Earth Archives

June 2, 2008December 24, 2015 by Ian O'Neill

How do you Model the Earth’s Magnetic Field? Build your own Baby Planet…

The model Earth, can a magnetic field be modelled in the lab? (Flora Lichtman, NPR)

The Earth’s magnetic field is quite a mystery. How is it generated? How does it remain so stable? We have known of the Earth’s magnetic field for hundreds of years and the humble compass has been telling us the direction of magnetic North Pole since the 12th Century. Animals use it for navigation and we have grown dependent on its existence for the same reason. What’s more, the magnetosphere gives us a powerful shield against the worst solar storm. Yet we still have little idea about the mechanisms generating this field deep in the core of the Earth. In the hope of gaining a special insight to the large-scale, planetary magnetic field, a geophysicist from the University of Maryland has built his very own baby Earth in his laboratory, and it will be spinning (liquid metal included) by the end of the year…

This story reminds me of a classic experiment carried out by Norwegian Kristian Birkeland at the turn of the 19th Century. In an attempt to understand the dynamic Aurora Borealis (Northern Lights), Birkeland experimentally proved that electrical currents could flow along magnetic field lines (a.k.a. Birkeland, or “field-aligned” currents, pictured left). This can be observed in nature as charged particles from the solar wind interact with the Earth’s magnetosphere and are then guided down to the Earth’s magnetic poles. As the particles flow into the upper polar atmosphere, they collide with atmospheric gases, generating a colourful light display called aurorae. However, this early experiment simulated a magnetic field; it did not model how the Earth generates it in the first place.

Now, in a laboratory in the University of Maryland, geophysicist Dan Lathrop is pursuing this mystery by building his very own scale version of the Earth (pictured top). The model is set up on apparatus that will spin the 10-foot diameter ball to an equatorial speed of 80 miles per hour. To simulate the Earth’s molten outer core, Lathrop will fill the sphere with molten metal. The whole thing will weigh in at 26 tonnes.

This is Lathrop’s third attempt at generating a scale model of the Earth’s magnetic field. The last two attempts were much smaller, so this large experiment had to be constructed by a company more used to engineering heavy-duty industrial equipment.

It is believed that the Earth’s molten outer core, starting 2,000 miles below the Earth’s crust, generates the global magnetic field. This “dynamo effect” is somehow created through the interaction of turbulent liquid iron flow (which is highly conductive) with the spin of the planet. In Lathrop’s model, he will be using another conductive liquid metal, sodium. Molten iron is too hot to maintain in this environment, sodium exists at a liquid phase at far lower temperatures (it has a melting point close to that of the boiling point of water, nearly 100°C), but there are some serious hazards associated with using sodium as an iron analog. It is highly flammable in air and is highly reactive with water, so precautions will have to be taken (for one, the sprinkler system has been disabled, water in the case of a sodium fuelled fire will only make things worse!). This whole experiment, although risky, is required as there is no direct way to measure the conditions in the outer core of the Earth.

“The conditions of the core are more hostile than the surface of the sun. It’s as hot as the surface of the sun but under extremely high pressures. So there’s no way to probe it, no imaginable technique to directly probe the core.” – Dan Lathrop

Spinning this heavy sphere should cause sustained turbulence in the flow of the liquid sodium and it is hoped a magnetic field can be generated. There are many puzzles this experiment hopes to solve, such as the mechanics behind magnetic polar shift. Throughout the Earth’s history there is evidence that the magnetic poles have switched polarity, prolonged spinning of the model may cause periodic magnetic pole reversal. Testing the conditions in the conductive liquid metal may shed some light on what influences this global pattern of polar shift.

This kind of experiment has been done before, but scientists have directed the flow of liquid metal through the use of pipes, but this model will allow the metal to naturally organize itself, creating its own turbulent flow. Whether or not this test generates a magnetic field it is unknown, but it should aid our understanding about how magnetism is generated inside the planets.

See the video at National Public Radio »

Source: National Public Radio

June 1, 2008December 24, 2015 by Ian O'Neill

Harvesting Solar Power from Space

Artist's concept of a space-based solar array. Credit NASA/SAIC

In a new report, the viability of sending solar panels into space to collect a vast quantity of uninterrupted energy has been re-investigated. Although the idea has been around since the 1970’s, space solar power has always been viewed as prohibitively expensive. In the current energy climate down here on Earth with spiralling oil prices and a massive push toward green energy sources, sending massive solar arrays into geosynchronous orbit doesn’t seem like such a strange (or expensive) idea. There are many obstacles in the way of this plan, but the international community is becoming more interested, and whoever is first to set up an orbital array will have a flexible and unlimited energy resource…

It sounds like the perfect plan: build a vast array of solar panels in space. This avoids many of the practical problems we have when building them on Earth such as land availability, poor light conditions and night time, but sending a sunlight farm into space will be expensive to set up. In the 1970’s a plan was drawn up by NASA for the possibility of orbital sunlight “harvesting”, but it was deemed too expensive with a hefty price tag of at least $1 trillion. There was no country in the world that could commit to such a plan. But as we slowly approach an era of cheaper space travel, this cost has been slashed, and the orbital solar energy case file has been re-opened. Surprisingly, it isn’t the most developed nations in the world that are pushing for this ultimate renewable energy source. India and China, with their ballooning populations are reaching a critical point for energy consumption and they are beginning to realise their energy crisis may be answered by pushing into space.

“A single kilometer-wide band of geosynchronous Earth orbit experiences enough solar flux in one year to nearly equal the amount of energy contained within all known recoverable conventional oil reserves on Earth today.” – Pentagon’s National Security Space Office 2007 report.

So how could this plan work? Construction will clearly be the biggest expense, but the nation who leads the way in solar power satellites will bolster their economy for decades through energy trading. The energy collected by highly efficient solar panels could be beamed down to Earth (although it is not clear from the source what technology will go into “beaming” energy to Earth) where it is fed into the national grid of the country maintaining the system. Ground based receivers would distribute gigawatts of energy from the uninterrupted orbital supply. This will have obvious implications for the future high demand for electricity in the huge nations in Asia and will wean the international community off carbon-rich non-renewable resources such as oil and coal. There is also the benefit of the flexible nature of this system being able to supply emergency energy to disaster (and war-) zones.

“It will take a great deal of effort, a great deal of thought and unfortunately a great deal of money, but it is certainly possible.” – Jeff Keuter, president of the George C. Marshall Institute, a Washington-based research organization.

The most optimistic time frame for a fully operational space-based sunlight collection satellite would be 2020, but that is if we started work now. Indeed some research is being done (Japan is investing millions of dollars into a potential prototype to be put into space in the near future), but this is a far cry from planning to get full-scale operations underway in a little over a decade…

Source: CNN International

May 27, 2008December 24, 2015 by Nancy Atkinson

Why the Phoenix Landing Site is Perfect

Permafrost on Mars (top) compared to Earth (bottom). Image credit: NASA Earth Observatory

Phoenix’s landing site may look flat and uninteresting. But actually, the site is perfect, and is exactly what the Phoenix science team was hoping for. You see, Phoenix is actually more interested in what is below the surface. From one of the first images sent back by Phoenix, a view of Mars’ surface at this site reveals a landscape familiar to polar scientists on Earth: a pattern of interlocking polygon shapes that form in permafrost that freezes and thaws seasonally. These polygon patterns were seen in orbital pictures taken by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, as well as other spacecraft, and these polygon shapes are part of the evidence that Marsâ€™ polar regions harbor large quantities of frozen water.

This pair of images above shows the similarities between the surface of Mars where Phoenix landed (top) and permafrost on northeastern Spitsbergen, Svalbard (bottom) an archipelago in the Arctic Ocean north of mainland Europe, about midway between Norway and the North Pole. The polygon patterns in the permafrost form when the upper parts of the ground thaw and refreeze from season to season. The ground contracts in the winter cold, creating small spaces that fill with melted water in the summer. When winter returns and the water freezes, it acts like a wedge, enlarging the cracks.

The Phoenix landing site with polygon shapes visible from orbit via MRO.

The only difference in these photos is the Earth image shows water on the surface, and on Mars, water couldn’t pool on the surface because the low atmospheric pressure would cause any water that might bubble to the surface to sublimate. But the thaw/freeze process could presumably occur beneath Mars’ surface with far less water.

And why is this so interesting? On Earth, permafrost, glaciers, and other frozen environments can preserve organic molecules, bacteria, and fungi for hundreds of thousands, even millions, of years. The Phoenix spacecraft has scientific instruments that will dig into the frozen ground of the Martian Arctic, vaporize the soil sample, and analyze the chemistry of the vapors. Scientists hope to learn whether ice just below the surface ever thaws and whether some chemical ingredients of life are preserved in the icy soil.

That’s why Phoenix’s landing site is perfect.

Original News Source: NASA Earth Observatory

May 25, 2008December 24, 2015 by Ian O'Neill

2012: No Planet X

Will Planet X cause mayhem in 2012? Nope.

Apparently, Planet X (a.k.a. Nibiru) was spotted by astronomers in the early 1980’s in the outermost reaches of the Solar System. It has been tracked by infrared observatories; seen lurking around in the Kuiper Belt and now it is speeding right toward us and will enter the inner Solar System in 2012. So what does this mean to us? Well, the effects of the approach of Planet X on our planet will be biblical, and what’s more the effects are being felt right now. Millions, even billions of people will die, global warming will increase; earthquakes, drought, famine, wars, social collapse, even killer solar flares will be caused by Nibiru blasting through the core of the Solar System. All of this will happen in 2012, and we must begin preparing for our demise right now…

As investigated in my previous article “No Doomsday in 2012“, a lot of weight had been placed on the end of an ancient Mayan calendar, the “Long Count”. According to this calendar and Mayan myth, something is going to happen on December 21st, 2012. Now the world’s Planet X supporters seem to have calculated that this hypothetical, deadly planet will arrive from a highly eccentric orbit to wreak gravitational havoc on Earth, sparking geological, social, economic and environmental damage, killing a high proportion of life… in 2012.

Related 2012 articles:

I’m sorry, but the “facts” behind the Planet X/Nibiru myth simply do not add up. Don’t worry, Planet X will not be knocking on our door in 2012 and here’s why…

Nibiru and Planet X

In 1843, John Couch Adams (a British mathematician and astronomer) studied the orbital perturbations of Uranus and deduced that through gravitational interactions, there must be an eighth planet, tugging at the gas giant. This led to the discovery of Neptune, orbiting at a distance of 30AU from the Sun. There have been numerous occasions where this method has been used to deduce the existence of other bodies in the Solar System before they were directly observed.

Neptune was also experiencing orbital perturbations, and on the discovery of Pluto in 1930, it was thought that the aptly named “Planet X” had been discovered. Alas, Pluto’s mass was tiny, and once the orbit of Charon (Pluto’s moon) was analysed it was found that the mass of the Pluto-Charon system was far too small to affect the orbit of Neptune. The hunt for Planet X continued…

After years of speculation and historic research, it was believed that a huge body astronomers were looking for was a huge planet or a small star, possibly a companion to our Sun (making the Solar System a binary system). The name “Nibiru” was unearthed by the author Zecharia Sitchin, on researching the possible intervention of extraterrestrials in the early history of mankind. Nibiru is a hypothetical planet as taught in ancient Sumerian culture (the Sumerians existed from around 6,000BC to 3,000BC, predating Babylon, in the current geographic location of Iraq). There is very little archaeological evidence to suggest this mythical planet has anything to do with Planet X. But since this dubious connection, Planet X and Nibiru are now thought by doomsayers to be the same thing, an ancient astronomical body that has returned after a long orbit beyond the Solar System.

OK, so the Nibiru/Planet X connection might be a bit ropey already, but is there any solid evidence for the modern-day Planet X?

Infrared observations = Planet X

There is much emphasis placed on the 1983 “discovery” of a mysterious heavenly body by NASA’s Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS) on the outskirts of the Solar system, some 50 billion miles (540 AU) away. Naturally the world’s media will have been very excited by such a discovery and began making noises that perhaps this was Planet X (the most popular accessible resources for Planet X advocates is the Washington Post article published on December 31st 1983 titled “Mystery Heavenly Body Discovered“). In actuality, astronomers weren’t sure what the infrared object was (the clue is in the word “mystery”). Initial media reports postulated that it could be a long-period comet, or a planet, or a far-off young galaxy or a protostar (i.e. a brown dwarf). As soon as the last possibility is mentioned, suddenly this became the “discovery” that Planet X was in fact a brown dwarf orbiting in the outer reaches of our Solar System.

“So mysterious is the object that astronomers do not know if it is a planet, a giant comet, a nearby “protostar” that never got hot enough to become a star, a distant galaxy so young that it is still in the process of forming its first stars or a galaxy so shrouded in dust that none of the light cast by its stars ever gets through.” – Thomas O’Toole, Washington Post Staff Writer, December 30th 1983 (from text on the Planet X and Pole Shift website)

So where did the Washington Post get its story? The story was published in response to the research printed a paper titled “Unidentified point sources in the IRAS minisurvey” (by Houck et al, published in Astrophysical Journal Letters, 278:L63, 1984). Dr. Gerry Neugebauer, co-investigator in the IRAS project, was interviewed and strongly stated that what IRAS had seen was not “incoming mail” (i.e. the results did not suggest there was an object approaching Earth). On reading this interesting research, I was especially drawn to the paper’s conclusion:

“A number of candidate identifications have been considered including near-solar system, galactic, and extragalactic objects. Further observations at infrared and other wavelengths may provide additional information in support of one of these conjectures, or perhaps these objects will require entirely different interpretations.” – Houck et al, Astrophysical Journal Letters, 278:L63, 1984.

Although these IRAS observations were seeing mysterious objects, at this stage, there was no indication that there was an object (let alone a brown dwarf) powering its way toward us. But the rumours had already begun to flow. When follow-up papers were published in 1985 (Unidentified IRAS sources – Ultrahigh-luminosity galaxies, Houck et al., 1985) and 1987 (The IRAS View of the Extragalactic Sky, Soifer et al., 1987), there was little if any media interest in their findings. According to these publications, most of the IRAS observations in the 1984 paper were distant, ultra-luminous young galaxies and one was a filamentary structure known as “infrared cirrus” floating in intergalactic space. IRAS never observed any astronomical body in the outer reaches of the Solar System.

Orbital perturbations = Planet X

In addition to the 1983 “discovery” of the Planet X brown dwarf, the 1992 Planet X claim goes something like this: “Unexplained deviations in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune point to a large outer solar system body of 4 to 8 Earth masses, on a highly tilted orbit, beyond 7 billion miles from the sun,” – text from an un-cited NASA source on the “Planet X Forecast and 2012 Survival Guide” video.

Pulling up the discovery of planets using orbital perturbation measurements, Planet X advocates point to a NASA announcement that in 1992, there were indirect measurements of a planet some 7 billion miles from Earth. Alas, I cannot find the original source for this claim. The only huge discovery NASA announced along these lines was the discovery of the first major trans-Neptunian object (TNO) called 1992 QB₁ (full details of the discovery of this “cubewano-class” object can be found in the original announcement transcript). It has a diameter of 200km and is confined to the Kuiper Belt, a zone of minor planets (where Pluto lives) and asteroids from 30AU to 55AU, just outside Neptune’s orbit. Some of these bodies (like Pluto) cross the path of Neptune’s orbit and there therefore designated as a TNO. These TNO’s pose no threat to the Earth (in as much as they wont be leaving the Kuiper Belt to pay us a visit in 2012).

Since then, any Neptune orbital perturbations have been put down to observational error and have since not been observed… so there doesn’t appear to be any obvious object any bigger than the largest Kuiper Belt objects out there. Still, to keep an open mind, there could be more large bodies to be discovered (that might explain why there is such a steep drop-off of Kuiper Belt objects at the “Kuiper Cliff”, the jury is out on that idea), but there is no evidence for a massive body approaching from the vicinity of the Kuiper Belt. Even the strange Pioneer anomaly that the Pioneer and Voyager probes are experiencing cannot be attributed to Planet X. This anomaly appears to be a Sun-ward acceleration, if there was a massive planet out there, there should be some gravitational effect beyond what has been predicted by the other known objects in the Solar System.

4-8 Earth masses = a brown dwarf? It must be Planet X.

Probably the most glaring inconsistency in the Planet X hypothesis is the Planet X advocates assertion that the 1984 IRAS object and the 1992 body are one of the same thing. As announced on many websites and online videos about Planet X, the 1984 IRAS observation saw Planet X at 50 billion miles from Earth. The 1992 NASA “announcement” put Planet X at a distance of about 7 billion miles from Earth. Therefore, the logic goes, Planet X had travelled 43 billion miles in the course of only eight years (from 1984 to 1992). After some dubious mathematics, Planet X is therefore expected to reach the core of the Solar System in 2012. (Although many believed it should arrive in 2003… they were obviously wrong about that prediction.)

Well, I think we might be clutching at straws here. For starters, for the 1984 object to be the same as the 1992 object, surely they should be the same mass? If Planet X was a brown dwarf (as we are led to believe in the IRAS observations), how can it possibly weigh in at only 4 to 8 Earth masses eight years later? Brown dwarfs have a mass of around 15-80 Jupiter masses. As Jupiter is about 318 Earth masses, surely the object hurtling toward us should have a mass of somewhere between 4,770 and 25,440 Earth masses? So I am going to go out on a limb here and say that I reckon the 1984 object and the 1992 object (if either object actually existed that is) are not the same thing. Not by a very long shot.

If there is no evidence supporting Planet X, it must be a conspiracy
If it can be this easy to cast the fundamental “scientific” theory behind Planet X into doubt, I see little point in discussing the historical reasons (mass extinctions, volcanic activity, earthquakes etc.) as to why the doomsayers believe Planet X should exist. If there is no renegade planet out there of significant mass, how can Nibiru be a threat to us in 2012?

They will have us believe there is a global conspiracy of international governments hiding the facts from us. NASA is involved in the cover-up, hence the lack of evidence. In my opinion, simply because there is no evidence, doesn’t mean there is a conspiracy to hide the truth from the public. So why would governments want to hide a “discovery” as historic as a doomsday planet approaching the inner Solar System anyway? To avoid mass panic and pursue their own, greedy agendas (obviously).

As it turns out, this is the only strength behind the Planet X myth. When confronted with scientific facts, the Planet X advocates reply with “…governments are sending out disinformation and covering up the true observations of Nibiru.” Although I enjoy a good conspiracy theory, I will not support anything in the name of Planet X. If the basic science behind what we are led to believe are the foundation of Planet X existing is wrong, it seems a poor argument to say “the government did it”.

Therefore, the story that Planet X will arrive in 2012-21-December is, in my view, total bunkum (but it helps to sell doomsday books and DVDs by scaring people). Nibiru will remain in the realms of Sumerian myth.

Sources: No Tenth Planet Yet From IRAS, Surviving 2012 and Planet X (Video), The SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System, New Scientist, IRAS, Planet X and Pole Shift

Here’s information on the 2012 comet, 2012 doomsday

Leading image credits: MIT (supernova simulation), NASA/JPL (extrasolar planet). Effects and editing: myself.

May 19, 2008December 24, 2015 by Ian O'Neill

No Doomsday in 2012

Apparently, the world is going to end on December 21st, 2012. Yes, you read correctly, in some way, shape or form, the Earth (or at least a large portion of humans on the planet) will cease to exist. Stop planning your careers, don’t bother buying a house, and be sure to spend the last years of your life doing something you always wanted to do but never had the time. Now you have the time, four years of time, to enjoy yourselves before… the end.

So what is all this crazy talk? We’ve all heard these doomsday predictions before, we’re still here, and the planet is still here, why is 2012 so important? Well, the Mayan calendar stops at the end of the year 2012, churning up all sorts of religious, scientific, astrological and historic reasons why this calendar foretells the end of life as we know it. The Mayan Prophecy is gaining strength and appears to be worrying people in all areas of society. Forget Nostradamus, forget the Y2K bug, forget the credit crunch, this event is predicted to be huge and many wholeheartedly believe this is going to happen for real. Planet X could even be making a comeback.

Related 2012 articles:

For all those 2012 Mayan Prophecy believers out there, I have bad news. There is going to be no doomsday event in 2012, and here’s why…

The Mayan Calendar
So what is the Mayan Calendar? The calendar was constructed by an advanced civilization called the Mayans around 250-900 AD. Evidence for the Maya empire stretches around most parts of the southern states of Mexico and reaches down to the current geological locations of Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador and some of Honduras. The people living in Mayan society exhibited very advanced written skills and had an amazing ability when constructing cities and urban planning. The Mayans are probably most famous for their pyramids and other intricate and grand buildings. The people of Maya had a huge impact on Central American culture, not just within their civilization, but with other indigenous populations in the region. Significant numbers of Mayans still live today, continuing their age-old traditions.

The Mayans used many different calendars and viewed time as a meshing of spiritual cycles. While the calendars had practical uses, such as social, agricultural, commercial and administrative tasks, there was a very heavy religious element. Each day had a patron spirit, signifying that each day had specific use. This contrasts greatly with our modern Gregorian calendar which primarily sets the administrative, social and economic dates.

Most of the Mayan calendars were short. The Tzolk’in calendar lasted for 260 days and the Haab’ approximated the solar year of 365 days. The Mayans then combined both the Tzolk’in and the Haab’ to form the “Calendar Round”, a cycle lasting 52 Haab’s (around 52 years, or the approximate length of a generation). Within the Calendar Round were the trecena (13 day cycle) and the veintena (20 day cycle). Obviously, this system would only be of use when considering the 18,980 unique days over the course of 52 years. In addition to these systems, the Mayans also had the “Venus Cycle”. Being keen and highly accurate astronomers they formed a calendar based on the location of Venus in the night sky. It’s also possible they did the same with the other planets in the Solar System.

Using the Calendar Round is great if you simply wanted to remember the date of your birthday or significant religious periods, but what about recording history? There was no way to record a date older than 52 years.

The end of the Long Count = the end of the Earth?
The Mayans had a solution. Using an innovative method, they were able to expand on the 52 year Calendar Round. Up to this point, the Mayan Calendar may have sounded a little archaic – after all, it was possibly based on religious belief, the menstrual cycle, mathematical calculations using the numbers 13 and 20 as the base units and a heavy mix of astrological myth. The only principal correlation with the modern calendar is the Haab’ that recognised there were 365 days in one solar year (it’s not clear whether the Mayans accounted for leap years). The answer to a longer calendar could be found in the “Long Count”, a calendar lasting 5126 years.

I’m personally very impressed with this dating system. For starters, it is numerically predictable and it can accurately pinpoint historical dates. However, it depends on a base unit of 20 (where modern calendars use a base unit of 10). So how does this work?

The base year for the Mayan Long Count starts at “0.0.0.0.0”. Each zero goes from 0-19 and each represent a tally of Mayan days. So, for example, the first day in the Long Count is denoted as 0.0.0.0.1. On the 19th day we’ll have 0.0.0.0.19, on the 20th day it goes up one level and we’ll have 0.0.0.1.0. This count continues until 0.0.1.0.0 (about one year), 0.1.0.0.0 (about 20 years) and 1.0.0.0.0 (about 400 years). Therefore, if I pick an arbitrary date of 2.10.12.7.1, this represents the Mayan date of approximately 1012 years, 7 months and 1 day.

This is all very interesting, but what has this got to do with the end of the world? The Mayan Prophecy is wholly based on the assumption that something bad is going to happen when the Mayan Long Count calendar runs out. Experts are divided as to when the Long Count ends, but as the Maya used the numbers of 13 and 20 at the root of their numerical systems, the last day could occur on 13.0.0.0.0. When does this happen? Well, 13.0.0.0.0 represents 5126 years and the Long Count started on 0.0.0.0.0, which corresponds to the modern date of August 11th 3114 BC. Have you seen the problem yet? The Mayan Long Count ends 5126 years later on December 21st, 2012.

Doomsday
When something ends (even something as innocent as an ancient calendar), people seem to think up the most extreme possibilities for the end of civilization as we know it. A brief scan of the internet will pull up the most popular to some very weird ways that we will, with little logical thought, be wiped off the face of the planet. Archaeologists and mythologists on the other hand believe that the Mayans predicted an age of enlightenment when 13.0.0.0.0 comes around; there isn’t actually much evidence to suggest doomsday will strike. If anything, the Mayans predict a religious miracle, not anything sinister.

Myths are abound and seem to be fuelling movie storylines. It looks like the new Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is even based around the Mayan myth that 13 crystal skulls can save humanity from certain doom. This myth says that if the 13 ancient skulls are not brought together at the right time, the Earth will be knocked off its axis. This might be a great plotline for blockbuster movies, but it also highlights the hype that can be stirred, lighting up religious, scientific and not-so-scientific ideas that the world is doomed.

Some of the most popular space-based threats to the Earth and mankind focus on Planet X wiping most life off the planet, meteorite impacts, black holes, killer solar flares, Gamma Ray Bursts from star systems, a rapid ice age and a polar (magnetic) shift. There is so much evidence against these things happening in 2012, it’s shocking just how much of a following they have generated. Each of the above “threats” needs their own devoted article as to why there is no hard evidence to support the hype.

But the fact remains, the Mayan Doomsday Prophecy is purely based on a calendar which we believe hasn’t been designed to calculate dates beyond 2012. Mayan archaeo-astronomers are even in debate as to whether the Long Count is designed to be reset to 0.0.0.0.0 after 13.0.0.0.0, or whether the calendar simply continues to 20.0.0.0.0 (approximately 8000 AD) and then reset. As Karl Kruszelnicki brilliantly writes:

“…when a calendar comes to the end of a cycle, it just rolls over into the next cycle. In our Western society, every year 31 December is followed, not by the End of the World, but by 1 January. So 13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan calendar will be followed by 0.0.0.0.1 – or good-ol’ 22 December 2012, with only a few shopping days left to Christmas.” – Excerpt from Dr Karl’s “Great Moments in Science“.

Sources: Dr Karl’s Great Moments in Science, IHT, 2012 Wiki

Leading image credits: MIT (supernova simulation), WikiMedia (Mayan pyramid Chichen Itza). Effects and editing: myself.

May 13, 2008December 24, 2015 by Fraser Cain

Rising Temperatures Could Shut Down Plate Tectonics

Venus is known as the Earth’s twin, but a better name might be Earth’s “evil twin” planet. Although Venus has a similar size and mass to Earth, it has a dramatically different surface and atmosphere. And one of the biggest differences is that fact that Earth has plate tectonics, and Venus doesn’t. New research indicates that prolonged atmospheric heat might be able to shut down plate tectonics, and cause our planet’s crust to be locked in place. Don’t worry, this isn’t something we’ll have to worry about for a few hundred million years.

This research was done by scientists from the US, Canada and Australia, and published in this week’s edition of the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters. According to the researchers, large amounts of volcanic activity or increases in the Sun’s luminosity could reach a tipping point, where the system of plate tectonics just shuts down.

Don’t worry, this isn’t an article about the dangers of global warming. The kind of temperatures we’re talking about here are beyond anything scientists are expecting from human-induced climate change.

These findings help explain why Venus might have evolved differently from Earth. Although the planet has a very similar size and geological makeup, the atmosphere on Venus is rich in carbon dioxide, and almost 100 times more dense. It acts like a blanket, trapping heat from the Sun, and raising temperatures to more than 450 Â°C.

Plate tectonics are very important for keeping our mild temperatures here on Earth. The carbon dioxide is pulled out of the air and trapped on the floor of the ocean. This carbon gets returned to the interior of the Earth when a free-floating sections of crust called tectonic plates slide underneath one another.

Scientists think that the Earth’s plate tectonics are stable and self-correcting, assuming excess heat from inside the Earth can escape through the crust. The flowing mantle keeps the tectonic plates moving.

But if the surface of the Earth is heated up for a long period of time, it could make the flowing mantle more viscous, so it stops flowing. This would shut down plate tectonics on Earth.

“We found the Earth’s plate tectonics could become unstable if the surface temperature rose by 38 Â°C (100 Â°F) or more for a few million years,” said lead author Adrian Lenardic, associate professor of Earth science at Rice University. “The time period and the rise in temperatures, while drastic for humans, are not unreasonable on a geologic scale, particularly compared to what scientists previously thought would be required to affect a planet’s geodynamics.”

One interesting discovery is that the rise in temperature doesn’t need to boil away the Earth’s oceans. The tectonic shut down could happen, even though there’s still liquid water on the surface of Earth.

Original Source: Rice University News Release

May 7, 2008December 24, 2015 by Ian O'Neill

Lightning Storm Generated by Chilean Volcano (Images)

The Chaiten volcano erupting during storms in the middle of the night (Daily Mail - UK Newspaper)

It could be the scene from a movie: huge plumes of ash and gas rising during a ferocious volcanic eruption, sparking off a dazzling lightning storm; lightning bolts thundering to life inside and out of the hot cloud. However, this is the reality down on the ground for the people living near the Chaiten Volcano, southern Chile, who have been evacuated since the volcano erupted on Friday. Activity continues to increase, producing these terrifying, yet mesmerizing scenes…

Lightning can happen as a result of a volcanic eruption. As the hot ash rises through the cooler atmosphere, transfer of charge occurs. This excess of electrons within the cloud makes it act like a capacitor, and should the conditions be correct, huge electrical discharges may be observed as bolts of lightning during volcanic eruptions. It seems that the Chaiten volcano’s recent activity has created the perfect conditions for such a show, allowing photographers in the region to capture some stunning images.

I actually saw the picture shown at the top of this article in a double page spread in today’s edition of the UK’s Daily Mail. At first I couldn’t work out what I was seeing but on reading the caption I soon realized it was connected with the recent eruption in Chile. Fortunately the Daily Mail also posted the article on their website, giving me the opportunity to share these incredible images on the Universe Today.

This region of South America has some very active plate tectonics and has been dubbed “Andean Arc” region of Chile, Peru, Ecuador and Columbia containing around 200 to 300 volcanoes. Volcanologists are highly concerned as many of these volcanoes are located in densely populated areas, so they are studying the Chaiten eruption very carefully. The small town of Chaiten is being threatened by this particular eruption, but fortunately the surrounding area is otherwise unpopulated.

Sources: Physorg.com, Daily Mail

April 30, 2008December 24, 2015 by Ian O'Neill

Explore Earth’s Ionosphere with Google Earth

Computer generated image of the density of electrons in the ionosphere (Cathryn Mitchell, University of Bath)

The ionosphere is the final layer of atmosphere before space. This highly dynamic region is constantly exposed to the full intensity of the Sun, harsh ultraviolet radiation breaking down molecules and atoms. Highly charged ions and free electrons therefore fill the ionospheric layers. Critical to terrestrial communications, the ionosphere also plays host to the largest lightshow on Earth, the Aurora. Now NASA-funded research has developed a live “4D Ionosphere” plugin for Google Earth. Now you can fly through the atmosphere’s uppermost reaches without even leaving your desk…

The ionosphere is highly important to us. Radio operators will be acutely aware about how the ionosphere influences radio wave propagation. Ever since Guglielmo Marconi’s experiments with trans-Atlantic radio communications in 1901 between England and the US, the ionosphere has influenced our ability to communicate over large distances, and without the aid of modern satellite technology. The ionosphere creates a charged, reflective barrier that radio waves can be bounced off (bypassing the blocking effect of the curvature of the Earth). However, radio signals are highly influenced by variations in the ionosphere and can be “blacked out” should a major solar storm pump charged particles into the magnetosphere and ionosphere. Even modern Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) signals are influenced by this atmospheric layer, reflecting and attenuating radio waves. As aircraft, ships and other modes of transport now depend on GPS positioning, it is essential that we fully comprehend the physics behind the ionosphere.

In the aim to have a better grasp of the state of the ionosphere, a “live” plugin for Google Earth has just been announced. Funded by NASA’s Living With a Star (LWS) program, it is hoped that this tool can be used by the public and professionals alike to see the current state of the electron content of the ionosphere. Once downloaded and running, the viewer can rotate the globe and see where electron density is high and where it is low. In dense regions, it is very hard for radio waves to propagate, signifying that radio quality will be poor, or blocked all together. In Google Earth, these regions are highlighted in red. The blue regions show “normal” radio propagation regions, expect good quality signal in those locations.

The reason why this new system has been dubbed “4D Ionosphere” is that you can view the ionosphere in three spatial dimensions, and the data is refreshed every ten minutes to give the extra time dimension.

Download the .kml “4D Ionosphere” Google Earth plugin »
View video tutorial of how to use “4D Ionosphere” (19MB .mp4 video) »
Download Google Earth »

This isn’t the first time Google Earth has been used by organizations for space-based research. On February 24th, I reported that a plugin had been released to track the space debris currently orbiting our planet. Nancy also gave the new Google Sky a test drive in March, a great way to learn about astronomy through this user friendly interface.

I can see lots of applications for this tool already. Firstly I’d be very excited to compare the ionosphere during periods of high solar activity with periods when the Sun experiences solar minimum (like now). This would be especially exciting in Polar Regions in the auroral zone when high quantities of solar wind particles ignite aurorae. Also, there are possible applications for amateur radio (ham) operators who could use this as a means to forecast the strength of the radio signal during campaigns. I am however uncertain how accurate or how detailed these measurements will be, but it at least gives a very interesting look into the current state of this interesting region of the atmosphere.

Source: NASA

April 30, 2008December 24, 2015 by Ian O'Neill

Gaia Hypothesis: Could Earth Really be a Single Organism?

Can a planet like Earth be considered a single living organism? After all, the human body is composed of hundreds of billions of bacteria, and yet we consider the human body to be a single organism. The Gaia Hypothesis (or popularly known as “Gaia Theory”) goes beyond the individual organisms living on Earth, it encompasses all the living and non-living components of Earth’s biosphere and proposes that the complex interacting systems regulate the environment to a very high degree (here’s a biosphere definition). So much so, that the planet may be viewed as a single organism in its own right. What’s more this hypothesis was developed by a NASA scientist who was looking for life on Mars…

When you stop to think about it, our planet does act like a huge organism. If you look at the interrelationship between plants and atmospherics, animals and humans, rocks and water, a complex pattern of symbiotic processes seem to complement each other perfectly. Should one system be pushed out of balance by some external force (such as a massive injection of atmospheric carbon dioxide after a volcanic event), other processes are stimulated to counteract the instability (more phytoplankton appear in the oceans to absorb the carbon dioxide in the water). Many of these processes could be interpreted as a “global immune system”.

The hypothesis that our planet could be a huge organism was the brain child of British scientist Dr James Lovelock. In the 1960’s when Lovelock was working with NASA on methods to detect life on the surface of Mars, his hypothesis came about when trying to explain why Earth has such high levels of carbon dioxide and nitrogen. Lovelock recently defined Gaia as:

“…organisms and their material environment evolve as a single coupled system, from which emerges the sustained self-regulation of climate and chemistry at a habitable state for whatever is the current biota.” – Lovelock J. (2003) The living Earth. Nature 426, 769-770.

So, Lovelock’s work points to interwoven ecological systems that promote the development of life currently living on Earth. Naturally, the statement that Earth itself is actually one living organism encompassing the small-scale mechanisms we experience within our biosphere is a highly controversial one, but there are some experiments and tests that have been carried out to support his theory. Probably the most famous model of the Gaia hypothesis is the development of the “Daisyworld” simulation. Daisyworld is an imaginary planet whose surface is either covered in white daisies, black daisies or nothing at all. This imaginary world orbits a sun, providing the only source of energy for the daisies to grow. Black daisies have a very low albedo (i.e. they do not reflect the sun’s light), thereby getting hot and heating up the atmosphere surrounding them. White daisies have a high albedo, reflecting all the light back out of the atmosphere. The White daisies stay cool and do not contribute to atmospheric warming.
Java applet of the Daisyworld simulation »

When this basic computer simulation runs, a rather complex picture emerges. In the aim of optimizing the growth of daisies on Daisyworld, the populations of white and black daisies fluctuate, regulating the atmospheric temperatures. When the simulation starts, there are huge changes in population and temperature, but the system quickly stabilizes. Should the solar irradiance suddenly change, the white:black daisy ratio compensates to stabilize atmospheric temperatures once more. The simulated Daisyworld plants are self-regulating atmospheric temperature, optimizing their growth.

This is an oversimplified view of might be happening on Earth, but it demonstrates the principal argument that Gaia is a collection of self-regulating systems. Gaia helps to explain why atmospheric gas quantities have remained fairly constant since life formed on Earth. Before life appeared on our planet 2.5 billion years ago, the atmosphere was dominated by carbon dioxide. Life quickly adapted to absorb this atmospheric gas, generating nitrogen (from bacteria) and oxygen (from photosynthesis). Since then, the atmospheric components have been tightly regulated to optimize conditions for the biomass. Could it also explain why the oceans aren’t too salty? Possibly.

This self-regulatory system is not a conscious process; it is simply a collection of feedback loops, all working to optimize life on Earth. The hypothesis also does not interfere with the evolution of species or does it point to a “creator”. In its moderate form, Gaia is a way of looking on the dynamic processes on our planet, providing an insight to how the seemingly disparate physical and biological processes are actually interlinked. As to whether Gaia exists as an organism in it’s own right, it depends on your definition of “organism” (the fact that Gaia cannot reproduce itself is a major drawback for viewing Earth as an organism), but it certainly makes you think…

Original source: Guardian

April 25, 2008April 26, 2016 by Ian O'Neill

Potential Global Warming “Fix” Will Damage the Ozone Layer

There are many possible “geo-engineering” solutions open to scientists in the aim to stave off global warming. One of the main candidates to dim the solar energy input to the atmosphere is to inject huge quantities of sulphate particles high in the atmosphere. This mimics the emissions from a large volcanic explosion proven to cool the Earth’s atmosphere in the past. But, you guessed it, there’s a problem. New research suggests that tampering with the atmosphere in this way will have serious repercussions for the ozone layer… Now there’s a surprise!

On writing this week’s Carnival of Space, I came across an interesting discussion about the damage that can be caused by scientists tampering with weather. Nancy L. Young-Houser takes the strong view that under no circumstance is it OK to alter natural weather processes, even if the purpose is to advert a catastrophic hurricane or bring rain to drought-ridden regions. Looking at historic examples of cloud seeding for example, Nancy concludes that weather manipulation is not only morally but ethically wrong. There will always be a loser.

Then today, the BBC ran an article on the perils of using high altitude particles to block sunlight from entering our atmosphere. The effect of such a large-scale measure could emulate the ejected particles from a huge volcanic explosion. Sulphide particles are known to be a highly efficient means to deflect sunlight, thus cooling our atmosphere, possibly saving us from the ravages of our self-inflicted global warming. (This effect was observed in the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo, pictured.) But there is a big flaw in this plan according to new research published in Science. Sulphide particles can damage the ozone layer, possibly creating another hole in the ozone over the Arctic and undo the recovery of the Antarctic ozone hole, setting it back decades.

Dr Simone Tilmes of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCar) in Boulder, Colorado, and her team analysed data and ran simulations of the sulphide effect on the atmosphere. Their conclusion? Injecting sulphide particles into the high atmosphere may lessen the effects of global warming, but it will also set back Antarctic ozone layer recovery 30 to 70 years. Sulphates are ideal particles on which atmospheric chlorine gases held in polar clouds will attach themselves to (pictured top). A chemical reaction between sulphate particle and chlorine destroys ozone molecules (O₃). The effects of this chemical reaction may cause accelerated damage in troubled polar regions. This ozone depletion was also recorded after the Mount Pinatubo eruption.

Attempting to “repair” the global damage we are causing to the atmosphere by injecting even more particles at high altitudes may not be the best way forward. After all, as outlined in Nancy’s article, there are many hidden risks when geo-engineering our atmospheric dynamics. Perhaps working on the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions may be a better idea, sooner rather than later.

Source: BBC