It is important to understand magnetism. Here is a letter I received.
Aaron
“The Magnetic Nature
of the Solar System” 14/9/14
Hi Aaron,
During the September school holidays
last year I spent a lot of time on the internet researching
Einstein's theory of General Relativity in particular his ideas about
space-time.
As I have become more interested I've
researched more and more. I came across the following Youtube clip
which explains an unusual magnetic phenomena.
When I saw this clip I became aware of
a possible mechanism which may explain why the moon orbits the earth.
Using this mechanism I have built up a
model for the Earth and the Sun based on my observations regarding
the magnets. I have developed the following hypotheses from these
observations.
The reason the moon orbits the Earth is
not due to a gravitational attraction between the two and no it's not
due to a curvature in space-time.
Hypothesis 1: The moon orbits the
Earth due to a magnetic attraction.
This magnetic attraction is
demonstrated in the Youtube clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyvfDzRLsiU
( 3 mins )
( or Google search: Amazing discovery
with magnets Youtube )
I believe the Earth is acting like an
inverter magnet. The movement of molten rock/iron/nickel inside the
Earth and its solid iron core act like the large central magnet.
Fig 1 A typical representation of
the Earth’s magnetic field.
In Fig 1 The centre of the Earth is
presented as acting like a bar magnet. No allowance has been given to
the magnetic material (magnetite) in the Earth’s crust or ocean
floors.
I believe the magnetic field lines of
the sun and planets should produce a shape very similar to concentric
circles or ellipses.
These magnetic field lines produce the
pushing force which we call ‘gravity’.
On Earth ‘gravity’ I believe is
created by the Earth’s magnetic field pushing on our atmosphere.
Objects accelerate towards the surface
of the earth due to this ‘pushing force’ produced by the Earth’s
magnetic field on the atmosphere.
HYPOTHESIS 2: I would also
suggest that the strength of the Earth’s magnetic field steadily
increases to a maximum level corresponding to the moon’s orbit
around the Earth then decreases in strength as the distance from the
moon increases.
Near the surface of the Earth the
Earth’s magnetic field is relatively weak due to its interaction
with the air of Earth’s atmosphere.
I predict the Earth’s magnetic field
increases significantly outside the Earth’s atmosphere.
As the Earth rotates on its axis it
produces a rotating magnetic field.
HYPOTHESIS 3: The Earth’s magnetic
field ( magnetosphere ) and the moon’s magnetosphere couple as
explained in the Youtube clip.
From my research I realize the moon
does not (anymore) have a global magnetic field but does have a
magnetosphere on its far side.
The moon has essentially ‘clipped’
onto the Earth’s magnetic field.
The reason why on Earth we only see one
side of the moon is not because it rotates on its axis in synchrony
with the Earth’s rotation on its axis.
We only see one side of the moon due to
this coupling effect as shown in the Youtube clip.
Similarly this explains why all the
other Planets have moons which also show only one face to their
respective planet.
Tidal locking or synchronous rotation
is an erroneous explanation of this observable phenomena.
Deposits of iron oxide (magnetite)
under the Earth's surface (continents) and on the world’s seafloors
( due to seafloor spreading from mid-ocean ridges) are acting like
the small satellite magnets in the clip.
Fig 2: Location of large deposits
of iron oxide on the continents of Earth.
I read on the NASA website that the
Earth's magnetic field has been weakening since 1850.
The
strength of Earth's magnetic field varies as well; it has been
decreasing slightly ever since around 1850. ( NASA Internet Article )
I have also read that the moon is
actually moving away from Earth at a rate of
3.8 cm per year over the past 40 years.
I wonder if that is due to mining of
iron ore over the last 164 years which is causing the Earth’s
magnetic field to decrease in strength ?
HYPOTHESIS 4: Also suggests
that the sun acts like a gigantic inverter magnet as well, which the
planets are magnetically attracted to. The sun’s sun spots are
acting like the satellite magnets in the clip.
Fig 3 Sunspot in photosphere
Fig 4 The suns internal magnet-
inner magnet satellite magnets in
clip. in clip.
Maunder’s
Butterfly Diagram
One
noteworthy observation is the absence of sunspots
above 40 degrees in either hemisphere. However, the most important
piece of information is that at a beginning of a cycle the sunspots
are mostly in the 20 to 40 degree ranges in both hemispheres. As the
cycle comes to an end the sunspots
mainly occur close to the sun's equator. This means that over time
there is a plasma flow going on beneath the sun's surface from the
outer portions of both hemispheres towards the equator. This is a
very important point in understanding the flow and magnetic activity
of the Convective Zone.
All solar events are strongly influenced by the solar magnetic cycle,
since the magnetic cycle serves as the "energy
engine" for all solar
activities. The sun's dynamic magnetic field defines the
Photosphere's
features, the Chromosphere,
the Corona,
Solar Prominences and CMEs,
the Solar Wind
and eventually the shape of the Heliosphere.
It is noteworthy that the sun's magnetic field and cycle effects our
whole solar system.
( Reference:
http://www.solarsystemcentral.com/sunspot_cycles_page.html
)
Inclination of the Planets to the
Sun’s equator
Name
|
||
Mercury |
3.38°
|
|
Venus |
3.86°
|
|
Earth |
7.155°
|
|
Mars |
5.65°
|
|
Jupiter |
6.09°
|
|
Saturn |
5.51°
|
|
Uranus |
6.48°
|
|
Neptune |
6.43°
|
There
seems to be a relationship between the location of sunspots and the
inclination of the planets to the sun’s equator.
Planet
Densities
The
planets are ordered by density. It helps show that mass is not the
interaction that is involved in planetary motion.
Mercury
5.427 g/cm3
Venus
5.204 g/cm3
Earth
5.515 g/cm3
Mars
3.934 g/cm3
Jupiter
1.326 g/cm3
Saturn
0.687 g/cm3
Uranus
1.27 g/cm3
Neptune
1.638 g/cm3
Pluto
(dwarf) 2.03 +0.006
g/cm3
The
densities of the planets show order. There are 3 main categories of
the order.
Solids
Gas Ice
(
Reference Aaron Guerami: Aaron’s Reality blog)
I believe that the planets, all the
moons of the solar system and the materials of the rings of Saturn
all orbit their associated planet/sun due to two factors
1. inverter magnet effect 2. rotating
magnetic fields
These masses are all following the
rotating magnetic field lines produced.
Venus has no moons as it does not
generate a large magnetic field of its own, thus has been unable to
capture any matter.
Venus still follows a magnetic field
line produced by the sun.
HYPOTHESIS 5: I believe our solar
system operates on a magnetic basis or alternatively an
electro-magnetic basis.
The sun’s rotation on its axis
generates a rotating magnetic field (Parker Spiral) that results in
planetary motion around the sun.
My hypotheses do not require the
existence of a ‘cosmological constant’ as suggested by Einstein
to counteract the effects of gravity.
HYPOTHESIS 6: The Precession of
Perihelion of Mercury
is caused by random variations in
sunspot activity over the century.
After doing some research I have
discovered that Einstein knew that the orbit of Mercury varied by 43
arc seconds per century so he fudged his equation to take this into
account with his value of pi. I think they call this ‘cheating’
at school.
Fig 5 Mercury’s
Precession of Perihelion
In essence my hypotheses do not
require the force of gravity.
Gravity I believe is a fictitious
force which has for centuries dominated our collective psyches to
allay humanities unconscious fears of the unexplainable effects of
magnetism and its associated occult links.
The phenomena known as Gravitational
lensing should be actually termed Magnetic lensing.
Gravitational red-shift should be
termed Magnetic red-shift.
Einstein’s space-time fabric may
actually be the magnetic field produced by the sun that permeates
like an ‘ether’ throughout our solar system.
I predict that the planets bend the
magnetic field emanating from the sun and consequently couple their
magnetic fields with the sun’s magnetic field.
I predict that the internal
structure (composition) of the planets and stars
(suns) are responsible for the
magnetic or alternatively electro-magnetic force of attraction
between these heavenly bodies.
My ideas I believe would be consistent
with the Quantum Mechanical Model.
I would also suggest that in our
universe there exists only 3 dimensions.
Einstein would not have known that our
moon has a magnetic nature as he died in 1955. When moon rocks were
bought back by the Apollo 11 mission in 1969 and analyzed, it is my
understanding that scientists were shocked to find out they all were
magnetic.
F.D.
5 comments:
I don't even know where to begin. Things like this...
"After doing some research I have discovered that Einstein knew that the orbit of Mercury varied by 43 arc seconds per century so he fudged his equation to take this into account with his value of pi."
No... just no. It's a century old peer reviewed result derived from GR axioms. It's not "fudged". To think so disrespects the entire scientific community. How little faith do you have in humanity that you would assume we're all so stupid as to fall for some stage-show hand waving?
I appreciate your interest in science, and there's certainly value in questioning the status quo, but from what I've seen on this blog, you could stand to educate yourself on more rigorous methods of mathematics, logic, and proof; and on a deeper understanding of existing theory before trying to rewrite it.
Also, it's a sad state of affairs when people like Fenton are teaching our children science.
Dear anon. Thanks for reading my blog.
I find it sad that you won't evaluate issues that Have been discussed on this site. The concept that the relationship between the Earth and the moon as an inverter magnet has been discussed on this blog several times. The moon always faces the Earth. That means it is travelling through space like a lawn dart. Both density and magnetism keep the moon in motion. The moon does not rotate. That shows that density holds the direction of motion of the moon and magnetism keeps the distance in check.
Also there are two types of craters on the moon. Large circular craters that are the came color inside the crater as on the ridges these are only found closer to the poles. Then small elliptical craters showing reflective ejecta in the opposite direction of the impact. The small reflective ejecta impacts are obviously from objects. The large circular polar craters are electrical impacts from the sun.
Mr. Deeton is correct on this topic.
The main problem with GR is that it lacks respect for Electricity and Magnetism. It fails the Standard Model. If your model ends in time travel or 2 dimensional mega structures, Multiple-dimensions, or does not take into consideration electricity, magnetism, density, or spectral information. Then your model has serious flaws.
Should I have the right to discuss these issues. I have the responsibility to discuss these issues. You have the right to not read them. I don't care if you read them. I am already describe as a Dissident Scientist
http://editionsassailly.com/liste_diss_alpha/climont%20full%20list%20G%20htm.htm
That is the best accolades I have ever had. By the way it says my critics will be SR and GR people.
Thanks for your time, but if you wish to discuss any other issues you have with this model please feel free to comment on any posting. I will get you comment and respond.
Aaron Guerami
I apologize for misspelling Mr. Doolan's name.
As a matter of fact most of Mr. Doolan's Hypothesis points are already discussed in this blog. He just put into an elegant and easy to understand letter. This model goes into finer detail of the W+/- Boson (magnetism) properties and interactions.
This model extensively describes the effect that Mr. Doolan states as Magnetic Red-shift. This is actually well defined as the Zeeman Effect. It is red shift. A magnetic field will stop the rotation of a photon and split it into three strands of information.
to be clear Mr. Doolan Did not suggest any part of the crater issue. So if you wish to take issue with that. It is all mine, baby. And again Most of the points discussed in the letter are well discussed and in some cases proven by logic, the work of previous and current physicist, Mathematics, and/or physical observation.
Aaron
"The main problem with GR is that it lacks respect for Electricity and Magnetism."
Einstein specifically took into account electromagnetism before he published ANY results. One of his 1905 papers was specifically "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies". Both SR and GR explicitly address Maxwell's equations, as he had to get this right before he could credibly publish anything.
Mainstream science is NOT perfect, but the vast majority of it far more self-consistent than you give it credit for.
I'm in support of what you're doing, but I just wish your community would take the time to attain a rigorous education on the topics at hand before trying to reinvent them, and then apply proper reason and research.
I've read the majority of your blog. You're making the same mistake every interested student makes, firmly rooted in our basic creative need. You want to build. Solve. Invent. Question. We all do. Every student given a bit of knowledge thinks they can explain the universe. "Aha! NOW I get it!" It's partly pride, wanting to best their peers and feel like they've got the world figured out. But typically, they keep going... continuing to balance this endless questioning with learning, and maturing past their arrogance in the process. Their questioning becomes less about their own superiority and more objectively about truth. And eventually, they further our knowledge.
You are not objective. You seek knowledge not to explain, but specifically to reinforces your own ends, or provide more material to rip apart and rebuild in your image and promote your significance. You refuse to embrace the reasoned pursuit of truth. You are the immature, proud, arrogate student, frozen in time.
Wow,
It is true, I want to Solve, Question and Invent. I hope that every student or professor has that ambition.
To say that I have not had the proper education to make these statements is not a foundation for a discussion of a topic. Its a dismissal.
I don't care if we the pond scum on this planet understand this. There are 7 billion people on this planet and we probably wont survive the century. So what do I care. I am a disabled epileptic with Parkinson. I dont care anymore.
SR and GR cannot and do nor work in the domain of Quantum Electrodynamics or the Standard Model. SR and GR cannot explain spectra.
So find a problem with my work and its definitions, principles and interactions and then we will talk. I have not heard you try to disprove my theories, you just want to polish an old idea.
Lets just pretend that the universe has 3 dimensions + time, lets call this dark energy. Within this structure all matter baryonic and dark resides.
The problem is that all recent observations at supercoliders point to a system that works like the Standard Model. The problem with the Standard Model is that it does not make sense because it is too new. With that you are willing to say old theory is better than observation and new thinking. Or maybe new thinking is just not allowed. The fear of loosing something.
To say that I am not objective or that I seek knowledge not to explain but to reinforce my own yada yada. This is a personal attack. Personal attacks are not relevant to any discussion. So if you can find any relevant issues with this model I will be willing to discuss them.
Aaron Guerami
Post a Comment