My OperaMathematical Physics; Derivations-Applications to Geomagnetic Field Decay; Geo-Core Heat Increase; Integrated Field System (IFS)
Friday, August 13, 2010 5:11:16 PM
BSM Reearch Associates (BSMRA) investigates space physics processes relating to the Sun, Earth, and geomagnetic field (GMF); particularly as these integrated processes are associated with solar and planetary orbital deceleration physics and GMF decay. Lenz Law effects as it relates to electromagnetic induced body (geo-core) forces and planetary angular velocity deceleration. [Please select ARCHIVES (above left) for complete BSM Research sites].
[BSM Research Associates On Antelecom: Mathematical Physics Applied To Geomagnetic Field Decay and Geo-Core Physics]
[Clifford A. Paiva Resume]
[Graphs and processed images generated from BSM Research Associates, unless otherwise indicated.]
Planetary Physics and Reality Checks (Second Law of Thermodynamics):It is impossible to operate a cycle in which the only net effect is an absorption of heat from a body (held at constant temperature) and the production of an equivalent amount of work. [BSMRA Definition: Spontaneous increases in configuration and information potential within closed systems is not possible, unless ordered (precisely programmed) energy is put into the system.
Mystery of Life's Origin (Charles B. Thaxton, Roger L. Olsen and Walter L. Bradley) Chapter 7 (Thermodynamics of Living Systems); Chapter 8 (Thermodynamics and the Origin of Life); Chapter 9 (Thermodynamic Work Specification by Polyneucleotides [DNA] and Polypeptides [Proteins][/ALIGN]
[BSMRA Note: Vortexes are exceedingly high entropy flows; as are thermal mass movement of mixed gases (air). Although Thaxton, Olsen and Bradley are correct in most of their discussion of thermal, configuration and information entropy requirements for biochemical systems, they are decidedly wrong by correlating "order" to entropic processes. The former has to do with human perceptions (snowflakes-low potential energy, ice crystals-low potential, vortexes-low potential, etc.); the latter being associated with high potential-to-kinetic energy transformation processes (i.e. vortex) with significant heat generation. Water vortexes down a drain, like hurricanes, tornadoes and spiral galaxy centers, are the very last examples one should select to demonstrate low entropy system.]
That this planet is tending toward and energy equilibrium (dying) may seem strange to some, however please check the information on this page carefully; as it is based on planetary and electromagnetic physical ongoing processes, not hopeful models and theories. For example, danger to Earth's biosphere as it is increasingly exposed to interplanetary, interstellar and intergalactic high energy charged particles (protons and electrons), is increasing. Increased tidal heating through planetary angular velocity decrease; and geo-core thermal efflux as a function of gravitational tidal friction, and electrically induced current's joule heating; all of these processes tend to increase as functions of time. Further, these processes (orbital pertubations and rotational variances) apply to all solar system planets, satellites and asteroids; not just the Earth. All undergo similar degradative spontaneous physical energy transformations.
New values for the Geo-Core conductivity and current decreases, and resistance increases are calculated from latest International Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) space and Earth-based sensor's data. As the conductivity and current density within the Earth's Geo-Core decreases, so does the induced magnetic field intensity (geomagnetic field) commensurately decrease.
[/align]BSM Research bases its geo-electromagnetic physics on Curl E and Curl H for moving (rotating) spherical conductors. or wxrxHmugeocore; here w=omega and wxr = va (angular velocity)for rotating Earth. The core's electrical current, generated by the Earth's core rotating through the Sun's interplanetary magnetic field, is dying since the planet's angular velocity is decreasing. Also dying is the induced magnetic field (primary signal field) of the Earth. If theSolar equatorial rotational decelerationcontinues, the geomagnetic field energy will have been converted into internal induced currents and heat within approximately 5544 years.Introduction: All calculations at BSM Research utilizes the Earth's conducting Geo-Core rotation through the ambient Solar interplanetary magnetic field. Put another way the Geo-Core is a rotating magnet; such rotation resulting in induced currents within the core of the Earth. The induced current densities determine the geomagnetic internal and external dipole symmetry and field intensity. As the Sun's equatorial rotation DECREASES, the induced Geo-Core electrical current density decreases; and the geomagnetic field strength likewise decreases. Also as the Sun slows in its equatorial rotation, conservation of angular momentum requires the Earth to slow in ITS rotation. As a result the Earth's core increases in temperature through internal tidal friction; the heat of which, along with induced joule heating from the collapsing geomagnetic field (GMF) generates additional induced electrical current. The generated thermal flux transports through the mantle (aesthenosphere), crust (lithosphere), oceans (hydrosphere) and atmosphere. Result: GLOBAL HEATING. This process presumably is ongoing for all planets in this Solar System.
[/ALIGN]
Frame Summary (from top):
Frame 1: Introduction frame of this section showing James Clerk-Maxwell, first to apply unifying mathematical physics framework to Micheal Faraday's fifty years of research at the Royal Institution of Great Britain. (See Clerk-Maxwell's On Physical Lines of Force-1861; incidentally Lorentz did not re-discover this relationship until 1892, 31 years later.)
Frame 2 :[/B] Clerk-Maxwell introduced in 1861 the mathematical physical relationship between charged particle velocity across an ambient geomagnetic field, resulting in an opposing force vector. In an extended form, the initial changing geomagnetic field will induce a geo-current with its own associated induced geomagnetic field. Specifically this latter field will work against the initial field in polarity tending to resist further change: or Fdeflection = qvxB; the equation in Clerk-Maxwell's 1861 paper: On Physical Lines of Force. This is termed Lenz's Law, which is manifestation of the Law of Conservation of Energy (First Law of Thermodynamics). Electrical current energy from the geomagnetic field collapse is converted into body force (geo-core) rotation decrease and thermal release in the core. The geo-core possesses these circulation ("eddy") currents whose associated induced magnetic fields oppose the Earth's geomagnetic field collapse, and results in a body force tending to slow the Earth geo-core rotation through Curl B = partial change [/B]D/dt[/URL].
BSMRA.org Related Site: Geomagnetic Field/Geo-Core Mathematical Formulations[/URL]22nd Related Site: Geomagnetic Field Primary Section
Geomagnetic and Geo-Core Mathematical Diffusion Analysis Originating From Clerk-Maxwell Field Equations; Sir Horace Lamb's Diffusion Equation; William Tussig Scott and the Maximum Age of the Geomagnetic Field (10,000 years); Geomagnetic Field (GMF) Complex Diffusion Equation; Geo-Core Geomagnetic Field and Geo-Core Power Diffusion Half-Life; GMF/Geo-Core Induced Electrical Currents, Associated Induced Magnetic Fields and Lenz's Law Applied to Geo-Core Angular Velocity Decrease; Unwarranted Assumptions of So-Called "paleo"magnetism, in Association with Potassium-Argon Attempted Dating; New Values of Geo-Core Conductivity and Current Decrease: 2.01(10)4 mho (siemen) m-1
This section utilizes the field equations generated by James Clerk-Maxwell in 1861 for the first time, and which revolutionized scientific understanding of electromagnetic phenomena( On Physical Lines of Force; The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science; March 1861[/B].
Particular note is addressed to Equation 77 which is commonly attributed to Oliver Heaviside (derived in 1881)and Hendrik Lorentz(derived 1892).
As noted the 1861 Clerk-Maxwell formulation of Equation 77 and applied to charged particle force deflection = qvxB, and where B is the geomagnetic field's induction intensity and v is the charged particle velocity; was in fact derived 31 years earlier by Clerk-Maxwell.
The mathematical formulations and derivations may also be viewed on the BSMRA.org site. Dr. Thomas Barnes (Emeritus of at University of Texas at El Paso, Physics Dept.) addressed, in his Origin and Destiny of the Earth's Magnetic Field, geomagnetic field (GMF) diffusion, core internal energy and thermal power generation.
The study continues here (BSM Research) which includes an electrically conducting silicon-nickel-iron core whose conductivity is a function of temperature; rotating through a cumulative magnetic field system consisting of: (1.) induced magnetic fields generated by a primary dipole changing (decaying) field. This results in geo-core electrical currents (Faraday's Law) and joule heat diffusion, associated magnetic fields; (2.) Lenz's Law-driven geo-core angular velocity decreases via torque effects; and (3.) the interplanetary field intensity of the Sun (also decreasing as the as the equatorial angular velocity of the Sun decreases). [Geo-Core separation into "solid inner" and "fluid outer (Elsasser)" cores merely to fulfill requirements of a dynamo magneto-hydrodynamic fluid chamber (inner) and an amperian current surface boundary (outer), is dispensed with at BSM Research.] The outer surface of the rotating conductive cure provides for the induced electrical currents which generate the Earth's geomagnetic field. As the Geo-Core reduces in angular velocity due to Lenz torque law effects and conservation of angular momentum (Sun equatorial angular velocity decrease), and increases in joule heat, the core temperature increase is proportional to the geomagnetic field decrease.
The inner-outer core concept had been initially introduced for evolution-required, long age purposes; hence the never-ending need of course for a magneto hydrodynamic dynamo. Again: Emphasis at BSM Research is on a dynamically rotating, temperature increasing (geomagnetic field decreasing), conducting core (with NON-EDDY surface currents)rotating through the cumulative geomagnetic field and the solar magnetic field. Although the Cowling Theorem precludes the possibility of poloidal and toroidal fields for magnetohydrodynamic dynamos, to say nothing of eddy currents, the case for a spherically conducting core rotating through a cumulative ambient magnetic field system still requires much more analysis;
including the effects of Currie temperature variance as a function of Geo-Core pressure: dTcurrie/dPcore pressure.
Ongoing Mathematical Derivation and Applications for Geo-Core and Geomagnetic Field Decay; the current International Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF)half-life value being 677.57 years(using observed geomagnetic field IGRF 2011 value of 48238.6 nT).. Several of the basic formulations from the original Clerk-Maxwell dynamic field equations are first presented and derived into governing forms. These include dynamic equivalence of electric and magnetic fields (Equation 77 in On Lines of Physical Force(1861 paper); Poynting energy density; electromagnetic propagation; electromagnetic stress and diffusion; and the magnetic vector potential derivation.[/COLOR][/COLOR]
Geomagnetic Field Decay and Geo-Core Electromagnetic Energy Diffusion:
a. Sir Horace Lamb extended the Philosophical Transactions, (London) 174, pp. 519-549[/B].]spherical harmonics solution of the earth's geomagnetic field, predicting a diffusion time of approximately 10,000 years.
b. The Earth's field is predominantly axis-symmetric; perturbations being generated by the asymmetric flow characteristics of the solar wind plasma field. Thomas George Cowling, a mathematician who collaborated with Chapman, investigated the feasibility of Larmor's idea. In 1934 he showed on physical grounds that an axis-symmetric field could not be produced by a hydromagnetic dynamo. This was the first of a number of "anti-dynamo" theorems. Summaries can be found in the literature (Jacobs, The Earth's Core, pp 129-130), (Jacobs, Geomagnetism, Vol II p 206). The restriction to axis-symmetric fields in Cowling's theorem was not appreciated and, for many years, it correctly inhibited the development of the idea of a dynamo, which is required for a billion year old Earth.
Plots (to be posted) include the new conductivity values for the Geo-Core 2.01(10)4 mho/m (Frame 13)derived from the International Geomagetic Reference Field (IGRF). The projected curves are based on the values of T1/e diffusion, which is the time required for the geomagnetic field to decay 1/eth of its initial 1900 IGRF value (53984 nT). The Geo-Core conductivity continues to decrease (using new IGRF 2010 value: 48238.6 nT) as the resistance and thermal release (joule heat) increase. As stated the decreasing half-life (time required for the geomagnetic field to decrease by 50%) is based on the IGRF 2011 model, and is calculated by BSM Research currently to be approximately 677 years. Process: The primary (signal) geomagnetic field energy is converted into geo-core electrical currents + associated induced magnetic nodal fields + release of joule heat. The induced electromagnetic fields function in accordance with Lenz's Law which results in induced magnetic fields (from the collapsing primary signal field) working against the primary decaying dipole field. This results in a body force torque effecting a deceleration of the geo-core. Also the angular velocity decrease generates tidal friction (more heat)between the geo-core, aesthenosphere and lithosphere.
c. One of the most important results in slow, kinematic dynamo theory is credited to Thomas Cowling (T.G. Cowling, Mon. Not. Roy. Astr. Soc. 94, 39 (1934); T.G. Cowling, Quart. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 10, 129 (1957). The Thomas Cowling anti-geodynamic dynamo theorem states that (All Elsasser-oriented models ignoring geomagnetic field symmetry notwsithstanding):
An axisymmetric magnetic field cannot be maintained via geomagnetic dynamo .
d. It should be realized that Thomas Cowling's theorem is the earliest and most significant of a number of anti-dynamo theorems which severely restrict the types of magnetic fields which can be maintained via dynamo action. The suite of anti-dynamo theorems can be summed up by saying that, unlike the Earth's geomagnetic field (very high symmetry)[/I]successful dynamos possess a very low degree of symmetry.
Thomas Cowling's Anti-Dynamo Mathematical Proof
Dr. Thomas Barnes: Origin and Destiny of the Earth's Magnetic Field Mathematical Section I
DR. Thomas Barnes: Origin and Destiny of the Earth's Magnetic Field Mathematical Section II
Reference Papers: James Clerk-MaxwellOn Physical Lines of Force (1861); A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field (1864)Introduction of the Field Equations:[/ALIGN] A; B; C; D; E; F
{Page Errata: Frame 13 from top should assign to the ordinate 1(10)4 for all conductivity values in mho/m (siemens)}.
Physical Problems of Relativity: Essentially the primary problem regarding relativity is wave propagation without the existence of a transmission medium. In relativity such propagation does not analytically account for the unrecoverable (at any time) energy dissipation. Attribution of physical reality to algebraic and tensor manipulations, and to models generated by Hendrik Lorentz to account for an assumed interpretation of the Michelson-Morely experiments; namely that It reflects the unsubstantiated assertion that observers moving at different velocities may measure different distances, elapsed times, and even different orderings of events. This is not physical experimentation but rather theoretical assertions and speculation. Electromagnetic wave propagation is a function of the transmission medium's square root ratio, specifically as related to the medium's tension-to-density. This root ratio is further equivalent to the reciprocal square root product of the electric and magnetic inductive capacitances. One may be set equal to the other, and both set equal to an observed value roughly equal to 2.998(10)8 m/s. The Integrated Field System (IFS) possess tension such that a transverse electromagnetic disturbance will generate propagation velocity equal approximately to this 186,000 miles per second value. I really do not have too much time to waste on two major science "suck" zones; namely evolution and relativity; including their derivative models. If any one is interested in these models you may obtain some insight from technical papers which have already addressed the pertinent issues fired against special and general relativity:
The Non-Einsteinian Origin of E=mc2:
E=mc2 existed before Einstein’s derivation in Sep. 1905. Isaac Newton, S. Tolver Preston, Poincaré , De Pretto and F. Hasenöhrl are the philosophers and physicists who have given idea of E=mc2. Einstein derived existing E=mc2starting with result of relativistic variation of light energy, but finally obtained L =mc2 under applying classical conditions (v<<c). After Einstein, Max Plank also derived the same independently. Max Born has expressed surprise over non-inclusion of previous references by Einstein in the derivation of E=mc^2.
Before Einstein, among other physicists, Isaac Newton [1], English S. T. Preston [2] in 1875, French Poincaré [3,4] in 1900, Italian De Pretto [5] in 1903, German F. Hasenöhrl [6,7] made significant contributions in speculations and derivations of E=mc^2. After Einstein Planck [8] has also derived E=mc2 independently. J J Thomson in 1888 is also believed to have anticipated E=mc2from Maxwell’s equations.
Issac Newton (1704))
The Great Sir Isaac Newton [1] has quoted "Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another...", 1704). In 1704 Newton wrote the book “Optiks”. Newton also put forth Corpuscular Theory of Light
Tolver Preston (1875)
Tolver made predictions which are based essentially upon E=mc2. Preston in his book Physics of the Ether proposed in 1875 that vast amount of energy can be produced from matter. Preston determined that one grain could lift a 100,000-ton object up to a height of 1.9 miles. This deduction yields the essence of equation E=mc2.
Poincaré (1900)
Poincare forth an expression for what he called the "momentum of radiation" M_R. It is M_[/U]R = S/c2, where S represents the flux of radiation and c is the usual velocity of light. Poincaré applied the calculation in a recoil process and reached at the conclusion in the form mv = (E/c2)c. From the viewpoint of unit analysis, E/c^2 takes on the role of a "mass" number associated with radiation. It yields E=mc2.
Olinto De Pretto (1903, 1904)
Olinto De Pretto, Italian Industrialist.\, first suggested E=mc2, to be applied in a concrete way. Firstly this article was published on June 16, 1903. Second time on February 27, 1904 the same was published in the Atti of the Reale Instituto Veneto di Scienze. Thus De Pretto published E=mc2 about one and half years before publicaton by Albert Einstein (1905). Unfortunately in 1921 De Pretto was shot dead by a woman over a business dispute. When De Pretto was killed he was trying to publish the complete book of his scientific ideas, including E=mc2. Also, regrettably this paper was in Italian; hence it remained away from accessibility of wider scientific community. It should be noted however that Albert Einstein was fluent in Italian language.
F. Hasenöhrl (1904)[/U]
[/align]Hasennohrl gave first derived expression for mass-energy conversion. He investigated a system composed of a hollow enclosure filled with "heat" radiations and wanted to determine the effect of pressure due to radiations. His calculations lead him to conclude that "to the mechanical mass of our system must be added an apparent mass which is given by m = (8/3)E/c^2" where E is the energy of the radiation. Further in later paper he maintained that improve result for mass exchanged is m = (4/3)E/ c^2"
Ebenezer Cunningham (1914)
In 1914 in his book The Principles of Relativity showed that F. Hasenöhrl, has made a slight error in his calculations. F. Hasenöhrl, did not take characteristics of the shell properly. If errors are removed then m (mass exchanged) = E/c^2 or E = (mass exchanged) c2. This is the same result as quoted by Einstein. It implies that E=mc^2 is contained in F. Hasenöhrl’s, analysis. Moreover Hasenöhrl’s work was published in the same journal in which Einstein’s method to derive E=mc^2 was published one year later.
Albert Einstein (1905)[/B]
Professor Einstein derived L = mc2, and then speculated from here E=mc2, analogously without actual proof. Einstein derived already existing (by others already mentioned here) E=mc2, and strangely did not acknowledge his predecessors, i.e. de Pretto and Hasenöhrl. Both have suggested E=mc2 just one and half year before Einstein’s derivation. However two years after i.e. 1907 when Max Plank [8] derived E=mc2 independently, Planck acknowledged derivation of Einstein. Planck even pointed out the conceptual and mathematical limitations of Einstein’s method of derivation..
Although Einstein started to derive E=mc^2 using unvalidated relativistic variation of light (electromagnetic) energy derived final results under correct classical conditions. Einstein interpreted the results using Binomial Theorem which is applicable if v<<c. Einstein never considered that any relativistic increase in mass of a body. The equation of relativistic increase in mass was first justified by Kaufman [11] in 1900. Further Einstein speculated E=mc2 for all energies from E=mc2 without justifying that E=mc2 is applicable for acoustic, heat, chemical , and complete broad band pass electromagnetic wavelengths. If E=mc2 holds good for sound and heat energies, then E=mc2 will be analogously transformed as sound (acoustic) energy = E=mc2 or every type of energy = E=mc2.
Max Planck (1907)
In 1907, Planck [8] made an in-depth investigation of the energy "confined" within a body, but he did not use Einstein approach at all. Plank presented his findings in Planck derived an expression m-M= E/c2and interpreted that inertia mass of body is altered by absorption or emission of heat energy. The increments of mass of body are equal to heat energy divided by square of speed of light”...then in a footnote at page 566 Planck writes, "Einstein has already drawn essentially the same conclusions”. Planck maintained Einstein derivation as approximation.
(ix) Recent developments.In 1907 Planck [8] even pointed out the conceptual and mathematical limitations of Einstein’s derivation. In 1952, H E Ives [12] stressed that Einstein’s derivation of the formula E=mc^2 is fatally flawed because Einstein set out to prove what he assumed.
Sharma (2003)
In 2003 extended E=mc2 to E =Ac2m, where A is conversion co-efficient and can be equal, less or more than one, depending upon inherent characteristics of conversions process in nature. The value of A is consistent with concept of proportionality factor existing since centuries. Energy emitted in celestial events Gamma Ray Bursts (most energetic events after Big Bang) is 1045 Joule/s. It can be explained with value of A equal to 2.57x10^18. Similar is the case of Quasars. Like wise kinetic energy of the fission Fragments of U^235 or Pu^239 is found 20-60 MeV less than Q-value (200MeV), Bakhoum [14] The similar deviations in experimental results are also quoted by Hambsch [15], Thiereus [16] etc. It can be explained with value of A less than one. Till date E=mc^2 is not confirmed in chemical reaction due to technical reasons, but regarded as true.
Also a particle Ds (2317) discovered at SLAC [17] has been found to have mass lower than current estimates based upon E=mc2. Incidentally, there are proposals for both theoretical and experimental variations (increase or decrease) in value of c [18-19]; as fine structure constant is reported to be increasing over cosmological timescales, implying slowing down of speed of light, c. The proposals for variations of speed of light definitely affect status of E =mc2, indirectly.
2.0 Einstein and priority of E=mc2. Einstein did not mention Hasenöhrl’s work (who gave first derived expression for mass-energy equation) in any of his paper on this subject from 1900 - 1909. However Hasenöhrl has published in 1904 the paper in the same very journal in which Einstein later published his derivation of E=mc^2 in 1905. Einstein [20] applied his E=mc^2 derivation in 1906. In this paper he gave reference of Poincaré' s work [3, 4]. Einstein gave credit to Poincaré for mass energy equivalence at least for electromagnetic radiations.
But, even with Planck's complete derivation and this Poincaré acknowledgement, Einstein later refused to accept any other priority for this notion. Stark [21] stated that Planck gave first derivation of E=mc2, in fact Planck and Stark were convinced that Einstein derivation of E=mc2 is inconsistent.
Herbert Ives Delineates the Problems of Relativity and Incorrect Interpretation of Results of Michelson-Morley Experiment
Then Einstein wrote Stark on 17 Feb 1908, “I was rather disturbed that you do not acknowledge my priority with regard to the connection between inertial mass and energy.” Max Born [23], co-originator of Quantum Mechanics stated, "The striking point is that it contains not a single reference to previous literature”. Einstein [24] in 1907 spelled out his views on plagiarism: "It appears to me that it is the nature of the business that what follows has already been partly solved by other authors. Despite that fact, since the issues of concern are here addressed from a new point of view, I am entitled to leave out a thoroughly pedantic survey of the literature..."
G. Burniston Brown: Relativity Nonsense; or What Is Wrong With Relativity?[/URL] [/B][/COLOR]
Bulletin of the Institute of Physics and Physical Society, Vol. 18 (March, 1967) pp.71—77] Bulletin of the Institute of Physics and Physical Society, Vol. 18[/URL]
THE ARTICLE BY DR. BROWN OF THE ROYAL INSTITUTE OF PHILOSOPHY, CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL SOCIETY DELINEATING PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH ALBERT EINSTEIN AND HIS RELATIVITY MODEL: The fact that Einstein asserted that the Lorentz transformation equations were the basis of the special theory, and these are, of course, purely mathematical, means that, in so far asthe theory is considered to have any physical implications, these implications must be the result of the interpretation of mathematical expressions in physical terms. But in this process there can be no guarantee that contradictions will not arise, and, in fact, serious contradictions have have arisen which have marred the special theory. Half a century of argumentation has not removed them, and the device of calling them only apparent contradictions (paradoxes) has not succeeded in preventing the special theory of relativity from becoming untenable as a physical theory. [Remember in that in the physical (not purely mathematical modelling world) energy transformation processes are required to be functionable. Altering directions, velocities and accelerations will not recover lost usable energy. This especially applies to mechanical (and biological) devices. The Second Law of Thermodynamics will apply for all displacements and in fact entropy increases obviates the possiblity that all motion is simply a matter of perspective; or relativity. Energy dissipative processes resulting in disorder and heat generation, are in fact occuring through all physical transformaions, including displacements. As an example see the enclosed statics problem for relativitists...and perhaps their cousin evolutionists. The Second Law of Thermodynamics destroys any hope of pure relativity. Time's Arrow point only one way...equilibrium (death). No such thing as "relative death". Riddle: This thing all things devour; birds, beasts, trees and flowers. It gnaws iron and bites steel; it grinds hard stone to meal. It slays kings and ruins towns; it beats high mountains down. What is it? NO! It is NOT "time". It is the Second Law of Thermodyanmics which results in all spontaneous physical processes moving from high potential energy to lower potential energy; with increased kinetic energy, and the generation of heat. Entropy (disorder...including the twins in the Twin Paradox of Relativity) increases. All of this FEEDS ON TIME.]
The Michelson-Morley Experiment; Lorentz Contraction Incorrect Assumptions; Newtonian Experimental Physics Versus Relativity Physics ; Electromagnetic Wave Velocity a Function of Integrated Field System (IFS) Tension/Density Ratio; Grusenick Vertical Interferometer Experiment
BOTTOM LINE: Reason for the Academic and Pseudo-Scientific Push of Relativity and Evolution Foolishness:
Physical and real biochemical sciences are concerned with experimentally derived CAUSES: logic and mathematics are only tools to assess the experimental results. (BSMRA Note: James Clerk-Maxwell used his mathmatical physics knowledge and applied this to over 30 years of physics and chemical research previously implemented by Michael Faraday in the basement labs of the Royal Institution of Great Britian. This led of course to the Clerk-Maxwell Electromagnetic Field Equations; such equations being purely a function of experimental implementation). Objective analysis of experimental results keeps the human heart, with its preferences and biases, OUT of the the mathematical physics process.
Nevertheless, relativists and evolutionists currently assert that "The dignity of pure theoretical speculation has been rehabilitated...based on a process of the mind (not experimental work), WITH ITS OWN JUSTIFICATION". Relativity (and Mother Nature-evolution) has "saved science from narrow (rigorous) requirements of experimentalism. It has emphasized the part which beauty and simplicity must play in the formulation of theories of the physical world [Mercier 1955 and BSM Research Associates].
On Geomagnetic Field Timelines:
V
1. (In answer to Holocene Volcanism and Active Faults): Dr. Karakhanian is probably an evolutionist which explains the evolutionary bent in his timelines and usage of evolution terms...including Holocene. However after I removed from his PDF article all evolutionary timelines and associated terms (Holocene), the article retained merit.
Planetary Timeline Restrictions:
2. Data received from magnetometers and solar equatorial angular velocity reductions (affecting the solar system in terms of conservation of angular momentum), indicate the Earth is decreasingh in angular rotation velocity.
3. The slowing of the Earth’s rotation through the Sun’s interplanetary magnetic field, results in an decreaseinduced geomagnetic field protective barrier (against cosmic rays) intensity. Going back in time (6,000 – 10,000 years) the electrical currents in the Earth, generated from the Earth’s electrically conductive core spinning through the Sun’s magnetic field (Faraday System), and additional induced currents from the collapse of the geomagnetic field (GMF), cumulatively result in geo-core increased joule temperatures [ today at 10(10)3 degrees ]. This induced electrical heat is convectivley transmitted through the aesthenosphere (mantle), lithosphere (crust), hydrosphere (oceans) and atmosphere. Alsop note that it is these induced geo-core electrical currents which generate the Earth’s geo-magnetic field (GMF), and which protects this Earth from lethal solar and interstellar lethal charged particle radiation. The Earth’s geomagnetic field is disintegrating as the electrical geo-core producing it dies due to a reduction in angular velocity of the Earth. Actually a time-varying decrease is occuring which means effectively that the rate of decrease is increasing exponentially.
BOTTOM LINE: The Earth cannot be older than 6-10 thousand years old based on geophysical and planetary constraints; evolutionary words (i.e. holocene, paleocene, ogliocene, jurrasic, cretationary...on and on...) mean nothing in the real world. No such thing as a cambrian rock, since cambrian is based on evolutionary geologic column nomenclature.
6. Attempting to implement evolutionary pseudo-science models into real (experimental) science completely negates and positive scientific return. It also confuses meaningful interpretation of experimental data. (Remember the NAMI Amsterdam 49 (10)3 age stated for the wood...the age of which was presented by Wing-Cheong Young at that NAMI meeting? That evolutionist based his conclusion on using a non-clock (radiocarbon). Not only is the numerator of the C14/C12 ratio dependent on the Earth’s geomagnetic field intensity (C14 generation from N14 decreases as GMF intensity increases), but the denominator C12 increases near volcanic regions. The very last place to use this poorly devised clock is where efflux of C12 is increased and variable. The clock always gives disparate larger ages as the numerator decreases and the denominator increases. Yet this type of radiocarbon dating is insisted upon by NAMI so that things appear to be scientific.
You must be 
Clifford Anthony Paivamycpaiva # Monday, August 16, 2010 4:59:47 PM
Clifford Anthony Paivamycpaiva # Tuesday, August 17, 2010 7:49:36 PM
Clifford Anthony Paivamycpaiva # Wednesday, September 1, 2010 2:39:51 PM
Clifford Anthony Paivamycpaiva # Sunday, September 12, 2010 4:32:48 PM