Check out the TB2K CHATROOM, open 24/7               Configuring Your Preferences for OPTIMAL Viewing
  To access our Email server, CLICK HERE

  If you are unfamiliar with the Guidelines for Posting on TB2K please read them.      ** LINKS PAGE **



*** Help Support TB2K ***
via mail, at TB2K Fund, P.O. Box 24, Coupland, TX, 78615
or


Earth Chgs It's not the Sun (directly) bringing a little ice age.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767

    It's not the Sun (directly) bringing a little ice age.

    https://spaceweatherarchive.com/2017...is-increasing/

    Atmospheric Radiation is Increasing
    DECEMBER 11, 2017 / DR.TONY PHILLIPS
    Dec. 9, 2017: Since the spring of 2015, Spaceweather.com and the students of Earth to Sky Calculus have been flying balloons to the stratosphere over California to measure cosmic rays. Soon after our monitoring program began, we quickly realized that radiation levels are increasing. Why? The main reason is the solar cycle. In recent years, sunspot counts have plummeted as the sun’s magnetic field weakens. This has allowed more cosmic rays from deep space to penetrate the solar system. As 2017 winds down, our latest measurements show the radiation increase continuing apace–with an interesting exception, circled in yellow:



    In Sept. 2017, the quiet sun surprised space weather forecasters with a sudden outburst of explosive activity. On Sept. 3rd, a huge sunspot appeared. In the week that followed, it unleashed the strongest solar flare in more than a decade (X9-class), hurled a powerful CME toward Earth, and sparked a severe geomagnetic storm (G4-class) with Northern Lights appearing as far south as Arkansas. During the storm we quickened the pace of balloon launches and found radiation dropping to levels we hadn’t seen since 2015. The flurry of solar flares and CMEs actually pushed some cosmic rays away from Earth.

    Interestingly, after the sun’s outburst, radiation levels in the stratosphere took more than 2 months to fully rebound. Now they are back on track, increasing steadily as the quiet sun resumes its progress toward Solar Minimum. The solar cycle is not expected to hit rock bottom until 2019 or 2020, so cosmic rays should continue to increase, significantly, in the months and years ahead. Stay tuned for updates as our balloons continue to fly.

    Technical note: The radiation sensors onboard our helium balloons detect X-rays and gamma-rays in the energy range 10 keV to 20 MeV. These energies, which span the range of medical X-ray machines and airport security scanners, trace secondary cosmic rays, the spray of debris created when primary cosmic rays from deep space hit the top of Earth’s atmosphere.
    https://www.swri.org/press-release/n...does-not-exist



    The sun is in fact going quiet. Sunspots are in fact going into solar minimum levels. Our magnetosphere has weakened and our atmosphere has been shrinking. The interstellar wind has shifted by 11°.

    The significance of the Earth Sky Calculus data is twofold.
    1. The sun's output protects the earth from interstellar ionized particles.
    2. Lacking sufficient strength to push those ionized particles away from Earth we end up with significant increases of those particles in the upper atmosphere.

    Those particles in turn increase the incidence of cosmic spallation creating a multitude of isotopes in the upper atmosphere, many of which combine with other atoms creating slightly heavier atoms in some cases, and in others atoms that increase the earth's albedo.


    The sun for its part is already struggling, so when combined with that higher albedo, we get less energy impacting the earth. We also end up with a shift in the spectrum that impinges the earth due to refraction and reflection. The end result of this is climate change towards the colder end of the spectrum on the whole.

    But that's just part of it. With that decrease in energy the oceans thermohaline currents change as the Pacific and Indian oceans that power them have less energy to absorb.

    Another mechanism that protected us is the interplanetary magnetic field. That too is weakened. The IMF and the solar wind powered the heliosphere bowshock. NASA knew it wasn't there as early as 2010. The change in direction of and composition of the interstellar wind was their first clue. The IBEX project confirmed it.

    It was that same time frame (2010-2012) that the narrative changed from global warming to climate change. Ask yourself if that was a coincidence?

    Data from previous solar minimums is often quoted. But haven't you ever wondered where that data came from? It came from sequestered beryllium 10 in trees and ice cores. Some places will tell you that. What they generally don't tell you is how it is the cosmic particles/radiation got here in the first place nor the significance of it.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  2. #2
    Thanks for posting this. Interesting.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    The loose buckle of the bible belt
    Posts
    11,639
    When might we see an effect at ground level?

    Any forecast of the cosmic radiation that we'll be receiving at the top of the atmosphere at the next solar maximum in about six years?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767
    When might we see an effect at ground level?

    Any forecast of the cosmic radiation that we'll be receiving at the top of the atmosphere at the next solar maximum in about six years?
    Extrapolate the earth sky graph reversing the time line assuming the sun recovers.
    rant/
    Consider this;
    The earth's atmosphere cycles in expansion and contraction phases. Basic thermodynamics is responsible for that. Heat it up it expands, remove the heat it contracts. As it contracts more cosmic spallation occurs as the energy from the sun is insufficient to keep out the interstellar wind/particles creating more cosmic spallation events.
    This in turn increases the earth's albedo when that causes denser gases/isotopes to form. That in turn causes a shift in the spectral bandwidth (frequency) of light/electromagnetic energy hitting the surface.
    That in turn changes the velocity of light in the medium (atmosphere) due to denser regions. That sets up for a higher refraction of light in accordance with snells law.
    Index of refraction (n) = velocity of light in a vacuum (c)/ velocity of light in a medium (v).
    Sells law then becomes;
    n1/n2=sin°2/sin°1.

    You can do the math yourself but the end result is increased reflection and refraction in the atmosphere. That changes both the quantity and quality of energy plant life receives.
    That is known demonstrable science. You see it every time you witness a rainbow or a reflection of light off of water.

    Yet the normal suspects go on for a month of Sundays about cold and sunspots.
    You can build a million dollar green house, but if you do not take into account the quantity and quality of light it will be nothing more than a nice warm place to starve. A couple of tons of seeds will do you no good if the plant won't grow. Science sans the fiction.

    Any old growth tree will demonstrate this if you core it. Wider rings, more growth that season, narrower rings less growth. Again demonstrable empirical science.

    Let us all pray the sun turns around and fires back up in the next cycle as between global warming and new ice age types, the means for survival if it doesn't is being buried in rhetoric and ego.
    /rant
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    39,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayku View Post
    Extrapolate the earth sky graph reversing the time line assuming the sun recovers.
    Sun won't be recovering for another 20-30 years.
    People are quick to confuse and despise confidence as arrogance but that is common amongst those who have never accomplished anything in their lives and who have always played it safe not willing to risk failure.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767
    Quote Originally Posted by packyderms_wife View Post
    Sun won't be recovering for another 20-30 years.
    Possibly, but it's impossible for any to state it one way or another with assurance. Trends for solar cycles have definitely been down, but past performance is no guarantee of future performance.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    39,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayku View Post
    Possibly, but it's impossible for any to state it one way or another with assurance. Trends for solar cycles have definitely been down, but past performance is no guarantee of future performance.
    Actually my statement is based upon an article I posted here sometime back that was published in 1967 about solar activity and it's effect on the earth's tilt, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions. The gov't has known as early as the 1950's that an ice age was coming which was why there was such huge rush to get out into space. It has to do with our solar systems position in the galaxy, remember we're not just revolving around a star, we're also revolving around the huge maw of a monster black hole. Of which we'll get a glimpse in 2018.

    Our solar system is currently residing in a galactic dead zone (I forget the exact termed used in the article and they predicted that this would happen), it's sorta like being a sale ship out in the ocean caught up in one of those areas where the wind doesn't blow for months on end. Until something happens in the galaxy we're kinda stuck here, and as long as we're stuck here our Sun will experience less and less activity.

    Which means it's gonna get mighty cold here on planet Earth! They've also know since the late 50's that ice ages happen much quicker than what they were telling the general public at the time, in fact that cat was finally released from it's bag in the mid 90's.
    People are quick to confuse and despise confidence as arrogance but that is common amongst those who have never accomplished anything in their lives and who have always played it safe not willing to risk failure.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767
    Quote Originally Posted by packyderms_wife View Post
    Actually my statement is based upon an article I posted here sometime back that was published in 1967 about solar activity and it's effect on the earth's tilt, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions. The gov't has known as early as the 1950's that an ice age was coming which was why there was such huge rush to get out into space. It has to do with our solar systems position in the galaxy, remember we're not just revolving around a star, we're also revolving around the huge maw of a monster black hole. Of which we'll get a glimpse in 2018.

    Our solar system is currently residing in a galactic dead zone (I forget the exact termed used in the article and they predicted that this would happen), it's sorta like being a sale ship out in the ocean caught up in one of those areas where the wind doesn't blow for months on end. Until something happens in the galaxy we're kinda stuck here, and as long as we're stuck here our Sun will experience less and less activity.

    Which means it's gonna get mighty cold here on planet Earth! They've also know since the late 50's that ice ages happen much quicker than what they were telling the general public at the time, in fact that cat was finally released from it's bag in the mid 90's.
    There were several articles of the kind posted in that time frame.


    That graphic comes from one such article published in National Geographic. They doubled down on it in 1974.

    New York times, Time magazine, etc, there were a plethora of such articles.
    Problem is they all turned out to be incorrect failing the test of time. With the available science of the time, they made the best call they could. However the understanding of how it works has come a long way since then.

    There is also a mountain of evidence to empirically prove where they went wrong. That in turn became 'global warming' science. We now know that too was wrong.

    What has made the difference are the deep space probes, skylab, Themis, IBEX, better space weather satellites, orbiting spectral analysis aboard ISS, and other platforms etc.

    We did not know what we do now. One of the key things in that is the nature of the heliosphere and the galactic gas cloud our system has been passing through. We didn't know about the nature of the stellar wind, interplanetary magnetic field, and a host of other things.

    I'd be very surprised if even now, there isn't something critical being missed.
    In balance, the unknowns and vaguely knowns kick us back to monitoring trends. We didn't even know what a sun spot was until we got an xray spectrum telescope up.

    I'll stand by my original statement. Others may feel differently.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  9. #9
    Coming at this from an "applied science" angle, seems to me those of us hoping to grow successful crops might prepare for this possibility of "quality/quantity" of light change by finding as much info as possible on which plants like which part of the spectrum - and when, because IIRC from little I've looked at this, the needs change over time from sprouting to maturation and development of "fruits". And of course, we'd need a way to measure the light too. Then, taking a tip from the pot growers, invest in some grow bulbs of the correct wavelength.

    Yes, that's a big investment in equipment and extra time. But there are other issues beginning to impact "food security" - geopolitics, natural disasters (witness the drug shortage due to Puerto Rico's hit from the hurricanes), inflation/currency devaluation, etc. We all like to eat... so it pays to consider being able to grow what you like to eat - come what may. (To the best of one's ability, that is - we could still get hit by a giant asteroid, or the gamma rays could start turning people into emotional basketcase, irrational, brainwashed zombies............ oh wait, that was Obama & Hillary........)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    14,240
    For what it's worth, it's now technically possible to have a growing space not directly exposed to sunlight at all and use sunlight concentrators and fiber optic lines manufactured to transmit only the specific bands of light you want to pass to the plants. They already make solar dish concentrators combined with fiber optic lines to pipe sunlight (minus UV light if you want, although I don't actually know if that's an option with the commercial systems being sold) into office buildings and whatnot, so assuming someone was willing to manufacture fiber optic lines to different specs I imagine it wouldn't be all that difficult to substitute the preferred fiber optic lines. I'm not saying it would be cost competitive to a standard greenhouse (it almost certainly wouldn't be), just that it should be possible. Think of it like FRS radios tuned to a very specific frequency and excluding all other frequencies, except that you'd be substituting light for radio waves.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767


    The above graph is dated but it is what I use for a baseline. Since that data was taken, the peak has compressed, and the quantity/quality received has dropped as measured on the ground in my area. While I can only wish for a satellite, I can extrapolate the portions I cannot measure on the ground directly by comparison.
    Keep in mind it will change with latitude. Angle of incident light/energy inherently changes with latitude which is why in the best of times, crops/plants that grow well in southern latitudes will not do so in more northern latitudes.

    That btw is the most frustrating part of it all for me. Century upon century of empirically demonstrated crop data is available for anyone with two or more brain cells and even a lazy attitude towards research to review. It's not like it's a state secret held closely in MI6, NSA, or FSB deep data holes, it's wide open to the public. Yet the overwhelming number of the people I've brought this up to absolutely, positively, refuse to see or listen. That goes for liberals and conservatives alike. Their confirmation bias source can't be wrong, no way, no how.

    For our part, we've acted. We have the capability to grow 100% independent of the sun. I'm no farmer, but I am an engineer at heart, so engineer I did. Between those of us who are farmers, and those who are not, we have our solutions in hand.

    There are commercially available units popping up here and there. They aren't cheap, but they are there.

    The frugal version is to research what grows (or at least what did grow) in more northern latitudes from your own. Currently you have to switch by about 11°-15° and climbing. So if your in Oklahoma, you'd be wanting something that grew in South Dakota. You'd want a test plot to monitor what grew, how fast, and to what quantity/quality. Records are important here.

    If you want to see a working example, review and research Icelandic production of bananas and other fruit.

    http://icelandmag.visir.is/article/i...panama-disease
    NATURE
    Iceland has Europe‘s largest banana plantation: could grow in importance due to Panama Disease
    BY STAFF |MAY 18 2016
    geothermal energy is used in Iceland

    Bananas were first produced in Iceland in 1941. Using cheap geothermal energy to heat the greenhouses and cheap electricity to provide illumination during the darkest months, it was possible to grow bananas in the middle of the North Atlantic. Import duties on imported foodstuffs and fruit meant the Icelandic bananas were competitive, and Icelanders consumed domestically produced bananas until the late 1950s. Since 1959, however, all bananas sold in stores have been imported.

    The claim that Iceland has the largest banana plantation in Europe has been disputed by fact checkers. But because it is an excellent story it has survived any attempts at correction. One of the arguments used by the pro-Iceland as Europe’s largest banana producer camp is that Spain, the largest European banana producer, actually grows bananas on the Canary Islands, which are part of Africa, rather than Europe.

    Read more: Geothermal power generates higher living standards, lower heating costs and less pollution

    The banana plantation in Reykir is operated by the Icelandic Agricultural University which has been growing bananas at its research station in Reykir since the 1950s. The bananas have remained completely isolated since then, safe from contact with plant diseases, including the Panama Disease which is currently decimating the world’s banana plantations. Many fear the disease, caused by a fungus, could wipe out the Cavendish banana, which is the most common type of banana consumed today.
    Those folks are way ahead of the curve on the subject, and what We've used as a guiding model.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    14,240
    It doesn't address the question of the quality or even the quantity of the light, but I seem to recall one of the founding fathers (Washington or Jefferson?) growing fruit trees far north of the usual range for those trees. If I'm remembering it correctly they did it by planting the trees in holes and keeping them warm in the winter using burning wood. The point being that there may be low-tech solutions available to a reduced growing season, although those solutions might also be very labor-intensive.

  13. #13
    Good idea tanstaafl. Along those lines, you've seen the in-ground or partly in ground greenhouses? They have a name, but I don't remember it right now. The work is probably worth it, if it means eating vs not.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767
    Quote Originally Posted by Sacajawea View Post
    Good idea tanstaafl. Along those lines, you've seen the in-ground or partly in ground greenhouses? They have a name, but I don't remember it right now. The work is probably worth it, if it means eating vs not.
    Walipini is the name your looking for most likely.

    Yes there are lower tech solutions. I mentioned one of them. For standard greenhouse and a walipini,
    they will not produce as fast or as much, but they will produce. Quality can be addressed by filters, quantity is addressed by extended growth times.

    However it's addressed, it needs to be addressed regardless.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    39,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayku View Post
    Walipini is the name your looking for most likely.

    Yes there are lower tech solutions. I mentioned one of them. For standard greenhouse and a walipini,
    they will not produce as fast or as much, but they will produce. Quality can be addressed by filters, quantity is addressed by extended growth times.

    However it's addressed, it needs to be addressed regardless.
    There's a thread in the Gardening forum here about these types of growing systems.

    http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showt...as-a-Prep-Item

    http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showt...of-Hugelkultur

    link to the room and there you will find the other threads
    http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/forum...?157-Gardening
    People are quick to confuse and despise confidence as arrogance but that is common amongst those who have never accomplished anything in their lives and who have always played it safe not willing to risk failure.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767
    Confirmation bias, it's a powerful thing.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767

    Pole shifts, solar cycles, and other related thoughts

    Magnetic field lines do not cross. Not even on the surface of the sun has a case of them crossing ever been observed. In fact, they are one of the causes for CME and flares as they do not cross containing the energy within until they are pushed aside. They will shift, compress, wiggle and squirm, but never cross.

    That comes into play when historical data for previous pole shifts.


    A pole shift is preceded by and followed by an chaotic shift in which multiple poles pop up. There doesn't appear to be any reason to it. Of course that is all predicated on magnetic dipoles, as in a north and south pole.

    What it doesn't take into account is the possibility of a magnetic monopole. In the classic theories of electromagnetism, a monopole is ruled out by Maxwell equations. However, for unified and #superstring theory, a monopole particle is predicted. All searches for monopole particles to date have been centered around classical physics. However there are some folks who have recently begun to experiment based upon an assumption they are a quantum physics property and not part of Einsteins classical universe. We know now through the large hadron collider that sea quarks are real.
    That is important given they are a temporary particle, that does not exist before or after the interaction in the final or initial state. They are also part of quantum field theory.

    So why does that matter? It proves that at least in the quantumverse, there are in fact particles that only exist during initial interaction I.E. observation.
    https://m.phys.org/news/2015-04-phys...monopoles.html

    Then that very understated discovery was made.
    The discovery of a magnetic monopole particle is still in the future. This new result establishes that the structure of a quantum mechanical monopole does appear in nature, and therefore it further supports the possibility that magnetic monopoles exist.
    In a nutshell, magnetic dipole field lines may not be able to cross, but such a particle could bridge them. Such a bridge would rapidly seek stability, eliminating the particle the moment the interaction occurs. Changes in strength of the line in question would force a shift in the lines as again, they cannot cross.

    So where do they come from? Therein gets into the gravity aspect. LIGO/VIRGO has recently confirmed gravity behaving as a wave.
    https://www.aps.org/publications/aps...ligo-virgo.cfm

    That goes into a whole other kettle of fish, but for this purpose, there is a troupe of elephants standing in the room.
    Einstein called the behavior of light acting as both a particle and a wave as "wave particle duality".
    Sounds cool, but in reality it's his way of saying I've no idea why. In fact when pressed to explain why particles interact at a distance he called it "spooky action at a distance". Through his general and special relativity, he gave birth to quantum mechanics.
    https://m.phys.org/news/2015-11-nist...-distance.html
    Einstein was wrong about at least one thing: There are, in fact, "spooky actions at a distance," as now proven by researchers at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

    Einstein used that term to refer to quantum mechanics, which describes the curious behavior of the smallest particles of matter and light. He was referring, specifically, to entanglement, the idea that two physically separated particles can have correlated properties, with values that are uncertain until they are measured. Einstein was dubious, and until now, researchers have been unable to support it with near-total confidence.
    https://www.wired.com/2010/09/stringy-quantum/
    String theory meets quantum entanglement. Now go back to # and read again.

    Part 2 of LIGO/VIRGO is the confirmation of the wave behavior. It's my assertion that gravitational waves behave just like light. Einsteins wave particle duality. To include the "spooky action at a distance" quantum mechanical aspects as well.

    All of that long before we get into the potential graviton. A graviton is a hypothetical elementary particle that mediates the force of gravitation in the framework of quantum field theory.

    Putting all that together.
    We know the sun flips poles every solar cycle. We know the earth does on an irregular basis. We know something has to cause it. We know gravity acts on every single thing. Light, matter, everything.
    My postulate is that it's not caused directly from an outside magnetic force, but rather from gravitational pulse waves carrying a variety of particles such as gravitons and monopole particles.

    Such pulses can also shed further light on solar cycles. In the face of the growing body of evidence mentioned above (which btw most of which has been empirically proven), it would be foolish to ignore the possibility. What the oppenheimer/electric universe hypothesis comes up short in facts on, the idea of a gravitational universe has in spades all the way down to earth's magnetic pole shifts.

    An outside force yes, magnetic or electric highly unlikely. Gravity bends space, time, light, magnetic field lines, electric fields, everything. It's also intrinsically tied to everything with any momentum such as light/photons, magnetic fields, electrical fields, so forth.

    I cannot imagine such a pervasive force of nature acting on one thing and not another.

    Food for thought.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    630
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayku View Post
    Magnetic field lines do not cross. Not even on the surface of the sun has a case of them crossing ever been observed. In fact, they are one of the causes for CME and flares as they do not cross containing the energy within until they are pushed aside. They will shift, compress, wiggle and squirm, but never cross.

    That comes into play when historical data for previous pole shifts.


    A pole shift is preceded by and followed by an chaotic shift in which multiple poles pop up. There doesn't appear to be any reason to it. Of course that is all predicated on magnetic dipoles, as in a north and south pole.

    What it doesn't take into account is the possibility of a magnetic monopole. In the classic theories of electromagnetism, a monopole is ruled out by Maxwell equations. However, for unified and #superstring theory, a monopole particle is predicted. All searches for monopole particles to date have been centered around classical physics. However there are some folks who have recently begun to experiment based upon an assumption they are a quantum physics property and not part of Einsteins classical universe. We know now through the large hadron collider that sea quarks are real.
    That is important given they are a temporary particle, that does not exist before or after the interaction in the final or initial state. They are also part of quantum field theory.

    So why does that matter? It proves that at least in the quantumverse, there are in fact particles that only exist during initial interaction I.E. observation.
    https://m.phys.org/news/2015-04-phys...monopoles.html

    Then that very understated discovery was made.


    In a nutshell, magnetic dipole field lines may not be able to cross, but such a particle could bridge them. Such a bridge would rapidly seek stability, eliminating the particle the moment the interaction occurs. Changes in strength of the line in question would force a shift in the lines as again, they cannot cross.

    So where do they come from? Therein gets into the gravity aspect. LIGO/VIRGO has recently confirmed gravity behaving as a wave.
    https://www.aps.org/publications/aps...ligo-virgo.cfm

    That goes into a whole other kettle of fish, but for this purpose, there is a troupe of elephants standing in the room.
    Einstein called the behavior of light acting as both a particle and a wave as "wave particle duality".
    Sounds cool, but in reality it's his way of saying I've no idea why. In fact when pressed to explain why particles interact at a distance he called it "spooky action at a distance". Through his general and special relativity, he gave birth to quantum mechanics.
    https://m.phys.org/news/2015-11-nist...-distance.html


    https://www.wired.com/2010/09/stringy-quantum/
    String theory meets quantum entanglement. Now go back to # and read again.

    Part 2 of LIGO/VIRGO is the confirmation of the wave behavior. It's my assertion that gravitational waves behave just like light. Einsteins wave particle duality. To include the "spooky action at a distance" quantum mechanical aspects as well.

    All of that long before we get into the potential graviton. A graviton is a hypothetical elementary particle that mediates the force of gravitation in the framework of quantum field theory.

    Putting all that together.
    We know the sun flips poles every solar cycle. We know the earth does on an irregular basis. We know something has to cause it. We know gravity acts on every single thing. Light, matter, everything.
    My postulate is that it's not caused directly from an outside magnetic force, but rather from gravitational pulse waves carrying a variety of particles such as gravitons and monopole particles.

    Such pulses can also shed further light on solar cycles. In the face of the growing body of evidence mentioned above (which btw most of which has been empirically proven), it would be foolish to ignore the possibility. What the oppenheimer/electric universe hypothesis comes up short in facts on, the idea of a gravitational universe has in spades all the way down to earth's magnetic pole shifts.

    An outside force yes, magnetic or electric highly unlikely. Gravity bends space, time, light, magnetic field lines, electric fields, everything. It's also intrinsically tied to everything with any momentum such as light/photons, magnetic fields, electrical fields, so forth.

    I cannot imagine such a pervasive force of nature acting on one thing and not another.

    Food for thought.


    Thanx for your technical expertise, Rayku......but your offerings are more like a FULL-COURSE BUFFET !!

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767
    http://www.news.com.au/technology/sc...6f4dbd97b8d97b
    [Quote]BY 2050, our Sun is expected to be unusually cool.

    It’s what scientists have termed a ‘grand minimum’ — a particularly low point in what is otherwise a steady 11-year cycle.

    Over this cycle, the Sun’s tumultuous heart races and rests.

    At its high point, the nuclear fusion at the Sun’s core forces more magnetic loops high into its boiling atmosphere — ejecting more ultraviolet radiation and generating sunspots and flares.

    When it’s quiet, the Sun’s surface goes calm.

    It ejects less ultraviolet radiation.

    In 2000 the TSI average was 1367 W/m^2, then it was 1364 by 2010, later dropped to
    1361 average. First was a change in instruments, then it was a change in methods, then a refinement of data. I wonder what the next excuse will be?

    Now scientists have scoured the skies and history for evidence of an even greater cycle amid these cycles.

    It appears that every 400 years or so, the Sun goes through a particularly cool cycle.Source:Supplied

    GRAND MINIMUM

    One particularly cool period in the 17th Century guided their research.

    An intense cold snap between 1645 and 1715 has been dubbed the “Maunder Minimum”.

    In England, the Thames river froze over. The Baltic Sea was covered in ice — so much so that the Swedish army was able to march across it to invade Denmark in 1658.

    But the cooling was not uniform: Distorted weather patterns warmed up Alaska and Greenland.

    These records were combined with 20 years of data collected by the International Ultraviolet Explorer satellite mission, as well as observations of nearby stars similar to the Sun.

    Now physicist Dan Lubin at the University of California San Diego has calculated an estimate of how much dimmer the Sun is likely to be when the next such grand minimum takes place.

    His team’s study, Ultraviolet Flux Decrease Under a Grand Minimum from IUE Short-wavelength Observation of Solar Analogs, has been published in the journal Astrophysical Journal Letters.

    It finds the Sun is likely to be 7 per cent cooler than its usual minimum.

    And another grand minimum is likely to be just decades away, based on the cooling spiral of recent solar cycles.

    While the Sun’s ‘grand minimum’ phase may only cool surface temperatures by a few tenths of a degree, it may have a major impact upon weather patterns. Picture: Sunshine/Fox

    SOLAR FALLOUT

    A quiet Sun has a noticeable effect on its planets.

    For Earth, Lubin says it first thins the stratospheric ozone layer.

    This impacts the insulating effect of the atmosphere, with flow-on effects including major changes to wind and weather patterns.

    But it won’t stop the current trend of planetary warning, Lubin warns.

    “The cooling effect of a grand minimum is only a fraction of the warming effect caused by the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,” a statement from the research team reads.

    “After hundreds of thousands of years of CO2 levels never exceeding 300 parts per million in air, the concentration of the greenhouse gas is now over 400 parts per million, continuing a rise that began with the Industrial Revolution.”

    One simulation of a grand minimum on the Earth’s current climate anticipates a reduction of Solar warming by 0.25 per cent over a 50-year period between 2020 and 2070.

    While the global average surface air temperature appears to cool by “several temths of a degree Celsius” in the initial years, this reduction was rapidly overtaken by ever-increasing trends.

    “A future grand solar minimum could slow down but not stop global warming,” the study finds.
    They admit all former models were wrong, but still they persist with global warming.
    “Now we have a benchmark from which we can perform better climate model simulations,” Lubin says. “We can therefore have a better idea of how changes in solar UV radiation affect climate change.”
    So what they are saying here is they had no such benchmark in previous models

    Our Sun may be due for a 'grand minimum' in its 11-year hot-cold cycle, cooling the Earth by several tenths of a degree Celcius and tumbling weather patterns. Picture: Sunshine/FoxSource:Supplied
    [Quote]

    Edit;

    Remember this?


    Quality and quantity of light changes. Keep that firmly in mind in the coming years.

    At least they are now hedging into some actionable truth for a change.
    Last edited by Rayku; 02-08-2018 at 08:02 PM.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  20. #20
    So, they finally readvJohn Casey's book? LOL!

    The intervals may not be exact, but he published "Dark Winter" back in 2014...

    And he didn't include (thank God) the stupid, discredited, Global Warming crap in it, either)

    Summerthyme

  21. #21
    Did anyone listen to the interview that Robert Felix posted on his website today? www.iceagenow.info

    IT was LOTS better than the one he did on C2C a short while back.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    3,767
    Quote Originally Posted by Martinhouse View Post
    Did anyone listen to the interview that Robert Felix posted on his website today? www.iceagenow.info

    IT was LOTS better than the one he did on C2C a short while back.
    Not a fan of iceage now so no.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


NOTICE: Timebomb2000 is an Internet forum for discussion of world events and personal disaster preparation. Membership is by request only. The opinions posted do not necessarily represent those of TB2K Incorporated (the owner of this website), the staff or site host. Responsibility for the content of all posts rests solely with the Member making them. Neither TB2K Inc, the Staff nor the site host shall be liable for any content.

All original member content posted on this forum becomes the property of TB2K Inc. for archival and display purposes on the Timebomb2000 website venue. Said content may be removed or edited at staff discretion. The original authors retain all rights to their material outside of the Timebomb2000.com website venue. Publication of any original material from Timebomb2000.com on other websites or venues without permission from TB2K Inc. or the original author is expressly forbidden.



"Timebomb2000", "TB2K" and "Watching the World Tick Away" are Service Mark℠ TB2K, Inc. All Rights Reserved.