The True Drop in the Magnetic Field Strength

The weakening of the magnetic field is inconsistent. By comparing the magnetic field strength in the year 1900, where the magnetic pole resided then, to its strength at its current location in 2014, we find that it has dropped by 7% in the Arctic and 4% in Antarctica. The following questions could simply emerge: Why has the magnetic field at its north pole in Antarctica weakened by 4% since the year 1900? Why is the weakening percent not the same in the North and South? and What is the true percentage of the weakening of the field over a century?

Before answering any of these questions, I bring for discussion the Earth 3-magnet model that I proposed earlier. While there is a permanent dipole magnet that is free to swivel, flip and spin, there are 2 induced south polarity magnetic fields that result from the spiralling electrons that flow in the Outer Core. The two induced magnetic fields emerge on the North and South surfaces of Earth around the Axis of Rotation at the orthographic projection of the volume that occupies the space between the Outer Core and Inner Core. The strength of the induced south polarity magnetic fields follows the speed of the spiralling electrons. The velocity of those electrons follow the formula V= W x D; where ‘W’ is the angular velocity of the planet and ‘D’ is the distance of the flowing electrons from the centre of Earth.  Keeping in mind that the Inner Core radius is 1,200 km and that the Outer Core radius is 3,000 km, the spiralling electrons pick up speed while flowing  in the outward direction inside the Outer Core on the equatorial plane. The resultant induced magnetic field varies in strength on the orthographic projection band starting from 1,214 km to 3,141 km distance from the geographic pole or Axis of Rotation when we consider the Earth’s surface curvature. It has minimum strength at 1,214 km and maximum strength at 3,141 km from the Axis of Rotation. The patches of south polarity magnetic field in Antarctica are called ‘Plasmoids’. The counterpart in the Arctic region are not called anything since it is not easy to tell if the south magnet polarity field that is being measured in the North is a result of a permanent dipole magnet or an induced one.

Figure 98-Magnetic Pole Distance from Axis of Rotation between the year 1900 and 2014

To answer the first question of why the magnetic field at its north magnetic pole in Antarctica has weakened by 4% since the year 1900? Let us track the north magnetic pole wandering path in Antarctica.  In the year 1900 it was 2,025 km away from the Geographic Pole. In the year 2014 it reached 2,861 km away from the Geographic Pole. Such a move brings the north magnetic pole closer to the region of the orthographic projection where higher intensity Plasmoids exist and explains the drop of 4% of the north magnetic field force lines as they bond with Plasmoids even at lower geographical layers and before emergence to the surface of Earth. The rate of Plasmoids intensity could easily be deducted by:

  • Comparing the increase of the south polarity magnetic field intensity or for better words the drop of the north magnetic field intensity of 4%; which is equal to 2,435 nT (nano Tesla) over the period between the year 1900 and the year 2014;
  • To the increase of the north magnetic pole distance from the Axis of Rotation from 2,025 to 2,861 over the same period between the year 1900 and the year 2014.
  • We find out that the rate of Plasmoids intensity increase is 3 nT/ km as we move away from 1,200 km to 3,141 km from the Axis of Rotation.

This helps us to isolate the measure of the true strength of the dipole magnetic field from the Plasmoids in both Antarctic and the Arctic regions as shown in the following table, which indicates that only 81% of the emerging magnetic field force lines form the Antarctic find its way to converge at the south magnetic pole in the Arctic region. It also shows that from the year 1900 to the year 2014 the converging magnetic field force in the south magnetic pole  in the Arctic region has dropped by 2%.

Figure 96-Net Magnetic Field without Plasmoids influence

While the original drop of 19% is explained by the planetary magnetic pull of the different celestial bodies of the solar system, the additional drop of 2% may not be explained; unless, the motion of Tyche is proven to be true by NASA and/or other further alignment in the planetary system. The weakening of the magnetic field on the western and southern hemisphere could then be summarized to come from 3 collaborating factors:

  • Both magnetic poles are moving eastward leaving the magnetic field in the western/ southern hemisphere to travel larger distances and areas from pole to pole. As such, the intensity becomes weakest especially mid distance between the two magnetic poles on the western/ southern hemisphere or what is known as the South Atlantic Anomaly.
  • The magnetic field has 2% of its magnetic field force lines not converging at the south magnetic pole in the Arctic region. This means that such a percentage has been strayed into space.
  • The same magnetic pull that caused the 2% of the magnetic field force lines to reroute into space instead of circumventing the planet from pole to pole has also caused the rest of the magnetic field force lines to get protruded and travel further distance into space before converging back to the south magnetic pole in the Arctic region.
  • All such losses and opening up of distance between the magnetic field force lines have resulted in penetration of more charged particles, such as Protons, that arrive from the Sun to the surface of the Earth. The Protons have also gained higher speed while spiralling along the magnetic field force lines in the Thermosphere layer; causing a global increase in thermal radiation as a result of higher impacts between such sped Protons and one another at the Thermosphere layer. Global warming of the planet is thus witnessed.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to The True Drop in the Magnetic Field Strength

  1. Pingback: Why CO2 is on the rise | Earth Changes

  2. Pingback: Why Earth Atmosphere is losing Oxygen | Earth Changes

Leave a Reply

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

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s