Sunspot 1039 rotated around the sun and came back as 1041. Since then, 1042 has also emerged. Holy cr**p! Sunspots have doubled!! The sun will soon wipe out all life on earth!!
Seriously, 1042 will soon pass over to the other side of the sun. 1041 will be with us for a while.
The rotisserie that the meat-slabs live on will continue spinning, browning the meat as the juices are slowly drained away, leaving nothing but jerkmeat.
What I want to know is, will solar warming cause global warming ?
Yes. It causes both global warming and global cooling. If there is a major volcano, like Krakatoa was, or Mt. St. Helen's, the ash in the atmosphere can filter out the long wave radiation, and if big enough, cause global cooling as well. CO2 is such a small influence, it cannot overcome the sun's influence. Particulate matter, though, like volcanic ash can filter the long wave radiation.
While La Nina is warming my part of the continent, there are other parts that are in the deep freeze due to low sun emissions. Take a look at Poland. Poland is in such a position, as is most of Northern Europe. Also look at the arctic. The ice buildup is significant under a solar minimum. BTW did you catch the news that the alleged retreat of the Himalayan glaciers was a hoax? The Indian government has acknowledged this publicly.
Sunspots and solar flares, do they affect eachother? I always thought a solar flare knocking out electrical power here on earth should be one of those "we're all gonna die" movies.
Sunspots and solar flares, do they affect eachother? I always thought a solar flare knocking out electrical power here on earth should be one of those "we're all gonna die" movies.
Yes they do. As we approach a solar maximum, there will be more and more sun spots which are where solar flares spout from in direct relation to the increased activity in the Suns magnetic fields. When certain magnetic fields focused in Sun spots expand beyond their their ability to hold itself together, the result is solar radiation and particulates being launched away from the sun at very high speeds in very large amounts. Dependent on the size of the sunspot and the field breaking, and launching in the earths direction, it will result in either no significant effect, to the destruction of electrical components, to the microwaving and destruction of the earths atmosphere, magnetic field, and all life on earth.
Approaching the suns solar maximum at the time that earth is experiencing a polarity switch is particularly disturbing for man kind as during the polarity switch, there will be immense holes in earths magnetic field that shields most of the planet from the suns harmful radiation and particles while directing it toward the earths poles where no one resides. This is the cause of the phenomenon "Northern Lights".As most of us have learned of "Plate Tectonics" in high school (The movement of the earths crust plates) these plates are floating atop the earths magma core (being primarily Iron). This flowing, sloshing molten Iron core is what what creates the magnetic shield spanning well outside of our atmosphere. I don't recall how often, however every so often, the flow of the earths Iron heavy magma changes its flow enough to disrupt the otherwise relatively uniform flow and magnetic field resulting in significantly smaller less powerful and more a higher number of individual magnetic fields that don't do us any good as a solar shield.
Scientists currently expect the polar shift to conclude in a few hundred years resuming an opposite however uniform and protective field around the earth yet again. If this polar flip during a solar minimum with little or no sunspots or solar flares would still result in a significantly younger life expectancy as cancer rates would sky rocket to nearly100% mortality rate eventually (though still able to re-produce, you would just die younger).
However during a solar maximum, there is no current public explanation on what is expected however it is possible that Earth Being hit by a solar flare once the polarity switch has moved along further would result in the extinction of man in a matter of moments to hours.
Current reports suggest that this is "unlikely" in our life time, however our children/grandchildren may very well have to deal with these events.
IP: Logged
05:12 PM
Jan 28th, 2010
2.5 Member
Posts: 43225 From: Southern MN Registered: May 2007
We are affecting the sun! The problem is worst than we thought. We now have solar system climate change. Start driving Priuses or it will soon be galaxy climate change. You do not want that.
IP: Logged
09:56 AM
Wolfhound Member
Posts: 5317 From: Opelika , Alabama, USA Registered: Oct 1999
Isn't it just too coincidental that the height of the Global Warming occurred in 2000 and so did the sunspot activity?
This is something the US President, his pal Al "the huckster" Gore and the other Dems don't want you to know.
Arn
Though the Solar activity does greatly effect earths climate, CO2 and methane are indisputably green house gasses trapping even more of the suns radiation while reflecting it back to the surface of the earth. Though we cannot control the amount of solar radiation that reaches Earths atmosphere, We most certainly control how much of it is retained.
IP: Logged
02:25 PM
PFF
System Bot
ryan.hess Member
Posts: 20784 From: Orlando, FL Registered: Dec 2002
Though the Solar activity does greatly effect earths climate, CO2 and methane are indisputably green house gasses trapping even more of the suns radiation while reflecting it back to the surface of the earth. Though we cannot control the amount of solar radiation that reaches Earths atmosphere, We most certainly control how much of it is retained.
Do some reading, you are, unfortunately completely bamboozled by Al Gore and his rich manipulative friends. CO2 and Methane have no significant influence at all.
Ever seen a top wobble? Our iron core is spinning like a top. But instead, it's shaped more like a marble....
Wait, so pole reversal literally means it is going to flip over?
I was thinking it just meant magnetism would change or something.
So can it just keep on spinning along fine, or does the pole reversal affect the speed or direction of spin?
I had a dream once that earth was losing its gravity and things were slowly floating away from the surface. I was standing in the old house I grew up in with my family and we were looking out the window as the house lifted off.
IP: Logged
04:40 PM
katore8105 Member
Posts: 1519 From: Upstate NY US Registered: Dec 2009
Wait, so pole reversal literally means it is going to flip over?
I was thinking it just meant magnetism would change or something.
So can it just keep on spinning along fine, or does the pole reversal affect the speed or direction of spin?
I had a dream once that earth was losing its gravity and things were slowly floating away from the surface. I was standing in the old house I grew up in with my family and we were looking out the window as the house lifted off.
There is a theory that the entire planet will physically flip but most scientists have written that off as jargon. It is the earths magma and magnetic field that will be doing the moving. Not the Earths Tectonic Plates.
IP: Logged
04:45 PM
RACE Member
Posts: 4842 From: Des Moines IA Registered: Dec 2002
Originally posted by katore8105: Yes they do. As we approach a solar maximum, there will be more and more sun spots which are where solar flares spout from in direct relation to the increased activity in the Suns magnetic fields. When certain magnetic fields focused in Sun spots expand beyond their their ability to hold itself together, the result is solar radiation and particulates being launched away from the sun at very high speeds in very large amounts. Dependent on the size of the sunspot and the field breaking, and launching in the earths direction, it will result in either no significant effect, to the destruction of electrical components, to the microwaving and destruction of the earths atmosphere, magnetic field, and all life on earth.
Approaching the suns solar maximum at the time that earth is experiencing a polarity switch is particularly disturbing for man kind as during the polarity switch, there will be immense holes in earths magnetic field that shields most of the planet from the suns harmful radiation and particles while directing it toward the earths poles where no one resides. This is the cause of the phenomenon "Northern Lights".As most of us have learned of "Plate Tectonics" in high school (The movement of the earths crust plates) these plates are floating atop the earths magma core (being primarily Iron). This flowing, sloshing molten Iron core is what what creates the magnetic shield spanning well outside of our atmosphere. I don't recall how often, however every so often, the flow of the earths Iron heavy magma changes its flow enough to disrupt the otherwise relatively uniform flow and magnetic field resulting in significantly smaller less powerful and more a higher number of individual magnetic fields that don't do us any good as a solar shield.
Scientists currently expect the polar shift to conclude in a few hundred years resuming an opposite however uniform and protective field around the earth yet again. If this polar flip during a solar minimum with little or no sunspots or solar flares would still result in a significantly younger life expectancy as cancer rates would sky rocket to nearly100% mortality rate eventually (though still able to re-produce, you would just die younger).
However during a solar maximum, there is no current public explanation on what is expected however it is possible that Earth Being hit by a solar flare once the polarity switch has moved along further would result in the extinction of man in a matter of moments to hours.
Current reports suggest that this is "unlikely" in our life time, however our children/grandchildren may very well have to deal with these events.
Interesting jargon. Meaningless, of course, but interesting, nonetheless.
I really don't know how to say this gently -- next time you want to appear as though you know what you're saying, and that you have more knowledge than others, pick a subject you know something about, rather than solar physics, or even geophysics. You might also try this on a forum where there are not engineers, and at least one physicist, who won't believe everything you say, and who will demand proofs that you cannot provide. For example, you said: "When certain magnetic fields focused in Sun spots expand beyond their their ability to hold itself together, the result is solar radiation and particulates being launched away from the sun at very high speeds in very large amounts. Dependent on the size of the sunspot and the field breaking, and launching in the earths direction, it will result in either no significant effect, to the destruction of electrical components, to the microwaving and destruction of the earths atmosphere, magnetic field, and all life on earth."
Apart from the obvious grammatical errors, I can see where this statement would "sound" impressive to the layman. Those more rational of us understand that "solar radiation" is constantly "launched away from the sun" (that's why we call it "solar radiation") at "very high speeds" and in "very large amounts." Try the speed of light (for some, but not all, solar radiation), for "very high speeds." The energy radiated from our sun is what keeps us alive. That radiation comes at "very high speeds" and in "very large amounts." Think about it. Consider how lucky we are that we're alive. Our sun radiates in all directions, at all times. We are a speck on a spherical surface 93 million miles in radius, yet the amount of solar radiation we intercept has kept life alive on this planet all these years.
So you describe nothing that has not been going on for millions of years. If you want to consider anomalous events, then say so, coherently. We could then speak coherently in terms of probabilities. Inasmuch as we are a speck on a spherical surface 93 million miles in radius (I admit I haven't done the calculation), I think we're talking about a very small number.
I'd ask you to physically define "field breaking," but I already know you don't have that answer, because you're obviously not a mathematician. If you were, you would not have used the term improperly, and if you were, we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place.
Misleading "knowledge" is worse than no knowledge.
[This message has been edited by Shyster (edited 01-29-2010).]
IP: Logged
02:21 AM
2.5 Member
Posts: 43225 From: Southern MN Registered: May 2007
Sounded to me like he was "dumbing it down" for the laymen. Hopefully he knew that radiation comes from the sun all day long, as I did. Radiation in larger amounts and higher speeds than normal would be what you call a solar flare no? Even if he is incorrect about some things, no reason to intimidate IMO.
IP: Logged
08:42 AM
Boondawg Member
Posts: 38235 From: Displaced Alaskan Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by Shyster: I really don't know how to say this gently -- next time you want to appear as though you know what you're saying, and that you have more knowledge than others, pick a subject you know something about, rather than solar physics, or even geophysics. You might also try this on a forum where there are not engineers, and at least one physicist, who won't believe everything you say, and who will demand proofs that you cannot provide. For example, you said: "When certain magnetic fields focused in Sun spots expand beyond their their ability to hold itself together, the result is solar radiation and particulates being launched away from the sun at very high speeds in very large amounts. Dependent on the size of the sunspot and the field breaking, and launching in the earths direction, it will result in either no significant effect, to the destruction of electrical components, to the microwaving and destruction of the earths atmosphere, magnetic field, and all life on earth."
Apart from the obvious grammatical errors, I can see where this statement would "sound" impressive to the layman. Those more rational of us understand that "solar radiation" is constantly "launched away from the sun" (that's why we call it "solar radiation") at "very high speeds" and in "very large amounts." Try the speed of light (for some, but not all, solar radiation), for "very high speeds." The energy radiated from our sun is what keeps us alive. That radiation comes at "very high speeds" and in "very large amounts." Think about it. Consider how lucky we are that we're alive. Our sun radiates in all directions, at all times. We are a speck on a spherical surface 93 million miles in radius, yet the amount of solar radiation we intercept has kept life alive on this planet all these years.
So you describe nothing that has not been going on for millions of years. If you want to consider anomalous events, then say so, coherently. We could then speak coherently in terms of probabilities. Inasmuch as we are a speck on a spherical surface 93 million miles in radius (I admit I haven't done the calculation), I think we're talking about a very small number.
I'd ask you to physically define "field breaking," but I already know you don't have that answer, because you're obviously not a mathematician. If you were, you would not have used the term improperly, and if you were, we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place.
quote
Originally posted by 2.5: Even if he is incorrect about some things, no reason to intimidate IMO.
Shyster, in all of your posts I have read, you seem really, really, smart. But you also seem really, really condescending.
It is of course your choice in the method you choose to communicate your ideas & opinions, but being as smart as you seem to be, wouldn't you be more effective at getting your point across to others by softening your approach a little. Some of us possses different levels of education, understanding, & communication skills. With those skills, we do the best we can. I think katore8105's post got the information across in a way that was easily understandable by most people.
No offense intended, just an observation from a someone nowhere near your level of communication & brainpower.
And yes, the above is most certain to contain grammatical errors.
[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 01-29-2010).]
IP: Logged
11:16 AM
starlightcoupe Member
Posts: 1767 From: Third World Country, OR Registered: Oct 2009
I second Boonie's post and please forgive my grammatical and spellin' errers 'cause I just fell off a turnip truck enroute from Silsbee, TX to Colorado Springs. I thought katore8105's explanation was good given what I know about solar radiation. Of course, my education was at the University of Houston where I learned about the sun from a solar expert who formerly was at MIT and worked for NASA so what do I know? I see Katore's only transgression as offering an opinion about greenhouse gases which runs counter to a lot of folk's opinions.
IP: Logged
11:37 AM
2.5 Member
Posts: 43225 From: Southern MN Registered: May 2007
Originally posted by Boondawg: Shyster, in all of your posts I have read, you seem really, really, smart. But you also seem really, really condescending.
It is of course your choice in the method you choose to communicate your ideas & opinions, but being as smart as you seem to be, wouldn't you be more effective at getting your point across to others by softening your approach a little. Some of us possses different levels of education, understanding, & communication skills. With those skills, we do the best we can. I think katore8105's post got the information across in a way that was easily understandable by most people.
No offense intended, just an observation from a someone nowhere near your level of communication & brainpower. And yes, the above is most certain to contain grammatical errors.
Sorry, been out for a few days. Boonie, you, and 2.5, among others, are due a decent response to well-stated words.
It is not my intention to ever be condescending, to you, or anyone else, here. I don't want to, much less would I try to, call out every factual mistake I see (much less every grammatical error ), as such would be a total waste of time, but worse, contrary to the spirit of this forum. If I have ever insulted you, however unintentionally, then you have my sincere apologies.
I, too, have been insulted here, I've had my professional integrity, and qualifications, questioned, by persons, who, so far as I could tell, had neither the education nor the background to do so. Such is life.
But I draw the line at gobbledygook wrapped up as scientific "fact." The post I addressed was not "dumbed-down" for the masses, that they might have a better sense of the world. The post I addressed made no logical sense, at all. Yet the terminology used was just "technical" enough that those who don't know any better might conclude that the conclusion was "logical." This is a technique used by con men, and the self-important, everywhere.
I do have the background to know that the precis is meaningless, and to understand that the conclusion is baseless. I didn't need to post anything to personally understand that post to be ka-ka. But since I consider the propagation of utter BS to be wrong, I responded. Apparently, I communicated poorly, because you apparently interpreted my post as "condescending." It was not meant to be so. It was intended to be a complete slap in the face.
The difference is this: I've probably disagreed with you in the past, and if so, I'm sure I've said so. I'd hope I treated those disagreements with respect, though you seem to feel differently. But you, as most others here, have not pretended to be something you're not. The poster in this case, did.
I will never respect pseudo-intellectualism, especially not when directed to mislead people who I think of as my friends. What I said was not intended to be condescending. What I said was intended to call out overt, meaningless jargon; words that may have sounded good but said nothing, and supported no conclusions. For that, I make no apologies.
Since I am a ham radio operator, my hobby depends upon sunspot numbers for long distance communication. This current cycle has the fewest number in my lifetime. My first really great ham radio experience was during the 1956-59 cycle and we could talk around the world on one watt and a wet string for an antenna. (pardon the exaggeration)
The 1967-70 cycle was great as well and we illegally talked to the US from Vietnam many times on 6 meters (54mHz). One night on ambush patrol, I had to change frequencies because of all the interference. We are apparently entering a period of a quiet sun and it will be interesting to see the climate changes if they do occur. Broadcast propagation for the AM bands is great. I listen to stations from the East Coast nearly every night.
I remember in the late 50's being able to pick up South America on my old tube GE radio. Not a chance today.
If you look at the chart I posted, it is really remarkable that we are flirting with "0" all the time. It may not be a "0" day, but it is so close it might as well be.
The BBC reported this in November 1999, while we were approaching the peak of solar activity and the height of the then current global warming cycle which started in 1996 and ended in 2000 with the start of the global cooling cycle.
Technically speaking, we are still in the Ice Age. The last 12,000 years is part of a warm period (an interstadial), which sooner or later will end with the onset of a new cold-phase (a stadial). That's how the Ice Age has worked, alternating between warmth and cold many times since its onset some two million years ago. A returning deep freeze would kill all but the hardiest plants in the affected zones. There would be large-scale climate change across the world putting stress on all animal and plant populations. The onsets of warmth and cold also tend to occur quite rapidly, leading to even greater stress. At the very end of the last cold spell, many large animals such as the Woolly Mammoth, the Giant Sloth and the Great Irish Deer disappeared, never to return.
According to them climate change is a real problem but not one we can influence apart from shutting down our factories, furnaces, stoves, and campfires in total, which would put the earth's inhabitants right back to the stone age. Even then it would not be nearly enough to mitigate the extremes the climate can go through. Remember the CO2 level chart does not correlate to the temperature chart. The CO2 has been rising steadily even during cooling periods.
We don't know the future sunspot patterns, and they could increase or stay low for a long time. So we could start warming up again or go into another ice age. Nothing we can do to stop it either way.
Arn
[This message has been edited by Arns85GT (edited 02-02-2010).]
EMERGING SUNSPOTS: New sunspots are popping up faster than NOAA can number them. Today's image from the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) shows a pair of no-name sunspot groups rapidly growing in the sun's northern hemisphere:
This raises to three the number of sunspot groups currently visible from Earth. The last time we could see three sunspots at the same time was in May of 2008. Since then, the sun fell into--and is now bouncing out of--a century-level solar minimum.
Of course as things warm up in the spring, it will all be our fault. Al Gore will go back to his fatuous claims.
Arn
[This message has been edited by Arns85GT (edited 02-06-2010).]
IP: Logged
10:17 AM
Feb 7th, 2010
katore8105 Member
Posts: 1519 From: Upstate NY US Registered: Dec 2009
Wow, I didn't realize that making a short summary of what I learned in school and read about in from other sources would offend someone to such extents. I apologize if I didn't write an official essay to the Professor Genius here straight from the textbook and might have mistaken some terminology. OK Mr. Patent Attorney with interests in Aviation, (or so says your profile) that minored as a math mathematician, Astro / Geo chemist. https://www.fiero.nl/cgi-bin...bio&UserName=Shyster Since my explanation requires 20 years of schooling and research and I somehow insulted your qualifications you must have all of these qualifications. If you don't then your insinuation that I should have degrees in Geochemistry and more are as meaningless as your unnecessary predatory attack on my grammar to the relevance to this thread. See how far going around the forum telling people to take English classes will get you.
"I, too, have been insulted here, I've had my professional integrity, and qualifications, questioned, by persons, who, so far as I could tell, had neither the education nor the background to do so. Such is life." So you have interests in Aviation, this means you likely fly (If you have the money, as an Attorney you should) you likely use math on a more frequent basis than I considering I am a carpenter striving for my Engineering degree eventually. But I highly doubt your qualifications have been questioned here, especially with absolutely 0 references to you or your "Patent Attorney" career. a "Poster" am I? I wont make any accusations here as they would have no relevance nor do yours. "Apart from the obvious grammatical errors, I can see where this statement would "sound" impressive to the layman." - Not what I was going for sir, Especially since cars are what does the impressing on this forum. Also, English was never my best subject. Glad to see it was yours. Want a cookie? "So you describe nothing that has not been going on for millions of years" Sure am, I was simply highlighting some points that clearly have the international Science Community concerned and in my limited knowledge are worth taking into consideration. "I'd ask you to physically define "field breaking" - Again, sorry, didn't plagiarize my text book! Furthermore, I don't think quoting text books verbatim would be a little dry and technical for a non professional atmosphere of the Fiero Forums.
"I already know you don't have that answer, because you're obviously not a mathematician." Did I say I was a mathematician? I am on the T/O Topic forum of car enthusiast website. I would likely have better things to do if I was. Lets see here Mathematician: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematician Now I am well aware that flying and Avaition requires a firm grasp of math however, you certainly don't have to be a mathematician to fly panes as my father was a Hobbyist Pilot and I can't imagine that a mathematician is needed to perform as a Patent Attorney so I am betting you are no Mathematician. (Though Not a Layman, I am not going to question your intelligence as it seems you are quite smart). However you obviously know the answers here and not being a mathematician, by your standards, you can't possibly know or comment. Had you taken into consideration your approach and God complex, I would have been far more receptive to these replies. When it comes down to it, You sound like a spoiled little brat having a bad day!
"What I said was intended to call out overt, meaningless jargon; words that may have sounded good but said nothing, and supported no conclusions. For that, I make no apologies." - Of course my statement supported no conclusion! There is currently many hypotheses out there from many sources to which none have concluded to my knowlage of what will happen in the relative near future. Had I found a conclusion, I would likely be working for the government predicting the future. In other words, had I made my own conclusion of what these events will indefinitely mean for earth, that would have made me a "Postor" by suggesting my conclusion is correct. This was simply a recollection and conjunction of ACTUAL events happening TODAY and suggested conclusions of different sources. None of which were my own.
"Misleading "knowledge" is worse than no knowledge." Sure! If the overall message of my post was as far off as you say it is, I could see more of a stern response but the simple fact of the matter is that its not. Some terminology and wording could be less than your standards but the explanation I gave is relative.
I spent about 5 minutes googling some of the above statements and posted the 1st ones that came up that were relative to this conversation as sources (Not my actual Textbook and Lectures as I don't own a scanner and I don't have the lectures on tape) But you get the idea. I am certainly not going spend my evening defending myself against some jerk (Not questioning your Intellect) that has nothing better to do than make a huge stink over a few errors in a forum post. Get a life dude! If you always talk to people like that (Which you do on here) I can see why someone with your stature is spending time in the "I have absolutely nothing better to do" Place of the forum. Which is why I am here by the way I am not going to defend myself on my sources to follow as like I said, I have already wasted enough of my time responding to this douche bag and I am not going to further prove myself.
It would be nice of you to correct my "False Information" to save "the layman" from being misinformed. It sure concerned you enough that I wasn't 100% accurate in my statements to write that unnecessary bit, It should concern you enough to take the time and inform us how 100% different everything I said was.
I can see that I obviously made you feel threatened somehow so here is your chance buddy, take the spotlight and grow the heck up!
Edit: I see that the statement of the polar shift expected to conclude in the next few hundred years was not 100% accurate. In reading some material I have lying around my computed desk, that was a very low ball suggestion of countless predictions of how long it will take. Solar maximum From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search For the spacecraft, see Solar Maximum Mission
Solar maximum or solar max is the period of greatest solar activity in the solar cycle of the sun. During solar maximum, sunspots appear[1].
Solar maximum is contrasted with solar minimum. Solar maximum is the period when the sun's magnetic field lines are the most distorted due to the magnetic field on the solar equator rotating at a slightly faster pace than at the solar poles. The sun takes about 11 years to go from one solar maximum to another and 22 years to complete a full cycle. [edit] Historic maxima
The last solar maximum was in 2001, and the next one has been predicted by NASA for 2012[2]. [edit] Film
There is an IMAX documentary about solar maximum called Solarmax. [edit] See also
The Earth's magnetic field may flip towards the end of the next millennium according to Danish geophysicists, exposing the Earth to harmful cosmic radiation in the process. In the past century, the magnetic north pole has moved over 1000 km towards the geographical north pole, and over the past decade the strength of the magnetic field has fallen by 1%. New measurements made in Greenland by the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) show that the magnetic north pole is moving northwards at 20 km a year - 2 km a year faster than 12 months ago.
"This is certainly the quickest movement since we started measurements in Greenland in 1928, " says Torsten Neubert, who heads DMI's Solar-Terrestrial Physics Department. Neubert thinks that this acceleration points to a switching of the magnetic poles, perhaps within the next thousand years, something that could have dire consequences. "In the period up to a reversal, the Earth's magnetic field would lose its strength and would no longer be able to protect the Earth from radiation coming from space - we could be exposed to violent cosmic radiation, " says Neubert. Such radiation would affect navigation as well as the production of semiconductors.
However, not all geophysicists are convinced. "I wouldn't say that the northward movement of the magnetic pole is a sign that the field is about to reverse, " says a sceptical Jeremy Bloxham, an Earth and planetary scientist at Harvard University in the US. He thinks that the pole would have to be travelling towards the equator in order to flip. Neubert admits that the case for a switch in the magnetic field is unproven and says that the field is a chaotic system and therefore difficult to predict.
The new Danish Ørsted satellite may make prediction a little easier by looking at the whole of the Earth's magnetic field, rather than just the poles. Due to be launched in the coming weeks, it should give researchers more accurate data on the orientation and strength of the field. Bloxham, however, believes that more accurate data will not point to a reversal. "I think the chances are that it will not happen, " he says. "It's a highly erratic process - there have been intervals of tens of millions of years without reversals." But Neubert is looking forward to a reversal. "It would be an exciting time, " he says.
NASA's confirmed 2012 prediction - Deterioration of Earth's Magnetosphere during Sun's Polar shift in 2012 : Scientists have now accepted that the intersection of 2 problems - the deterioration of Earth's Magnetosphere during the Sun's Polar shift in 2012 (as recently discussed) will be the real concern as we approach 2012 :
Now here's the reason why: Scientists have found two large leaks in Earth's magnetosphere, the region around our planet that shields us from severe solar storms. Now in 2012 the suns poles will reverse (not the earths as wrongly said on many 2012 sites - see below!) , during this time a massive solar storm will reck havoc on earth - usually this is no problem - but now due to the 'cracks' in it, Earth's protective Magnetosphere may fail us, so the violent solar and electromagnetic radiation will make it through and cause many problems to life as we know it (eg: disabling communication satellites, mobile phones, effective sleep patterns, & radiation poisoning of humans) Also as earth has to absorb extra radiation & energy this will cause possible changes within the earth's core - with energy being re-dissipated from the earth with new volcanoes formed and crust movement.
You do not want that.
