I thnk it's the sun

[MacGyver1968]

Hello,

I am new to this board, and I would like share my theory about earthquakes, without anyone calling me crazy...because I know people of science are known to believe stuff without any evidence....take "String Theory"...obviously something somebody just made up while tripping balls on mushrooms....anyway I digress.

I believe the cause of this latest round of earthquakes is Draq's new girlfriend. There is clear evidence that correlates her "jazzersize" routines with ground tremors. These tremors trigger faults all over the world....causing major quakes.

(j/k Draq! )

 

[Read-Only]

Hello,

I am new to this board, and I would like share my theory about earthquakes, without anyone calling me crazy...because I know people of science are known to believe stuff without any evidence....take "String Theory"...obviously something somebody just made up while tripping balls on mushrooms....anyway I digress.

I believe the cause of this latest round of earthquakes is Draq's new girlfriend. There is clear evidence that correlates her "jazzersize" routines with ground tremors. These tremors trigger faults all over the world....causing major quakes.

(j/k Draq! )

Actually, that IS possible if she's big enough to warrant three ZIP codes of her own... I had a girlfriend like that once. She was banned from jogging in the company parking lot because they couldn't keep up with all the potholes.

 

[Giambattista]

excellent point Trippy.

It just doesn't make sense that a sunspot is going to move the plates.

The only thing I can suggest is that they both correlate with another factor as yet to be discovered...

 

[William Kinney]

Solar Flares and Earthquakes--Yes, ending a quiet sun period

I don't assume the original poster scooted just because he/she let a day go by without any banter back and forth.
Yes, I am gratified to see a relationship based on my theory sketch on the rotation of the earth which I am looking for ways to validate. The mercifully short capsule version is that the quiet sun solar wind is causing the earth to rotate. The flares disrupt the rotation effect. The rotational pressure suddenly eases. The plates can ease back, and some do, producing release of pressure quakes, or "slop quakes" as I have come to call them.

In other words these quakes would be expected after a period of no or weak flares associated with sunspots because the steady pressure rotating the earth is disrupted when the big flare disrupts the incoming solar wind.

I learned about the solar wind in the papers in King and Newman, eds. Solar-Terrestrial Physics 1967 Academic Press. The quiet sun solar wind was measured by a series of probes as about 1-3 ions per cubic centimeter (cm-3) and about 8 electrons cm-3.

It would be hard to create a vacuum that good in a lab. Consider though the throughput. The solar wind is headed our way at about 300 km/sec. In more familiar terms it's coming in at 700,000 miles per hour. So this does not act like a vacuum.

The speed of the earth in counterclockwise orbit averages 30 km/sec. If you are riding with the earth looking down the apparent direction of the solar wind will I calculate be about 9 degrees ahead of a line direct to the sun. Hence there is a "running in the rain" effect. The heavily negative quiet-sun solar wind strikes the heavily negative outer Van Allen electron belt and drives it around counterclockwise making the sun appear to rise in the east. They don't actually touch but interact across an extreme pressure area discovered by D.L. Carpenter known as "Carpenter's knee". Once the sunspots and flares increase my ideal setup here becomes muffled and more complex.

Once the ion counts rise to 50 -cm3 or more, they may burst to higher speeds like 500 or 900 km/sec. Ions are vastly more massive than electrons. Sensitive equipment can be at risk.
Physicists are not impressed with the flimsey electrons, and I think, have missed thus far what is causing our planet to rotate, but want to look, if anywhere, to processes beneath the crust, and the big show on the sun.

I run a Google thing:sunspot earthquake solar flare. That is how I stumbled on this blog And I want to thank Eyes of Fire.

As we watch weather systems cross the Americas from west to east we are watching the earth being spun around. Also in the southern temperate zone we have heard of the "roaring forties" in the South Atlantic. I found in a National Geographic hardship sailing article there is also the "furious fifties" and even more so the "screaming sixties" winds and waves racing around the earth. My simple idea is that the winds push on the vegetaion and mountains and press the crustal plates around (in the temperate zones). Daily the atmosphere rises and in the afternoon drops back down where there is an opportunity for torque to be added to the crust.

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

Your conclusions are quite reasonable and correct, but will not be proven by 'common sense.'

Filaments and sun spots are produced by the same force, and flares or filaments breaking up by the opposite effect of that force. I want to be able to tell you in detail, but it will attract the hyenas so I'll just give you some observations.

Force A produces sunspots and filaments, force B does the opposite - flares and quakes. 'A' is also responsible for gravity and rotation of the sun and earth etc. 'B' does the opposite, it reduces gravity, resists rotation etc.

Here is an 'unsolved' mystery, a solar quake causes surface waves that accelerate instead of travelling at a constant speed.
That's because the sun is large enough to produce a gradient of energy between 'A' and 'B.' Put 'B' in the centre and you get two results - the plasma lifts off the sun with ease, and because it is surrounded by 'A' the surface waves of the quake accelerate outward, increasing speed with the increased gradient between 'A' and 'B.'

These same forces operate within and around earth, and are also shared with the sun, so without any measurable connection with the sun, the earth responds to such changes.

Force 'B' shares an instantaneous field with all the planets, but Force 'A' demands locality. Both A and B are actually the same force that has dual and paradoxical characteristics.

'A' causes energy to recycle or be stored, 'B' causes its release.

Note how sunspots are cooler and flares hotter. A sun spot can produce an immediate influx of stored energy which is released immediately, locally, or in another place and time. Notice sunspots sometimes have brighter and higher flames around them, and other times great flares are produced on the other side of the sun. This tells you that the sun is constantly replenished with energy, and not dependent on wax, wood, electricity or atomic explosions, or the latest invention of man.

On earth, 'B' causes several things like heat release inside the earth and high pressure zones. On the other hand 'A' causes low pressure systems etc.

 

[origin]

I don't assume the original poster scooted just because he/she let a day go by without any banter back and forth.
Yes, I am gratified to see a relationship based on my theory sketch on the rotation of the earth which I am looking for ways to validate. The mercifully short capsule version is that the quiet sun solar wind is causing the earth to rotate.

1 There is no where near enough energy in the solar wind to do that.
2 How do you propose that a constant relatively uniform flow of particles can cause a spherical object to rotate.

The flares disrupt the rotation effect. The rotational pressure suddenly eases. The plates can ease back, and some do, producing release of pressure quakes, or "slop quakes" as I have come to call them.

If the 'rotational pressure' stopped to the point that this had an effect on the plates, then the results would be easily measured - they would actually be unavoidably detected. This effect is not seen so I think we can safely discount that possibility.

In other words these quakes would be expected after a period of no or weak flares associated with sunspots because the steady pressure rotating the earth is disrupted when the big flare disrupts the incoming solar wind.

Earthquakes do not follow any pattern that corresponds to the solar cycle so the hypothesis has been falsified.

 

[origin]

Filaments and sun spots are produced by the same force, and flares or filaments breaking up by the opposite effect of that force. I want to be able to tell you in detail, but it will attract the hyenas so I'll just give you some observations.

Oh come on and be honest! You can't go into detail because you are talking out our ass, and do not have a clue what is going on.

 

[origin]

Good Lord! Get this crap out of the science section and into pseudo-science where it belongs. Some poor impressionable lad might mistake this crap for science!!

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

1 There is no where near enough energy in the solar wind to do that.
2 How do you propose that a constant relatively uniform flow of particles can cause a spherical object to rotate.



If the 'rotational pressure' stopped to the point that this had an effect on the plates, then the results would be easily measured - they would actually be unavoidably detected. This effect is not seen so I think we can safely discount that possibility.



Earthquakes do not follow any pattern that corresponds to the solar cycle so the hypothesis has been falsified.

Your view of the steady flow from the sun onto the earth assumed an equal force on either side, without bias, but William makes it clear in the fifth paragraph how that bias takes place, which works.

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

Good Lord! Get this crap out of the science section and into pseudo-science where it belongs. Some poor impressionable lad might mistake this crap for science!!

Don't worry about the poor lad, he is not set in his ways yet!

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

i don't toatly think so,
the earth quackes, are because of teh earth plates teknoniks,
not the sun, but the sun may be a help in shifting the poles

Plate tectonics causing earthquakes, is a traditional assumption because of the locality of earthquakes and volcanoes on what appears to be the edges or joints of plates. Not quite the case, as we are seeing more earthquakes and volcanoes occurring in places far from any tectonic plate activity, the questions come up about what really causes earthquakes. No mystery, they were always wrong.

 

[origin]

Your view of the steady flow from the sun onto the earth assumed an equal force on either side, without bias, but William makes it clear in the fifth paragraph how that bias takes place, which works.

It doesn't 'work' and the whole conjecture is just plain silly. Why don't you calculate the total amont of force that the solar wind imparts on the earth and see if you still think that it has ANY affect on the rotation, let alone being the cause of the rotation.

 

[origin]

Plate tectonics causing earthquakes, is a traditional assumption because of the locality of earthquakes and volcanoes on what appears to be the edges or joints of plates. Not quite the case, as we are seeing more earthquakes and volcanoes occurring in places far from any tectonic plate activity, the questions come up about what really causes earthquakes. No mystery, they were always wrong.

Nice strawman. Plate tectonics IS the major cause of the earthquakes and volcanoes. No one who has any knowledge about geology thinks that this is the only cause. There are 'hot spots' such as the Hawaii that are not associated with the plates. There are also earthquake areas such as the New Madrid fault that are far from the plate boundires but this is interstingly enough also associate with a 'hot spot' that the north american plate passed over millions of years ago.

Basically every explanation you have put forth has been unevidenced, poorly thought out, incorrect conjectures. At least you are consistent.

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

It doesn't 'work' and the whole conjecture is just plain silly. Why don't you calculate the total amont of force that the solar wind imparts on the earth and see if you still think that it has ANY affect on the rotation, let alone being the cause of the rotation.

I don't think that the earth rotates by that force, even though it may help. What I am saying is that Will's conclusion of how that might take place is correct.

But according to common sense, the earth is just rolling around with extremely little resistance, and what would stop a little energy doing just what was said.

But I don't think the earth is rolling freely. In fact, if you had the capacity to stop it turning, you would get a very nasty shock.

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

Nice strawman. Plate tectonics IS the major cause of the earthquakes and volcanoes. No one who has any knowledge about geology thinks that this is the only cause. There are 'hot spots' such as the Hawaii that are not associated with the plates. There are also earthquake areas such as the New Madrid fault that are far from the plate boundires but this is interstingly enough also associate with a 'hot spot' that the north american plate passed over millions of years ago.

Basically every explanation you have put forth has been unevidenced, poorly thought out, incorrect conjectures. At least you are consistent.

Just wait and see. By the way, the plates aren't so platey as many think, they are more like the tracks of a military tank, they fold down and under, and with a change of forces, they can move very quickly, shifting continents a thousand miles in one year, or even rolling them back into the earth. Last time they moved rapidly was about 2050 BC.

 

[origin]

Just wait and see. By the way, the plates aren't so platey as many think, they are more like the tracks of a military tank, they fold down and under, and with a change of forces, they can move very quickly, shifting continents a thousand miles in one year, or even rolling them back into the earth.

Please supply some evidence of this.

Last time they moved rapidly was about 2050 BC.

Evidence.

You cannot make up some bat shit crazy idea and call it science. It doesn't work that way... that is called sciencefiction.

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

Please supply some evidence of this.[/I].

The date is more like 2250 BC, after I checked. At that time a person called Eber had two sons, one was named Peleg which means division, named so because at that time the main land mass was divided and the land moved. How long did it take? I don't know, could have been hundreds of years.

There is no evidence that the continents drifted millions of years ago. That notion is a result of intellectual codependence. The evidence of what I said earlier in regards to earthquakes in unexpected places, will surface very shortly. It is far more convincing than a panel.

We're getting away from the thread theme.

I want to finish by saying that earthquakes and solar flares are caused by the same phenomenon, whether there is a direct and immediate relation I am not certain, but it is possible because the background forces of matter have an immediate connection that is not governed by normal space time properties.

 

[origin]

The date is more like 2250 BC, after I checked. At that time a person called Eber had two sons, one was named Peleg which means division, named so because at that time the main land mass was divided and the land moved. How long did it take? I don't know, could have been hundreds of years.

Your evidence is the bible says so!! Are you kidding me?

There is no evidence that the continents drifted millions of years ago. That notion is a result of intellectual codependence.

Gee, guess what you are wrong there is lots of evidence. This is getting more and more absurd...

The evidence of what I said earlier in regards to earthquakes in unexpected places, will surface very shortly.

Bet you that it doesn't 'surface very shortly'.

I want to finish by saying that earthquakes and solar flares are caused by the same phenomenon, whether there is a direct and immediate relation I am not certain, but it is possible because the background forces of matter have an immediate connection that is not governed by normal space time properties.

So how is the weather in La La Land? I no longer know if you are serious or just trolling, I hope you are trolling... I can't imagine that you believe this crap.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Strange thing , years ago when reseaching events of 1985/86, I found many references from reputed sources on the net that demonstrated qute dramatcally that the sun started to heat up as of 1985/6 in a way that was graphed to show a huge change in the the suns processes.
!985/6 was also the first year of global warming awareness globally.
I managed at the time to download a graph and have it in my files somewhere but the strange thing is that all references to the sun heating up were suddenly withdrawn from the net
A pity the flaming of our board of resident "discussion killers" dissuaded the OP poster and other interested posters from making further offering. As there appears to be a possible association with the earthquakes and weather conditions around Cyclone Yartsi and the issues at Fukashima/Christchurch

 

[origin]

Ah yes the great net purge of scientific data on the sun heating up. I remember the black helicopters visiting all of the solar scientist to hatch the plan to use the heating sun as an excuse for gloabal warming so that the Masons could destroy democracy and christianity.

I am sure the discussion about the sun heating up in 1985 - 1986 had nothing to do with the 11 year solar cycle - nope it was probably a world wide conspiracy.