RE: These glass beads explain climate change.
Thanks for the information and I defer to your knowledge on the complexity of fusion. Consider the following proposition. Following the big bang, elements were distributed like shotgun pellets around the universe. Instead of having matter distributed evenly, higher concentrations would cluster around where stars would be formed. As the density of matter would reach a particular point, fusion would initiate and matter would be pushed away from the center point. Naturally there would be a push/pull (explosive pressure vs gravity) with heavier elements being found closer towards the sun (eg planet Mercury) and the lighter elements (eg Oort Cloud) found further away. Planets would be formed as a result of orbital clearing... all the dust in a path would be gathered by the gravitational pull of each planet.
I think that describes how our solar system was created. Now an additional speculation describes another aspect of what happens.
Cosmic rays are the atomic nuclei of hydrogen, helium and larger molecules that have been stripped of their electrons. They have been generated from galactic events such as supernova and quasars, and travel throughout the universe at almost the speed of light.
Source
Add to this the nature of waves. A single wave from a single source is just a blip. Ordinarily the pressure of our solar wind is sufficient to deflect these atomic nuclei from both the sun and earth. Even a wave from two different sources wouldn't be a problem. Because of the principle of superposition the additive nature would occur. This means for the a period of time the amount of positive waves will combine into a megawave etc. I think that this leads to a chicken - egg / correlation- causation situation. Do solar minimums occur because of increased cosmic wave activity or does earth experience increase cosmic wave activity because of solar minimums (or both).
Studies have shown the Earth’s magnetic field, which acts as the second line of defense against cosmic rays, as well as being a shield against the solar wind, has been steadily weakening throughout the 20th century. Since the year 2000, however, the weakening has dramatically increased as illustrated in the following image provided by Davidson in his Earth Catastrophe Cycle series.
Source
In part 2 of this series of articles investigating issues raised by Ben Davidson in his Earth Catastrophe Cycle video series, I discussed a CIA document authored by a geologist, Chan Thomas, that was only declassified in 2013. Thomas hypothesized that the inner core of the Earth, behaves just like a star in terms of emitting plasma or “neutral matter” in periodic bursts every few thousand years into the outer core, thereby triggering both magnetic and geophysical pole shifts.
Source
I think the implication is that because of the solar minimums, the earth's magnetic protection is reduced which allows an increase in cosmic waves hitting Earth directly. I assume that having less solar activity has the paradoxical effect of increasing Earth's inner core activity (presumably increasing turmoil on the surface as well).
While on Earth, it is understandable that the beads could be formed through volcanic action. By extrapolation it might be assumed that this was the case on the moon. The flaw in this conjecture is that it would assume a fairly recent history of volcanic eruptions because the beads are readily found on the surface. Most traces of volcanoes went extinct over a billion years ago, (with the exception of pit craters like Ina). Part of the concern has to do with the shape of some of them:
I believe the assumption that some scientists who don't follow the volcanic model is that during periods of solar minima that it is a lead up to a special type of mass ejecta.
Instead of a single column of cme a wave of dust and particles are pushed out from the surface of the sun. The explanation for this is described as a micronova. Some of this debris hits the moon in the form of the beads. The rotation of the some of those beads at 5000 revs per second is due to this ejection (the conjecture is that volcanic action would not be sufficient to create this speed). A corollary of this ejection is that masses also strike the Earth causing massive destruction every 12000 years.
Theoretically it would be possible to generate on high energetic and regular pulsed signal out of interference of waves(after all this is the principle of a femto-second laser-pulse), but the problem is that in your cosmic ray example the sources of the radition are not fixed for several years. Supernovae are to short-lived to create a constant radiation that is high enough to create such a regular high-energetic pulse. Also relativistic nuclei have a very short wavelength(should be something a lot less than 10⁻¹⁶ m) making it a lot harder(and therefor much less likely) to generate a pulsed signal of a year-long frequency.
So I would say only "earth experience increase cosmic wave activity because of solar minimums" can be right.
About the form of the beads:
Yes rotation will lead to such a shape, but that doesn't imply that every such shape origins in rotation.
Consider the following situation: two perfectly round beads come out of some volcano. During the flight they start cooling down just above their melting point. What if the beads meet on the ground? Trying to reduce surface tension they will try to merge. But they are rather cold and may not merge fast enough compared to the time needed to cool their surface below melting point. Therefor they might end up getting solid in a halfly-merged state. Such a state would look like the beads in the picture, right?
I don't think so. I would say these strikes are rather weak. Otherwise we wouldn't have such a rich environment and we should find some evidence concerning these eruptions in stone-age art.
Do you got a reliable source of the dating of the samples?
Why would the sun spit out heavier elements(like oxygen and silicon which are contained in glass) instead of lighter elements like hydrogen and helium, as those should be closer to the surface because they are lighter?
The original information that I had pointed toward the 12068 cycle using an interpretation of the formation of those beads found on the moon (ie. periodically they are ejected from the sun). I was thinking that there was some process found in the larger universe which would account for this (cosmic waves). Today I found this video -
which still points at the sun but has the fluctuations due to the spin and swoop of the sun.
That's a very long video. Could you please compress its content?
A snapshot is that most climate models tend to fail on prediction. The model developed by Zharkova et al gives a close prediction to actual sunspot activity:
This model allowed them to create a formula which could be used to predict what the sunspot activity would have been in the past (eg. the little ice age) as well into the future:
Depending upon the veracity of this model, instead of global warming, we are actually heading toward a short period of cooling ... similar to that found during the Maunder Minimum.
I would say we are heading towards a warmer period, as the number of sunspots will decrease.
Sunspots are actually cooler than the rest of the sun. Therefor less sunspot would mean the overall temperature would rise, right?
Also I would say that the effect of the number of sunspots on earth isn't measurable. Although at this one point 400 years ago the little ice age fits into this model, there are no other big temperature drops every 400 years.
You could argue that there is a small bump every 400 years or so, but those bumps could be within the measuring error(shown in light blue) and are also negligible compared to the rise of temperature within the last century.
Fortunately we have only a couple of years to wait to see the accuracy of this model. I "believe" the sun is analogous to a pot of boiling water. When it is at its hottest if bubbles away. If you don't see bubbles it isn't as hot. I also "don't believe" that there is enough information to establish a causal relationship. Did the decrease in sunspots causing the Maunder Minimum precipitate the Mini Ice Age or is it possible the decrease in sunspots signal some other action which is also associated with temperature change. For instance one hypothesis is that the tidal forces of the inner planets affect the sun. If that is true the roughly 400 year variation of the earth's temperature is caused by the its action on the sun. Another consideration is the Earth's precession which has been attributed to the greening and desertifying the Sahara.
While I concede that the pollution that China is creating is disrupting the jet stream and causing really nasty weather in the US, I feel that there is other phenomena not explained by carbon emissions:
Source
The magnetic pole started moving 100 years ago in a trajectory toward Siberia.
Source: Cavit, via Wikimedia Commons
As can be seen by this illustration, the magnetic field strength has been waning for 3 hundred years.
Magnetic pole reversal will pose a big risk for humanity when it happens, that's for certain.
I think we don't have enough data to decide if the sunspots are a sign of an overall hot sun or if they are leading to an overall cooler sun.
I would argue that Jupiter and Saturn also have a similar effect on the sun due to their high mass.
That sounds rather like people who don't want to take responsibility towards our planet. Precession is just the effect that is holding earth's axis steady, leading to seasons.
Desertification is most likely created because of extensive agriculture which removes local plants, that keep desertification from happening, and replaces them by a monoculture of some profitable plant.
Evidence for this can be seen in the type of remains found in the deserts of Northern Africa
Source
I don't think that it is that people don't want to take responsibility but that it is a multivariate problem not just something that is one source. By focussing on one aspect (man made CO2) which should lead to global warming, it neglects that a number of events are happening at the same time. For instance in this video
you can see the expansion of rifts in Africa. In no way can CO2 be held responsible for this type of event. I think we have a situation of a sinking ship that catches fire. Focussing on one crisis while denying the other exists might lead to unfortunate consequences.
Earth's magnetic field
Earth's magnetic field, also known as the geomagnetic field, is the magnetic field that extends from the Earth's interior out into space, where it interacts with the solar wind, a stream of charged particles emanating from the Sun. The magnetic field is generated by electric currents due to the motion of convection currents of molten iron in the Earth's outer core: these convection currents are caused by heat escaping from the core, a natural process called a geodynamo. The magnitude of the Earth's magnetic field at its surface ranges from 25 to 65 microteslas (0.25 to 0.65 gauss). As an approximation, it is represented by a field of a magnetic dipole currently tilted at an angle of about 11 degrees with respect to Earth's rotational axis, as if there were a bar magnet placed at that angle at the center of the Earth.