hitting-current-sheet-fold/

  33. Paul Vaughan says:

    more rough notes on:
    “asymmetric centennial geothermal potential cycle”

    JEV amplitude with JEV pace: (165)*(61) / (165 – 61) ~= 97 years
    sun & JEV with bidecadal extremes: (11.07)*(9.933) / (11.07 – 9.933) ~= 97 years

    (25)*(19.865) / (25 – 19.865) ~= 97 years
    (25)*(19.865) / (25 + 19.865) ~= 11.07 years
    (25)*(19.865) / ( (25 + 19.865) / 2 ) ~= 22.14 years

    where 25 = (√5)^4 = (φ+Φ)^4

    (also worth noting: (208)*(179) / (208 + 179) ~= 96 years — not exact match, but eyes wide open)

  34. Paul Vaughan says:

    Where geothermal meets ice…

    Thin-Crust:
    West Antarctic Rift System

    See Fig.8 p.9 here to see what the modellers were thinking 12 years ago (before more observations were available) — this is illuminating:
    http://ciei.colorado.edu/pubs/2004/8.pdf

  35. Paul Vaughan says:

    Look at the shallow Moho depth over the WARS (West Antarctic Rift System):

    http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=694.0;attach=4342;image

    http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=694.0;attach=4340;image

    http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=694.0;attach=4344;image

    See a comment on this here (with links to the original images):
    http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,694.msg18006.html#msg18006

    “The first figure shows the highly uncertain past estimates of basal geotechnical heat flux in West Antarctic, which shows some possible indication of high basal geotechnical heat flux beneath the Recovery Glacier. The second image shows the very thin crust beneath the PIG/Thwaites basins indicating the likely high glacial isostatic rebound in this area; which is reinforced by the third image which shows the very low viscosity in the upper mantle beneath the BSB, indicating that this area can rebound much more quickly than most past models have estimated”

    This warrants some serious digging.

  36. Paul Vaughan says:

    Where geothermal meets sensitive ice:

  37. Paul Vaughan says:

    Gravity & anti-phased rate of change of ice thickness at these 2 locations:

    “Figure 3. Summary of the GRACE data used in this study. (a) Ice mass change in the AIS and GrIS from April 2002 to March 2015. (b) Spatial distribution of rate of change in ice thickness, averaged over the GRACE period. See Sect. 4.1 for a detailed discussion of the GRACE data processing.”
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Surendra_Adhikari/publication/283328414/figure/fig3/AS:341028885286919@1458319031504/Figure-3-Summary-of-the-GRACE-data-used-in-this-study-a-Ice-mass-change-in-the-AIS.ppm

    “Figure 4. Some important geodetic signatures of ice sheets during the GRACE period. Rates of change in (a) relative sea level, (b) solid-earth deformation, (c) absolute sea level, and (d) absolute gravity. (Notice the different scale and color order in the color bars.) These results are obtained by linearly fitting the corresponding monthly solutions in a least-square sense. The blue contours in (a) represent the trend in the global mean value, with magnitude dS/dt = 0.91 mm yr −1 . Annotations are supplied for 14 locations in (a) (see Table 3 for their description).”
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Surendra_Adhikari/publication/283328414/figure/fig4/AS:341028893675520@1458319032569/Figure-4-Some-important-geodetic-signatures-of-ice-sheets-during-the-GRACE-period-Rates.ppm

    ISSM-SESAW v1.0: Mesh-based computation of gravitationally consistent sea level and geodetic signatures caused by cryosphere and climate driven mass change
    Adhikari, Ivins, Larour 2015

    Adhikari & Ivins are the NASA JPL wobble authors featured here:
    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2016/04/09/nasa-study-solves-two-mysteries-about-wobbling-earth/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s