Snap!: Mr. Comet Watch Talks About Space Quakes

Posted by Jay Man on January 29, 2012
Posted in: USEFUL INFORMATION. Tagged: , , , , , , , , . 31 comments

Fascinating! In a very relevant video produced by MrCometWatch.com, we see demonstrated the effects of solar flares on our atmosphere. According to the genteel voice of Mr. Comet Watch, a new phenomenon was discovered last year by a group of NASA satellites called THEMIS (Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms). Solar flares can pump the Earth’s magnetic field with enough energy to cause a “space quake” in the upper atmosphere. The magnetic field lines that surround the Earth stretch due to the bombardment of solar energy. When it’s stretched to it’s limit, it actually snaps back like a rubber band forcing the energy back into the atmosphere. According to Mr. Comet Watch, this effect can register on seismographs as a 6.5 earthquake. He believes that this could be the source of sky noise. I like his theory and it’s based on an article from National Geographic here.

About these ads

31 comments on “Snap!: Mr. Comet Watch Talks About Space Quakes”

    • From the video.. “Scientist don’t know what causes a magnetic field reversal” yet they seem to know that this thing that they have no idea how it works is “overdue” and will happen again like if it is a periodic event.. i wonder based on what… nice scientific stuff..

      This guy sells fear mate by taking any credible and not credible theory existing around and making a mix according to his mood…

      Reply

      • ““Scientist don’t know what causes a magnetic field reversal” yet they seem to know that this thing that they have no idea how it works is “overdue” and will happen again like if it is a periodic event.. i wonder based on what… nice scientific stuff..”

        No they don’t believe, in any way, that we’re “overdue” for a magnetic reversal. Scientists are well aware from studying geological data that reversals were/are random. Furthermore, they don’t have any reason to assume (based on the same data) that a reversal would have dire consequences for ANY life on Earth. Humans have lived through them in the past, so the whole concept is hyped by pseudoscience (2012′ers in particular) for no other reason than to scare people….because if it’s on youtube, it MUST be true!

        This is a particularly good explanation of magnetic reversal: http://scienceblogs.com/highlyallochthonous/2009/02/is_the_earths_magnetic_field_a.php

      • actually, they know it’s overdue because it has happened more than 3 times before in the past, from looking at rock samples in different parts of the world and analyzing the magnetic waves trapped in the rocks over time, these waves point in one direction, then another when a reversal happens, then back to the opposite direction when another reversal happens, and so on. so there is concrete evidence that pole reversal has happened many times. also, there is a very specific and common time frame between these pole reversals from the rock analysis. (i can’t remember what the time frame was, but it’s pretty easy to find these documentaries on youtube, pls find if you are interested) and according to the time period patterns of the previous reversals, we are very long overdue indeed, by thousands of years..

        i don’t think any stand at all hehe and maybe these documentaries are wrong but the evidence is shown and they do interview scientists who have made this their life work so its worth checking out if you guys are interested :) peace!

      • @Quins -

        Obviously you didn’t visit the fantastic resource I suggested. Dr. Rowan makes it very clear that we are not “overdue” for anything as reversals follow no particular pattern. That makes them *unpredictable*. We cannot be overdue for something that does not follow a predictable pattern.

        [If the opposite were true, I'm well overdue for hitting the powerball jackpot]

        For cripe’s sake, stay off of youtube and do some real research! ANYONE can post ANYTHING they want on youtube!

        There are a whole slew of scientists here: http://www.bautforum.com/
        They’ll answer questions in real time with REAL facts!

      • @Anne & Qins

        You argue on a topic that even scientists argue and that is because their assumptions start from more basic things than the reversal.

        One, if not the biggest, problem of today’s consensus science is that they seem to have forgotten what is a Hypothesis, what a Theory and what a Fact. They mix these terms and they use them at will according to what suits best in each case (and what can bring some funding to their research).

        So do we know what causes the Earths magnetic field?
        Hypothesis = there is a magnetic field and we can measure it. So this is our basis.
        Theory = the magnetic field is generated by a gyro action of the earths core.
        Fact = there is no fact yet. The theory is not proven and there are several observations and logical arguments that do not agree with the above theory.

        So if you don’t know what generates this field and how it operates how you can speculate about it’s reversal?

        They do that because we have evidence that there were reversals in the past, and because we see that the Sun reverses its field every few years in a regular fashion.

        But do we know what causes the Suns magnetic field? Again no.
        Do we know what is the Sun? Again no.

        For both the Sun and the Earth we have theories dating back 200 years or more when observations were very poor and knowledge even poorer. And we still maintain those theories and keep building new theories on those old and absolutely unproven and questionable theories.

        Why? For the same reason once we were supporting that the Earth was flat and in the center of the universe for hundredths or thousands of years. Because the consensus needs time in order to change its views and move to something new and different.

        IMHO, for talking about reversals you have to first know what is the field and what causes it. Then you can find possible reasons for why and when it is reversing and then you can talk about the possibility of such an event happening in the near or distant future.

        We like it or not, we are blind in these things still and any speculation is out of somebody’s stomach.

        p.s. Question for thinking about it. All past reversals appear to have happen very fast, possibly instantly (that is actually the way it happens on the Sun too). How can a gyro reverse its field in a second?

        I don’t see how. And my guess is that the field is externally generated and not by an internal gyro. And if that’s the case then it can reverse any time in a sec and the only problem we will have is that out navigation systems will be useless unless adjusted. Nothing else.

    • @Anne – i’m just suggesting a documentary (not just posted by anyone, and features real scientists) that might or might not add to what you already know which i’m sure is extensive. these scientists here say that the patterns follow a VERY predictable pattern and has for many many cycles. but i also do think, well since we are SO overdue, then maybe the very fact that we are overdue means we can throw that pattern out the window and it should not hold any water after all, so we should not worry :) i will definitely check out your link thanks!

      Reply

      • @Anne – i’ve read the report you suggested and it looks like its a simple matter of scientists disagreeing on several factors.. however, this link u suggested does not offer evidence that pole shift most definitely occurs over a long period of time as he claims, whereas scientists in the video have some evidence that it has occurred over the time period of one day in many previous instances.. i don’t think we can discount either theories, let’s leave them to carry on their work further and maybe soon or some day we will all be more enlightened haha

  2. Man this video (and the National Geographic article) beg for some serious technical comments cause these things are anything else but science…

    Although i also believe that if these sounds are real, then their origin is electrical activity in the upper atmosphere, the things said in this video are as close to reality as is a magnetic field line to be a physical entity that can snap, and stretch and bounce like a string.. this is not science, it’s science fiction mate and these people have no idea about electromagnetism for claiming such things.

    The problem of course arises from the fact that astrophysicists have no idea about electromagnetism and think of these things in mechanical terms. Then popular science media like National Geographic and Scientific America and the Discovery channel, take these distorted ideas literally and play with them in a completely unrealistic way. Then such guys like the one in the video come, and thinking that they are based on real science (not even close) they start transforming an electrical phenomenon to a mechanical one.

    This “phenomenon” described in the video of the stretching and snapping of the field lines is called magnetic reconnection. It is something stated initially as an analogy by Hannes Alfven that was the father of magnetohydrodynamics and one of the leading figures of plasma physics, and even he, when understood that the term was misused by astrophysicist canceled it and stated clearly that it is not to be taken literally. Unfortunately it was too late and astrophysicists that back then (and even now) have no real understanding of electromagnetism use it in a very unrealistic way and completely against every theory of electromagnetism, in order to explain phenomena that they can’t even understand.

    I mean take a minute and thing about it, what is a field line? is it a physical entity that you can play with? it’s imaginary representation of the strength of the field, not an entity!
    You can’t push or stretch and brake and reconnect a magnetic field line because it is as real as the path you traveled from your bed to the toilet. Can you see your path? can you change it? No!

    What you do is you alter the magnetic field, and for that you need some other magnetic or electric field. Then the lines (the imaginary lines) take a new shape describing the strength of the new field.

    I need to write a lot and I’m going to be more technical that most people can follow so I better leave the theory and say only the following regarding the “sky quakes”.

    First of all even the article doesn’t say that you can measure them. It says that their energy could be analogous to a 5 or 6 scale quake. It is a completely different thing.

    Second and most important. If you have such a disturbance like a magnetic vortex in the upper atmosphere then it is impossible that disturbance to create a sound audible in the surface because the distance is so large and the medium (the air) so thin that the sound can’t travel and reach the surface.

    All these sounds, if real, and if their origin is electromagnetic, are produced close to the ground by other things that are effected from this EM disturbance in the same fashion as the sounds from the Aurora. They are not the result of the “push” but the result of something close to the ground that is effected by the electromagnetic disturbance in the upper atmosphere.

    They are probably the result of a phenomenon called “Brush Discharge” and has to do with the charge difference of things close to the ground such as trees, mountains, high buildings, sometimes clouds, etc.

    Reply

  3. Jay I don’t know which topic head to place this under, so I’ll just place it here.

    An amateur radio operator friend and I were discussing atmospheric sounds (he was totally unaware of the youtube splash) and without me prompting him at all, he sent me this link which includes the famous FL video. The NWS in FL addressed the sound *at the time*, “Ducting” is not uncommon in coastal areas and at sea under the right conditions. Absolutely a ‘sky phenomenon’, but not strange or of unknown origin in the least.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/17/atmospheric-audio-ducting/

    Reply

  5. The sounds of interest are hissing periodic sounds that cover quite large areas.. ducting is highly improbable cause for such sounds even if we were talking about one incident… if more incidents as in our case the probability is below zero…

    Thunderstorm sounds that could be a nice candidate for being the source of a ducting process are not hissing and not periodic at all. They are irregular, with bangs and strong echoing..

    Reply

    • I was not commenting on the header or SOTT video (which is downright pseudoscience). Since this is not a forum, I can only post things in the comments sections. The site I posted is totally unrelated, but of relevance to previous discussions. If Jay wants to move it to a more appropriate place, he can.

      Reply

      • Yes I know, i just pointed out that Ducting is highly unlikely to be the reason of the phenomenon due to the nature of the sounds.

        If it was line listening to a thunderstorm in clear weather then Audio Ducting is 99% the cause.

        And BTW, the idea of a Forum would be nice to have over here.. Jay Man,do you feel like expanding your IT knowledge into forums too?

  6. Panos writes:

    “All these sounds, if real, and if their origin is electromagnetic, are produced close to the ground by other things that are effected from this EM disturbance in the same fashion as the sounds from the Aurora. They are not the result of the “push” but the result of something close to the ground that is effected by the electromagnetic disturbance in the upper atmosphere.”

    This seems more likely to me also.

    Reply

    • People researching the possible causes for the Aurora originated sounds have concluded to the following possible causes for the sounds. I copy paste from this very interesting study of the University of Helsinki Finland about Audible Aurora Sounds: http://lib.tkk.fi/Dipl/2005/urn007898.pdf

      a) Brush Discharge

      Silverman and Tuan [62] concluded that the most likely source of aurora related sounds
      seems to be brush discharge, and that these are generated by aurorally associated electric
      fields. They also stated that the quality of the sounds suggests some kind of electrostatic
      discharge and, therefore, supports this hypothesis.
      Brush discharge is the occurrence of discharge from point electrodes where very sharp
      potential gradient exist. The local potential gradient can be increased by an irregularity on
      the Earth’s surface such as an isolated tree or a mountain, by lowered air density as the
      altitude is increased, by dust, by fog, and by induction from clouds with active internal
      circulation. [62]
      The brush discharge can produce a rustling or hissing sound, light (generally purple in
      color) near the ground, and can make light, slender objects such as hair stand on end [62].
      The smell of ozone or sulphur that has been reported to accompany the sounds on rare
      occasions seems to support the brush discharge hypothesis. Lamar and Romig [45] also
      note that an occasional smell of ozone as well as electromagnetic disturbances associated
      with meteor entries suggest that a local corona discharge is responsible for hissing noises.
      There are some references from as early as the 1930’s [7, 8, 9, 15] that suggested brush
      discharges as sound production mechanisms. However, it was not until 1946 electric field measurements indicating sufficiently large values for production of brush discharges were
      first reported by Olson [52].
      The normal average electric field on the Earth’s surface over open ground is about 100
      V/m which is insufficient to cause discharge. Silverman and Tuan refer to the work of Olson
      [52] where it has been shown that during auroral corona (i.e. a spectacular form of aurora
      where all rays of aurora seem to converge to a point) this field can rise to very high values
      (close to 10 kV/m) which are sufficient to cause discharge.
      According to Silverman and Tuan [62], aurorally associated electric fields are most likely
      produced by a space charge possibly resulting from ionization by hard X-rays which have
      themselves been produced at higher altitudes by the impact of energetic particles.

      b) Electrophonics

      A hypothesis called ”electrophonics” has been proposed by Keay [30, 31, 32, 34]. Most
      of his work deals with meteor sounds but he says aurora related sounds are produced the
      same way. This hypothesis is based on objects in close proximity to the observer, acting
      as ”transducers” to make the conversion of electromagnetic radiation into acoustic waves.
      These transducers are objects that act as loudspeakers, converting electromagnetic signals
      into audible vibrations. According to Keay, e.g. aluminium foil, thin wires, pine needles or
      dry, frizzy hair all respond to a VLF field. The radio waves induce small charges in such
      objects, and these charges force the object to vibrate in time with the oscillating waves,
      effectively making them act like the diaphragm in a loudspeaker.
      Keay says that the plasma trail of a large fireball, or bolide, generates the required ELF
      or VLF emissions. He notes it has been shown that large fireballs generate radiation in
      the ELF/VLF region [31]. Similarly, very low-frequency hissing from aurora has been
      registered by a number of research groups [48, 60].
      Keay [30] suggests that if the VLF amplitude is sufficient, the combination of a high electric
      field modulated by a substantial audio frequency component would have the required
      properties to excite an acoustic response from naturally present objects by a straightforward
      transduction process. Keay notes that a brush discharge could explain the crackling
      and some of the higher frequency components of the auroral sounds, but the hissing and
      swishing sounds are more akin to the VLF hiss associated with aurora.
      The electrophonics hypothesis has been criticized because a meteor or aurora can hardly
      produce electromagnetic power of the scope needed to produce audible sound. Keay’s work
      inspired Silverman and Tuan to further study this particular hypothesis. They conclude
      with D. Y. Wang [67] that the intensity of VLF emission required for the production of
      anomalous sounds necessitates unreasonably high currents.

      There are other possible causes examined but they are highly unlikely and many of them completely impossible so i do not list them here.

      My guess is one or both of the above effects but not due to an Aurora like current (since we have no visual counterpart) but due to a radial atmospheric current from pole to pole.

      Reply

  7. “One, if not the biggest, problem of today’s consensus science is that they seem to have forgotten what is a Hypothesis, what a Theory and what a Fact. They mix these terms and they use them at will according to what suits best in each case (and what can bring some funding to their research).”–Panos
    Amen!
    @Anne
    “For cripe’s sake, stay off of youtube and do some real research! ANYONE can post ANYTHING they want on youtube!

    There are a whole slew of scientists here: http://www.bautforum.com/
    They’ll answer questions in real time with REAL facts!”
    You are right, anyone can publish on YT, but remember, anyone can also claim to be a scientist. And those scientist who are sincere and use good methodologies are still swimming in the dark , as it is tremendously difficult to establish “fact.”
    Which are currently based on THEORY, not “facts.” A “fact” or “law” is a hypothesis that has been established so thouroughly, has been reproduced by so many independent sources, that the probability of it being found false is miniscule (although that probablility still exists. The law of gravity, the second law of thermodynamics, etc, may be found to be more tenuous as we discover more about the universe).
    One of the reasons I laugh when people say confidently “there is no God/Gods.” Sure you know that.
    In the great vastness of the universe, we are rediculously arrogant as a species.

    I am afraid that you are still not bringing enough skeptisism to research. Panos is right
    “For both the Sun and the Earth we have theories dating back 200 years or more when observations were very poor and knowledge even poorer. And we still maintain those theories and keep building new theories on those old and absolutely unproven and questionable theories.”

    This is no different then the clap-trap that the body needs “eight, eight-oz glasses of water a day.” That has been repeated for years, as the bodies daily water requirement. Do you realize that conventional wisdom is based on one paper that was published in the fifties, and the researcher just made that recomendation up?
    Anne, not discounting your point of view, as yes, there is a tremendous amount of crap out there offered as “truth.” All Panos and I are saying, is that, having personally done research/grant proposals in some of the most “progressive” labs in the country, I saw a level of corruption and group think that I had not encountered anywhere else.

    One of the reasons I love this blog. No one on here is persuing a grant, or is fighting for a dean-ship, or is trying to fail a rivals grad student :)

    Reply

  8. “The NWS in FL addressed the sound *at the time*, “Ducting” is not uncommon in coastal areas and at sea under the right conditions. Absolutely a ‘sky phenomenon’, but not strange or of unknown origin in the least.”
    I’ve lived in Florida for the last 15 years and yes, we have some crazy sky phenoms down here (flash storms, tornados, hurricaines, more lighting strikes then anywhere else in the world.) Throw in a military base and you certainly can get some odd “sky sounds.” But this wasn’t “ducting.” Much too long, too uniform IMO.
    But I certainly could be wrong :)

    Reply

  9. Ok, my vacation is over, and this is pretty much ‘speculation central’ with no emphasis on research (I’m sorry, youtube doesn’t count) so I’m outta here. I’m not going to reply any further to the above comments as nothing productive will come if it.

    If you’re really interested in these things, skip the conspiracy theorist websites and seek out the vast world of decades research and words on paper….contact experts who make their livings in this field. Even amateur astronomers are excellent resources. They often know more details about the universe than professionals (who focus on specific areas of interest) No one is *hiding* anything from anyone. They’ll give you answers. I’ve had very fascinating and fruitful discussions with two NASA scientists the past week. All I had to do was send an e-mail. It’s that simple. I do these things because I am NOT an astronomer or astrophysicist, or atmospheric audio expert, so I go to the people who are and they tell me what they know, and some of it I never would have thought of…because, ya know… I’m not educated in those fields like they are, and I would never PRETEND or attempt to sound like I am (which seems to be an issue *here) just as they wouldn’t actively solicit psychological advice…..

    Reply

    • I just re-read my comment: that last sentence should say: “just as they wouldn’t actively solicit psychological advice from a pig farmer….”

      Had to correct as it didn’t make sense.

      Reply

  10. Sorry to be the bad guy that will brake the news to you again Annie but this is a blog. And in blogs people comment because they feel like sharing their views with others.

    And they should be free to do so as long as they do it without insulting others and as long as they are not spamming or they are not trying to force other to do or accept things without their will.

    Trust me nobody really cares if you or I or anyone else will reply or not on anybody else’s comment.

    Nobody also really cares if you or I or anyone else will comment or not. An nobody really cares about your opinion or mine.

    People post and read for them, not for others.

    So nobody will lose sleep because some one else that he never met and lives in some place 1000 miles away, will stop commenting on a blog. Trust me, if you care about these things then you need some help.

    So if you like to comment on something do it, if you don’t like it you can go down the wormhole you came out in the first place. Nobody really cares.. just stop bitching and crying out for everybody’s attention because it’s becoming annoying.

    Reply

  11. Pingback: Meteor Goes Boom: Fireball in Texas « Strange Sounds in the Sky

  13. Pingback: Strange Sounds and Where We are Today (READ THIS POST DARN IT!) « Strange Sounds in the Sky

  14. The explanation is so simple that creating spectulative remarks makes the believing almost impossible.
    One: World wide sounds are the results of crustal adjustment over base structure stratra.
    Two: The earths crust varies in thickness
    Three: The crust is made up of a variety of sedimentary material
    Four: The Sedimentary materials, by metamorphic processes, are soldified into rock and compose the mantel along with the softer stratra of clays, gravels, sands, and unconsolidated deterious.
    Five: The underlying regions are those of magma, granite, garboros, etc. more resistant and of harder materials.
    Six: The continental plates are made up of the Metamorphic solids and ride over the underlying area.
    Seven: The continental plates are subject to subduction, a process where in the plate mass is diving down and under into the surface.
    Eight: There are magma pools below the continental masses and the continents move above an over these pools. The magma areas create plumes which periodically flare into activities and forced up ward into what we perceive as volcanos and volcanic activies. These areas are considered to be “Hot Spots” The Hawaii Islands are produced by this sort of plume flares.
    Nine: such hot spots are in a variety of sites about the world. As a plume moves up ward it must create sounds.
    Ten: An earthquake is the result of adjustment of the mantel. As the mantel adjusts there is a continous movement. We see the result of this adjust , suddenly, as a quake. These areas are stress Zones, actually more in lines, as opposed to regions, are fractures, some moving with some degree of regularity and other not moving for centuries.
    Eleven: When you consider all of the variables as listed, movement/adjustment, creates frequences
    of some sort, these frequences result into audiable harmonics which in some cases are withing our hearing ability. Pizoelectric effects of a great variety must be created simply because of the variety of tthe matrix of the underlying stratras.
    Twelve: Popping, growling, screeching, humming, booming, cracking, and many sounds would be produced and revebrate in the atmospher. The is no mystical, weird, extra earthly influence associated with this activity. Solar flares do created and influence magnetic fluxing in the mantel, and the poles do shift periodical replace each other. The resulting shifting when gradual disrupt the directional stability of the devices dependent on startionary magnetic poles but gradual is the key here.
    We do not want to be around if the shifting is sudden: The result of such rapid movement can be seen in the continental USA in the Columbia Plateau in Eastern Washington, Regions in South Africia, Russia, china, and India…….These sites and other similar sites are the result of Magmatic Plumes.

    Reply

  15. MrCometwatch sadly has a very limited knowledge about anything except maintaining the preassure of fear on his minions. During Elenin he claimed it was a “dark star”. He said at least Pleiades, comet 45P-Honda and a star cluster behind one of the Tau stars was the comet. He also claimed two asteroids in the asteroid belt (Vesta and Dembowska) were “inbound”, hinting that they’d collide with the earth. At a later stage he claimed Ceres was one of his two previous “inbounds”.

    MrComedywatch (since we’ve now established he knows nothing about comets) regularly blocks people trying to explain what he’s really seeing. Lately he’s even started blocking people for just asking what happened to some of the blocked ones.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s