2012 earth magnetic field reversal
Author: Virtus J Armani
The 2012 earth magnetic field reversal otherwise known as the pole shift phenomenon is important to take into consideration when theorizing about the events that may take place on December 21st 2012 because recent geological surveys conducted worldwide have recently discovered that this 2012 earth magnetic field reversal has indeed occurred in the past and will occur again in the future.
The most astonishing thing about this discovery was that as they analyzed the data they found they noticed that the magnetic fields of the rock samples seemed to progress in a normal fashion until one particular point where all of a sudden the readings became the exact opposite of the previous samples, the only way this could have happened is if there was a spontaneous pole shift that caused the very nature of the rocks to change.
What was equally interesting that these geologists discovered whilst researching the 2012 earth magnetic field reversal was that if they then surveyed the rocks after this particular point that had shown a spike In magnetic activity they found that the markings and residue left on the rocks showed indications of both high altitudes and water erosion, however in this particular point in Finland that would have been impossible today, the simple explanation was of course that at some time in our ancient past these rock samples had moved as a result of a pole shift.
However this finding in one location was not enough for the geologists to conclusively say there had been a pole shift in the past, if they were to be certain of this they would need to find data that complimented what they had found in a location with no direct contact to Finland at all, so they proceeded to continue their research of the 2012 earth magnetic field reversal in the outback of Australia.
This is when things began to get particularly interesting because what they found in the Australian outback was data that was not just a little bit similar to that of Finland, but precisely the same in every way, this amazing discovery proves that the pole shift phenomenon is indeed possible and has occurred in the past, but what does it mean for the 2012 earth magnetic field reversal.
Well fortunately for us, they discovered that although the pole shift had occurred, it did not occur in a spontaneous fashion all at once, but rather was a slow progression of the changing of the poles on earth over the course of hundreds of years, whilst this did change the geological nature of the planet itself and had dramatic influences on all its areas, the changes were not so fast as to cause apocalyptic damage, however with this in mind, it does not indicate that a 2012 earth magnetic field reversal could not be brought about by other such natural phenomenon such as meteorite impacts or even as a result of manmade scenarios.
Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/metaphysics-articles/2012-earth-magnetic-field-reversal-2778343.html
About the Author
When I was researching the 2012 earth magnetic field reversal I found a wealth of information in a fascinating book called Contact 2012 and I would strongly recommend that you all check it out right now, as it demystifies the subject and separates fact from fiction.
We all need to be serious when researching the 2012 topic because there is so much to learn about and if we do not keep focused we can end up missing vital pieces of information, if you're looking for an overview guide that covers every single topic in a precise and easy to read manner look to further than Contact 2012 educate yourself right now!
Is the core of Mercury comparatively larger than that of the Earth based upon magnetic field measurements?
Relative to the size of Mercury, the core is larger, than is the case for the Earth. The Earth’s high density results partly from gravitational compression in the core. But Mercury is much smaller, so to have such a high density, its core must be large and rich in iron.
But Mercury’s high mass and therefore high density were already known before Mariner 10 went there and took magnetic field measurements.
The internal field of the solenoid does not depend on the orientation of the solenoid. The magnetic field is determined by Ampere’s Law, which relates to the current in the solenoid. Changing the orientation of the solenoid changes the direction of the current, but the field follows it.
Is there an axis dependence in measuring the magnetic field inside a solenoid?
If my solenoid, say a Slinky, is positioned in a north-west or some other axis, will this affect my measurements of magnetic field strength? Considering all other variables are kept constant. And why?
Electric and magnetic fields do propagate at the speed of light.
The fundamental reason is that light is called electromagnetic radiation.
magic word is claim…all creationists can do is claim…never prove…
Why do creationists claim the Earth’s magnetic field is evidence the for a young earth?
The earth’s magnetic field is known to have varied in intensity (Gee et al. 2000) and reversed in polarity numerous times in the earth’s history. This is entirely consistent with conventional models (Glatzmaier and Roberts 1995) and geophysical evidence (Song and Richards 1996) of the earth’s interior. Measurements of magnetic field field direction and intensity show little or no change between 1590 and 1840; the variation in the magnetic field is relatively recent, probably indicating that the field’s polarity is reversing again (Gubbins et al. 2006).
Empirical measurement of the earth’s magnetic field does not show exponential decay. Yes, an exponential curve can be fit to historical measurements, but an exponential curve can be fit to any set of points. A straight line fits better.
T. G. Barnes (1973) relied on an obsolete model of the earth’s interior. He viewed it as a spherical conductor (the earth’s core) undergoing simple decay of an electrical current. However, the evidence supports Elsasser’s dynamo model, in which the magnetic field is caused by a dynamo, with most of the “current” caused by convection. Barnes cited Cowling to try to discredit Elsasser, but Cowling’s theorem is consistent with the dynamo earth.
Barnes measures only the dipole component of the total magnetic field, but the dipole field is not a measure of total field strength. The dipole field can vary as the total magnetic field strength remains unchanged.
Sources:
Thompson, Tim, 1997. On creation science and the alleged decay of the earth’s magnetic field. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/magfields.html
Barnes, Thomas G. 1973. Origin and destiny of Earth’s magnetic field, ICR Technical Monograph No. 4.
Gee, J. S. et al. 2000. Geomagnetic intensity variations over the past 780 kyr obtained from near-seafloor magnetic anomalies. Nature 408: 827-832.
Glatzmaier, G. A. and P. H. Roberts. 1995. A three-dimensional self-consistent computer simulation of a geomagnetic field reversal. Nature 377: 203-209.
Gubbins, David, Adrian L. Jones and Christopher C. Finlay. 2006. Fall in Earth’s magnetic field is erratic. Science 312: 900-902. See also: Kono, Masaru. 2006. Ships’ logs and archeomagnetism. Science 312: 865-866.
Song, X. and P. G. Richards. 1996. Seismological evidence for differential rotation of the earth’s inner core. Nature 382: 221-224.
Magnetic field propagation speed?
How fast do magnetic fields move at.
Example:
If a electromagnet is turned on and at some distance away there is a magnetic field measurement tool
then how long would it take to detect that the electromagnet was turned on?
obviously it can’t be faster then the speed of light or that would be breaking some law’s
so would it travel at the speed of light?
So then I was correct in thinking that the Magnetic measurement tool would detect the EM after so much time and it would not be instantaneous
Why do creationists claim the earth’s magnetic field is evidence for a young earth?
Posted a few minutes ago:
“the magnetic field of the earth is decreasing far too quickly”.
1. The earth’s magnetic field is known to have varied in intensity (Gee et al. 2000) and reversed in polarity numerous times in the earth’s history. This is entirely consistent with conventional models (Glatzmaier and Roberts 1995) and geophysical evidence (Song and Richards 1996) of the earth’s interior. Measurements of magnetic field field direction and intensity show little or no change between 1590 and 1840; the variation in the magnetic field is relatively recent, probably indicating that the field’s polarity is reversing again (Gubbins et al. 2006).
2. Empirical measurement of the earth’s magnetic field does not show exponential decay. Yes, an exponential curve can be fit to historical measurements, but an exponential curve can be fit to any set of points. A straight line fits better.
3. T. G. Barnes (1973) relied on an obsolete model of the earth’s interior. He viewed it as a spherical conductor (the earth’s core) undergoing simple decay of an electrical current. However, the evidence supports Elsasser’s dynamo model, in which the magnetic field is caused by a dynamo, with most of the “current” caused by convection. Barnes cited Cowling to try to discredit Elsasser, but Cowling’s theorem is consistent with the dynamo earth.
4. Barnes measures only the dipole component of the total magnetic field, but the dipole field is not a measure of total field strength. The dipole field can vary as the total magnetic field strength remains unchanged.
Sources:
Matson, Dave E., 1994. How good are those young-earth arguments? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea.html#proof11
Thompson, Tim, 1997. On creation science and the alleged decay of the earth’s magnetic field. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/magfields.html