COUNTERACTING GLOBAL WARMING, AND A POSSIBLE WAY TO DEFEND AGAINST CMEs.

  

 As on my other posts I've mentioned how I believe Jupiter may have influenced the Earth's weather for millions of years. Like the tree rings which have 11 year cycles (evidence about dendrochronology) Jupiter's magnetic field also goes in 11 year loops and my belief was that perhaps a large impactor hit Jupiter and caused structures like the Great Red Spot at the start of the Ice Age and this then might have cooled the sun because Jupiter's magnetic field is much stronger than the Sun's and it seems possible this then caused the Ice Age, which would only be modulated not caused by the Milankovitch loops which are about 100,000 years. It's been well known by scientists that all the events of the ice ages could easily be explained if the sun was just burning cool.

 

  As I say on my weather control post if the Ice Age was only caused by astronomical cycles, the period after the dinosaurs went extinct for 64 million years of global warming would have gone on indefinitely without something large having hit the Earth at the start of the ice ages to start the 100,000 year astronomical loops but there's no evidence for this.

 Indeed Jupiter acts like a shield from large impactors like comets because it's got more gravity, and large comets and other impactors are hitting Jupiter more often than they may be hitting the Earth.

 By this idea the baseline for the solar radiation is like it was for 64 million years before the mere 1 million years of the ice ages and these indeed might be modulated by the astronomical cycles but if they're caused them they would have gone on indefinitely farther and farther into the past! 

 (Actually nothing would have had to hit the Earth except at the beginning perhaps with the advent of the large asteroid size bodies in the giant impactor phase of the Earth's early history to cause the Milankovich events and this is indeed what we find with much older rocks in periods when the sun was burning cooler as the Milankovich astronomical cycles were continuing. And this means the Milankovich events were on going during the much warmer phases of Earth history including the time of the dinosaurs but there were no glacial events then and many of the dinosaurs ranged into the Arctic and the Antarctic.

So perhaps the only way for the Earth to be warm during the 64 million year period with the rise of the birds and the mammals would be if the sun would have been burning warmer or else greenhouse emissions, and the Milankovich events didn't cause this. As I'll say below I found out that the volcanic eruptions of the pleistoscene correlate well with the start of the ice ages and the peaks in the glaciation recently from another website and so now I agree that the volcanoes may mostly have caused the ice ages including the time of the snowball Earth events because there were really strong submarine volcanoes that associate with these events.

 Even so as I'll be discussing there may be valuable science involved in research about the ice ages including using small star chips boosted by lasers to quickly cheaply research surfaces of the solar system. 

 As I'll be discussing since the sun puts out a fifth of its energy in neutrino radiation this may have possible influence on the volcanoes by way of the recent evidence that neutrinos actually change their radiance from the Sun in 11-year Cycles just like Jupiter, and presumably because of Jupiter, and this might be because of simple mechanical pressure by the magnetic field squeezing the Sun with heating combined with the solar gravity and by its modulating and causing a different rate of fusion for the neutrinos.

The magnetic field of Jupiter would be modulated by it's volcanic (and highly magnetic) satellite Io eclipsing it every 22 years with precession around Jupiter.  On sunspot charts two 11 year loops are seen and with each second loop a reduction in the top of the curve  would be caused by this eclipse.

 Also this would solve another mystery about why the temperature is the hottest on the outside of the Sun because the particles of the sun are being pulled out by the gravity and magnetic field of Jupiter and at this point they're oscillating back and forth rapidly with more room to move and this makes them much hotter under the influence of other radiation outward from the Sun. We could say heat doesn't flow from cold to hot usually or it just "flows upward sometimes"..

 For reasons like these including the cause of global warming because the last Ice Age was only 75,000 years and the rest were 100 or even 200000 years, it seems possible the structure or structures like the Great Red Spot of Jupiter having damped the field for the ice ages are finally fizzling away by chemical and/or mechanical erosion on Jupiter, and so Jupiter has had influence on the Earth's weather.

In general throughout most of the time when we measured the Sun's temperature as with global warming historically the sunspots have been increasing as from 1850 to about 1960 even while the Sun's temperature hasn't been rising supposedly. Events like the Maunder minimum and the Dalton minimum as you see could also be explained perhaps by smaller impactors than the Great Red Spot impactor.  

 Presumably if these impactors hit Jupiter we would see evidence with more exploration as I'll discuss, perhaps some splashing upward of the debris from the impact that might show a record on the surface of the moons of Jupiter like Europa or Callisto, and perhaps elsewhere on other planets like Mars or even on the moon.

 If Jupiter is changing the sun's magnetic field this would be by an outside influence and not as some have believed to be caused by a dynamo inside the sun.

 It would be expected that since the influence on the magnetic field by Jupiter is from the outside that the currents of the loops inside the magnetic field of the sun itself would only be near the surface. According to this link (Northwestern U.) that's exactly what happens..The currents only reach down to about 20,000 miles not 130000 miles to the center as had been believed.

While it's known that the sun's magnetic field changes in 11 year cycles, longer-term changes like for global warming haven't yet been established so this can't be ruled out yet.

 Another possibility I consider is that the sun actually radiates 1/5 of its energy in neutrinos. While the interaction for each neutrino is small when many more interactions are considered it may have influence and solar neutrinos have been found to change radioactivity rates of isotopes also in 11 year events. 

 I think of the magnetic field influence and the way that an impactor could decrease the amount of influence from Jupiter as a possible influence of changes in solar radiation like for the ice ages,  but also the change in the neutrinos might have some influence on the heat of the Earth like for recent global warming mostly from inside because most of the neutrinos will be interacting with the atoms of the Earth and there are a lot more atoms inside the Earth than out!

 This link from the physics World site says that the fluctuation of the neutrinos has been established with 11-year cycle of the Sun but the page also says there's no known way this could be so with established physics and while others here say that the correlation is not well established, a lot of physicists believe the correlation exists.

 Here I offer the following simple explanation..

  My idea is that radioactivity of the atoms in the lab we see with the machine that change with the solar flux involves the input of a solar neutrino of the right type of quantum number to match with electrons around the radius of the ready to be radioactive atom at that time by thermal random motion and also combining with the proton to form a neutron which wouldn't then attract by the strong force and this radiates out the neutron with radioactivity which is converted to a proton and an electron in about 12 minutes.

 This could be a possible source of heat for some of the global warming since the output of the usual light from the sun hasn't changed much or actually we don't yet know how much it's changed. Since it's mostly from inside the Earth it wouldn't be seen as radioactive heating much.

 

 If you like Click Here for my post about how we might reduce radioactivity like by reducing radioactive waste by way of this type of influence of the neutrinos from the Sun, or see the same link at the end of my post.

 You may note that few of the neutrinos actually interact with the atoms of the Earth. And even while the neutrinos are of small energy essentially they would act as a catalyst of the interaction by way of the right quantum numbers and the nuclear reaction itself may be far more powerful and enough to heat the Earth so while I realize this maybe less plausible than other explanations it seems possible at any rate..

 Since the modern maximum in the 60s the sun spots have been decreasing and the temperature of the sun has been going down while global temperatures have risen. This might seem to be evidence that the sun has nothing to do with the weather but it's hard to see how the ice ages for the time between the ice ages from the dinosaurs could have been caused by something people had done.  

 We look at records of the change in world temperatures historically and this is minor compared to the changes in the weather in the ice ages to the interglacial ages or from the Ice ages to own era.

 As I say the sun radiates a fifth of its energy in neutrinos, and one thing we know about neutrinos is that they can change types as they radiate out from their source. Due to the quantum numbers only one type of neutrino will fit the events of positive beta radioactivity as I say on my post, so I think it's possible that cooling the sun would actually make the neutrinos convert over to this type of neutrino (anti e neutrino) more often by lowering the energy of the reaction inside that makes more neutrinos and these might actually cause more heating of the Earth from the inside by the radioactivity even while the sun is cooling. Magnetic heating and cooling may not be the same as the thermal temperature of the sun and may be more involved with neutrino radiation. Magnetic "heat" may be independant and this is why the temperature of the sun itself hasn't changed much. Magnetic heating may cause more heating of the Sun and thus the Earth.

 (Magnetism and electricity may not be completely the same as Maxwell believed. My belief about this is that like heating and cooling in thermodynamics and also like gravity and inertia or mass and energy, these are not completely equivalent. For example recent research shows that heating is not completely the inverse of cooling. If relativity were true completely we would expect them to be completely equivalent. 

 This is what we were always taught in physics about how an ice cube melting can be time reversed when it's cooling but it's easy to see this really isn't true because the water doesn't flow up to the ice cube and then freeze in the shape of the ice cube. So the idea that gravity and inertia are completely equivalent I don't buy into and so we can say that the magnetic field of the Sun not being equivalent to the thermodynamic electric field of the atoms actually can be shielded considerably independently of the heat shield for the starchip we might boost to the Sun for research.

While the second law of thermodynamics shows that heat flows generally from hot to cold it doesn't say why, and by relativity we would say that it would be equally valid unless relativity is incomplete. Otherwise we have an explanation of it like Aristotle's that smoke rises because it's the most natural thing for it to do, an explanation that explains nothing.. Click Here is a recent post of mine about why I think relativity is incomplete or if you like you can click the same link at the end of the post..  I also include links to what I consider to be some of my most classic posts about this, mellowed with age, not  yawns!)

 

 Cooling the sun thermally could actually make more neutrinos somewhat like the Curie limit for magnetism because the reaction needs the right angle of the neutrinos and the electron into the proton by way of the magnetic poles aligning to create the neutron will be like trying a code to fit in the lock at the right angle and if there's less thermal vibration of the atoms with a cooler solar temperature this might actually create more neutrinos not less. This mechanism of change in the 11 year neutrino flux by changes in the angle in solar heat rather than pressure may be an important or most important way the neutrino flux changes with these loops and may carry over to more intensive solar events like the ice ages over geologic time..

Click Here for why I think that this type of neutrino might be useful for this possible explanation as a cause of global warming or see the same link at the end of the site if you like.

Why The Greenhouse Effect Isn't the Only Cause For Global Warming of Venus.

The idea that scorching temperatures of Venus are evidence for greenhouse emissions may not be complete because it's been found that Venus is actually putting out more heat than it's taking in from the Sun and this might be simply by volcanoes heating the atmosphere and maybe not so much from carbon dioxide from those volcanoes causing the greenhouse events on Venus. 

 Venus may get its heat itself from the tidal forces by keeping the same face to the Earth all the time, the same as how two thirds of the earthquakes and volcanoes on Earth happen within 10 days of the 1st of the month when the moon is closest.

 So the argument that the heating of the rocks may have released carbon dioxide, and this may have heated the temperature of Venus more which may have released more carbon dioxide to cause a runaway global warning event on Venus may be wrong. Venus is closer to the Sun and it has more volcanoes so it just has more heat.

 If there was not more keeping the Earth's temperature from rising we would certainly say that during the time of the dinosaurs and also during some of the interglacial ages since the climate was warmer there might have been a lot of release of carbon dioxide from the rocks and this could have led to the runaway greenhouse effect but it didn't. Whatever caused the temperature to not indefinitely rise for all this time surely must not be luck and so this type of event might be discounted as we add more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

It might seem that the volcanic eruptions on Venus might cause and Ice Age for Venus like on Snowball Earth and the reason this may not have happened is because as they say on the link about how volcanoes correlated with the ice ages including the peak of the times and the onset of the cooling events, rhyolite lava flows may have caused global warming but usual volcano eruptions may have caused cooling, so perhaps the global warming of Venus was mostly because of these rhyolite lava flows.

 As has been believed, all the changes of the ice ages could be explained quite readily by way of just the sun with reduced heat and dramatic rapid changes in global temperature aren't the express property of our machines causing more global warming.

We can explain global warming currently by greenhouse gases emitted by humans but we need some other cause for the onset of the ice ages over the time since the extinction of the dinosaurs.. And it would seem the ice ages won't match the astronomical causes well, if the astronomical causes aren't sufficient and neither is any influence by us then. 

 We certainly need some other explanation for the ice ages and other weather and even if recent warming is caused by the influence of CO2, After astronomical events, greenhouse gasses, and dust as I'll say below, I think we still need a fourth major general cause of the changes in the weather. 

 The influence of Jupiter on the weather over geologic time by way of impactors while yet unproven, may be a simple and straightforward solution and it might be influenced by the neutrino flux.

 Even if it's not I believe there's (often) more to it than astronomical loops or CO2.

 Certainly greenhouse gases and probably the astronomical loops can modulate the ice ages but the question is, they modulate what?

If nothing hit the Earth, there would need to be a sudden increase in greenhouse gases at the onset of the Ice Age since the astronomical influences are no different presumably from the 64 million years and more before that in geologic time when there were no ice ages. However this AI link shows that there was no sudden decrease in carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases at the beginning of the Ice Age. 

(On the link the site also makes the claim that the CO2 follows not proceeds the change in temperatures. While this would also support my idea that CO2 isn't the cause of global warming, I've seen sites that claim the opposite is true.)

One question that scientists are researching is about why halfway through the Pleistocene the astronomical cycles went from 41,000 years to about 100,000 years. 

 If Greenhouse emissions can't change the astronomical loops, I would ask how could the Milankovitch Cycles suddenly go into 100,000 year loops. It's true we can't explain it by an impactor hitting the Earth.

 It's possible with all the ice weighing down the Earth it changed its angular momentum and that flipped it into other resonances of the orbits.

If another impactor had hit Jupiter, this could have changed the ice by changing the solar heat, and this might have changed the astronomical loops.

 Gravity and the orbits tend to be nonlinear and even while the Earth's flip from a low energy to a high energy orbit is possible, returning to this orbit after the change seems improbable. So the older evidence for the Milankovitch events before the ice ages seems incongruent with the idea that in more ancient events the Milankovitch loops were 100,000 years, yet during the start of the ice ages they were at 41,000 years and then halfway through they converted again to 100,000 year loops.

Click Here for a Smithsonian page about how they're looking at evidence about ice in Antarctica to see what may have caused this.

 Research is ongoing about what changed the astronomical events but I also ask what in the world could have caused the general changes about the ice ages.

 About Jupiter's influence on the Earth's weather to me the main smoking gun about this would just be that the tree rings are showing continuous loops of about 11 years with these records which is the period of the orbit of Jupiter and the sunspots. Solar radiation like light and heat has changed by 0.04% over the time we've been measuring it. Jupiter must be influencing the plants somehow so we think that it may be influencing the weather and if it is then this may be a possible contributing cause of the ice ages by way of Jupiter and the Sun.

  I find it inconceivable that the tree rings wouldn't have continuous changes associated with Jupiter and the sunspots without some weather influence (perhaps neutrino influenced heating or magnetism) to change the rate of growth of the plants like with oxygen, radioactivity in the clouds, rates of lightning caused by this radioactivity, how much rain is falling on the Earth, combinations of these, or other causes.

If Jupiter is influencing radioactivity rates on the Earth in 11 year cycles, it seems possible it might influence it in unknown ways over geologic time and be a contributing cause of the radioactivity of the Earth. (Some elements will not be as changeable by the influence from the outside, so while most of the radioactivity out will be much the same, a considerable degree would be energised by the neutrinos. So as I'll say while this might allow us a possible way to control earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanos by reducing Jupiters influence on the Sun and cool the Earth like by a magnetic bubble shield between Jupiter and the Sun, it may only allow partial control over these events.)

 I don't think necessarily that the association between greenhouse gases and the changes of the glacial and the interglacial ages are a causal connection.

This is because when the Earth cools down the plants reduce their activity and they stop using carbon dioxide from the animals so there's more carbon dioxide and this then raises the temperature back up in a simple loop that keeps the temperature the same for millions of years by way of carbon dioxide. 

 There's not yet enough data to prove or disprove if there's been a general heating of the planets with increase of the global warming on Earth by the same event.

   However I've read that there is evidence that when sun heats up and changes shorter term that Neptune and Mars having greenhouse gases also change their temperature somewhat with the solar flux. 

On this link Brave Browser we see that the changes in Neptune are actually caused by distance from the Sun and so the amount of solar radiation it receives and changes on Mars are not due to the greenhouse effect due to the thin atmosphere, and here too the changes are considerably much not caused by the greenhouse effect. 

  Both planets have a high percentage of carbon dioxide in their atmospheres however, and while of course the atmosphere of planets like Mars or Neptune are special, this short-term flux in the heating of the planets with changes in the solar radiation is a general prediction of my idea and also as we find out more about the weather history of the planets, a general rise in global warming with other planets like over the last hundred years 100 years from now as the Earth has been heating with the records if caused mostly by general change of the sun might be a prediction of this. 

  Or at any rate there might be a general change in the magnetic field of the Sun during the ice ages found in the records left on the surfaces of the planets and moons compared to the time since then and also in the times before them.

 (While this is out of range of our sensors now this may be relatively easy to prove in the years ahead by a method I devised.. By this we may send small cheap starchips boosted by lasers to explore the solar system rapidly and find out what the planets tell us about long-term changes in the solar radiation including the magnetic or even radioactive events as it may have influenced their surface history. 

 As I say on my other posts, use of these small star chips would be by self-assembly in orbit around planets perhaps by using magnetic fields around each of them to unify into something like a 3D printer, then sending more ink by way of the lasers to print out drones. These would go down to the surface of the planet to find and retrieve samples if we also send fuel pellets by way of the lasers to power the drone. Then the drones would boost back up to orbit where we could also print out a laser to boost the samples back to us. 

 (This could even be useful to make a lot of money by finding the diamonds with the drones on planets like Saturn or Neptune! According to this NASA page It's believed that it's raining diamonds on both these planets  because there's lots of carbon and lots of pressure.)

 Finally we could use a magnetic net near the Earth to retrieve the diamonds with the small starships perhaps each carrying one diamond for lots of wealth... and science value.)

 In any event something must have caused the Earth to be much warmer before and after the time of the extinction of the dinosaurs to the time of the ice ages and now, and this might be no concern.  

Recent evidence supposedly has been found that the Gulf Stream ocean flow is changing and it might even reverse.

  If we look at how the Gulf Stream has increased or decreased only by how it then changes the biology would we know more about what these changes are and whether our influence is even the cause or not.

 Greenhouse gases are found on other planets like Neptune and Mars but the only sure changes with general rise and fall temperature may be when the sun heats up or cools down. While it's true Mars has a thin atmosphere, we would expect to get results by ratio according to the degree to which there's a large amount of carbon dioxide blended with other gases in the atmosphere.

The Influence of Dust on Global Weather not Greenhouse Gasses

While I believe that greenhouse gases may not have as much influence on the world's weather as outside modulation if it's found at any rate that the other planets just heat up or cool down with changes in the sun, I believe that like the Milankovich events dust created by people may modulate the weather.

 If you look at a picture of the world at night and you see where the brightest lights are they're on the east coast to the United States. This means the most machines generating dust are also there more than anywhere else in the world and according to this site this is where the global cooling has shown the most change.

(On the link they say that the cooling of the East coast of the US maybe caused by more cloud cover in the tropical Pacific which then rotates up and around to the Northeastern and central US and back down to the E. Coast with also more cloud cover there which shields from the sunlight and cools the E Coast. 

I would think this isn't causal link and this is because the jet stream may be held down by the dust which is a more powerful influence than just high pressure rising in the W. as with the droughts in the West. We might expect if there's more cloud cover in the Pacific like this there could be more cooling there too but there isn't.

Perhaps first the jet stream is influenced by the dust and this then carries over to the Pacific causing the clouds and these then cause more influence to the East. We might be able to find evidence for this in how the energy of the force is transmitted from the east coast to the west by way of tension on the jet stream.

  The jet stream is powerful and whatever holds it down if it's strong enough is going to have a lot of influence on the world generally because the jet stream has a lot of energy..it's moving at hundreds of miles per hour and for example it's believed that if we can harness the power of the jet stream like with machines this will give us 400 times as much energy as we would need.)

 The dust is sticky and it's dragged down the jet stream as it's cooling because it shields from the sun and then the jet stream being a continuous loop all the way around the world changes much of the rest of the world's weather.   

 This also involves heating like in the west coast of the United States because if the jet stream is moved N by the tension it's actually centering around the E. coast of the United States for changing much of the rest of the world's weather.

 So if we would want to stop these weather events some way we would want to move the jet stream or remove the dust. Perhaps the best way would just be to shut down more of the machines or use solar power or the advent of fusion.

It's been found that the Milankovich cycles and levels of carbon dioxide don't correlate  as closely to the start of ice ages or the peaks of the glaciation nearly as much as the influence of large volcanic eruptions. These produce aerosols that cool down the planet.

Click Here for the link.

But what may have caused these volcanic eruptions to increase as the radioactivity of the Earth was generally decreasing might need another explanation itself and by this idea first the Jupiter impactor might have increased the number of neutrinos being emitted by the Sun by way of the reduced temperature increasing the solar neutrino influence and that in turn may have caused the radioactivity of the Earth to increase and with them the volcanoes and the ice ages.

Even so because of this, here I accept that neither CO2, dust, or astronomical events are the cause of the ice ages, and that this change in volcanism may be in need of improvement itself. If the Earth's volcanism is cooling down over geologic time from the start of the Earth then why did it then heat up to start the ice ages if the curve is generally lower and why has it stopped now for this interglacial age? 

Radioactivity would seem to influence these large volcanos and yet by continual cooling of the Earth this might seem to be without the outside influence of Jupiter. 

Outside influence of Jupiter if viable may be the cause of the solar neutrino cycle and since it may also influence volcanism, this may have value to us as I say below because we may be able to build shields that will help us to limit the influence of Jupiter causing either ice ages or global warming if so.

In addition to controlling global temperatures if we want, if the neutrino connection is viable this might also help us to control earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcano eruptions. The the other events contributing to the ice ages will have their own percentage of the influence and so we might only be able to reduce these by a certain percentage but this might save a lot of lives and reduce these disasters.

According to this AI search page, "radioactive heating from the Earth is constant and shows no change over time (other than a gradual reduction since the start of the Earth)".. If the neutrinos are influencing the heat this might only be caused by overlapping the different radioactive elements of the Earth and so they might seem to have a smooth heat.

I would think a sudden eruption of a lot of large volcanoes with the Ice Age events might show a change of some sort about the radioactivity powering these volcanoes. 

 So far no evidence has been found for changes in the Earth's radioactivity at the beginning of the ice age, but not much research has yet been done about this. So the influence of radioactivity on global cooling is a possibility. Some evidence and some weather, is better than no weather!

 Whatever caused the Earth to be heating, we still have the need to defend against solar  events like the CMEs.. These are the giant solar plasmas that may wreak havoc on the power grid and it's been said that we're going to be clobbered if one hits us and we're overdue by historical evidence that was unknown before they built the power grid. So worldwide it may knock out both the power grid by resonance and the internet and 30 nuclear power plants at once if we get hit.

SHIELDING FROM CME'S AND PERHAPS GLOBAL WARMING

 Some have proposed that we could stop global warming by putting a large shade between the Earth and the Sun, and these plans have been improving by use of the material like carbon fibers so they're not so heavy or huge and so they might be somewhat cheaper.

Even so the engineering would be on a large scale and expensive.

Here I propose that we use a magnetic shield between Jupiter and the Sun to stop Jupiter's influence at the point when we might find a CME is beginning to form on the Sun, this might be most common at the time when the sun spots are at a maximum also.

 For this instead of using a heavy expensive optical shade as for global warming boosted far away I think instead we might be able to use a much simpler lighter cheap magnetic bubble between Jupiter and the Sun or to stop the CMEs a closer shield between the Earth and the Sun.

  Magnetic bubbles have been proposed to send space vehicles to different areas of the solar system or beyond by way of Einstein's idea of light having radiation pressure to power the sail.

  One good thing about magnetic bubbles is about how the further they get from the Sun the more they expand so it takes no more power to get more acceleration outward from the Sun.

This AI search page says that magnetic bubbles are being researched for shields around spacecraft to shield from solar radiation events. While the link says larger shields might not be as efficient because they need to be high energy enough to totally deflect the CME I think this might be solved by using more magnetic bubbles in an array, like how more small telescopes can be used for longer baseline astronomy.

 I believe that since it might have to be between the Sun and Jupiter where the Earth is when most of the CMEs would radiate out towards Jupiter with Earth between, this would only be the most probable time when they would hit the Earth, so we wouldn't have to pay for high payload cost to boost the shield far and so most of the time we could just keep it turned off.

By this the shield also wouldn't be like a large radio star in the sky which wouldn't be good for  radio astronomy or communications.

But because it radiates out with heating as the magnetic field of Jupiter is stronger, the bubble shield would also get stronger to counteract it more, saving a lot on cost and size of the shield.

  Indeed this might be a good way to counteract global warming itself if the idea that Jupiter is changing the weather is true since this might be much cheaper and simpler than an elaborate optical shade between the Earth and the Sun. It's partially powered by the outside magnetic field itself so it's cheaper.

Jupiter is much further away from the Sun than the Earth and so if we intercepted the magnetic field and make the CME fizzle out before it reaches the Earth we wouldn't have to influence the plasma directly from Jupiter just between it so instead of it being influenced over light hours we would still have the half hour delay between the Sun and the Earth at the speed of light. 

 Also we would need good sensors like neutrino sensors to find out when the CME is about to start (neutrinos may give major advanced notice about events deep inside the sun because the solar storms spend quite a lot of time inside the Sun before they radiate out) and I think while we couldn't directly cancel it right away as it moves towards the Earth it would gradually fizzle out if we intercepted it with the shield.

 Solving another Ice Age in our future with a shield, which might also be used to boost Jupiter's influence on the Sun, would reduce the issues about how people can't move from their national boundaries like they did in the days before when there were no fences and the weather changed.

 On the other hand while these methods could be used to reduce global warming, I would say we wouldn't even want to use the shields to cool the Earth if global warming is actually caused by Jupiter's influence since the most natural way for the Earth would be generally warm like it was for 64 million years. Changing this would seem to be expensive and unnecessary.

 Perhaps we will find that if the Great Red Spot really is influencing the weather and fizzling away, it would seem the probability of another such large impact hitting Jupiter is small and because the last ice age was only 75,000 years and many of them were 100,000 or 250,000 years we may just be entering into another long-term period of mild weather like to 64 million years after the dinosaurs, and we may not have to do anything for the weather to stay like this indefinitely on into our future.

 While stopping CMEs may save us from the Ice Age if by Jupiter, changing the world's temperature by this method may not be advised because it may be putting too many eggs in one basket etc. Even so if the magnetic bubble shield was ever built it could easily be shut down unlike an optical shield.

  During some of the interglacial ages hippopotamuses were far north as England but we really may not want reindeer as far south as Spain. Certainly before putting up a shield for other than solving CMEs like for short-term use we might want to make especially sure that Jupiter's simple influence is causing global warming if we want to reduce it. 

 

  I imagine using one shield like this near the Earth first for more continual defense against the CMEs if needed, but also another one, or an array moving continuously around the sun with Jupiter as it moves to counteract global warming to "whatever degree" we might want (this could also reduce the CMEs in general). Because part of the magnetic field would make it past the bubble this would make it so it wouldn't remove all of the sunspot radiation events which may be valuable to life on Earth at any rate changing something perhaps like the oxygen rates in the air if the dendrochronology and the other evidence has value.

Mostly counteracting global warming as I say might be expensive and possibly unnecessary.. if the world is indeed entering into a long-term interglacial age by natural events as Jupiter might be multiplying up its flux the reduced damping from the impactor event or events that caused the Ice Age, a cheaper CME Shield would seem to be the best value.

Even if neutrinos turn out not to cause volcanoes as much, I think another use of Starships might be to send them right into the sun and use small but high energy magnetic bubbles around them to shield from the magnetic field and also metamaterials of the right size to hopefully counteract a lot of the heat perhaps also with miniature Peltier cooling or magnetic cooling on the chip. We might not have to pay much for the return trip of the starchip after it moves into the Sun with the laser because the radiation pressure of the sun would then accelerate it outward at high speed to us..

One thing we can say about heat is that at short distance it doesn't take nearly so much cooling to keep it cool. This is like pressure which is force per unit area and you can get much more huge pressure if the area is really small. 

 So too it might not take huge amounts of heat to cool the starchip if we also either use the energy of the Sun or perhaps just a small nuclear boost on the starchip if it had enough shielding from the heat and using starchips like this may be valuable to research about the Sun more than even the neutrinos perhaps.

 

Here again for you is my post about reducing radioactivity which may also may be useful as a sensor to give us advance warning about CME events as has been noted. Here's a page (Interesting Engineering) about UsingNeutrinos for an Advanced CME Warning Method. A good neutrino sensor would enable us to know when to turn off the power grid and this might save us from the CME Adverse Events.

Here again is my post about why I think this  type of neutrino the anti e neutrino might be one possible explanation of recent global warming.

 Even so for longer-term changes I believe it's possible that the Jupiter impactor events might be a contributor to a considerable percentage of the ice ages.

As promised, here's a my post about why I think relativity seems incomplete. Thanks for your science wit and wage. 

Improved Methods of Weather Control at Medium Scales

 

I'm thinking about ways to cause wind and rain for weather control. I thought of an orbiting or an cheap lightweight inflatable airship lens or mirror. This is also like spinning air. To bend heat waves it's been found that by spinning a disk of air of a few feet it becomes a lens that focuses the heat. This would be lightweight.. and cheap to put into orbit or in the airship and it focuses the heat down.. And this could create temperature gradients "also known as wind!" as on the on the leading edge of the cloud, you have more heat on one side that melts the ice crystals there. And this helps the gradient of cooling that moves the cloud on the other side of the front. Moving the cloud may have use as well as just inducing rain on the leading edge.  One side has more heat and the other has more cooling and so they both tend to move the cloud at any rate if we choose a cloud of the optimal size.

One large cloud can weigh a million tons but we may be able to manage steam of more moderate size!

But also if an artificial tornado is used this can send heat into the cloud to melt the ice crystals. And this will make the ice crystals start to sink and rain to start.  The artificial tornado might be energized from the ground or from above with sinking air. Artificial tornadoes have been used to do things like extract the waste heat from power plants. Below these are created by fans and as the air rises it reaches the zone of downward flow and this primes the pump and then it forms a cooling tornado that goes down and reaches the ground with the reservoir to get the rain like in the desert.

  We might make it so that even in the desert where if you have heat to melt the ice or cloud, the ice crystals or rain doesn't reach the ground or fizzles out because of high pressure because it causes removal of more clouds..But there are 4 ft of rain above us even above the desert and it's interesting how we might get the rain above to the thirsty cities and country of the West.

 And so in the desert you've got kind of high pressure when the skies are not cloudy all day, high pressure to sell some more songs by Steven Foster! Because this might work best for clouds that are low where it's not so hot as the desert I can imagine that we could extract the rain from clouds and adjacent areas and then pipe that rain water to the reservoirs in the desert.
   

 I had thought of the large air filled lens inside the airship above the cloud.. this would send down the heating beam by focusing the light from the sun and that would melt the ice crystals in the cloud so they fall down.  You have fans that swirl the air up and that would then connect to the area beneath the cloud where it's starting to rain. And that would pump the air back down and prime the rain..a sort of a siphon that siphons off the rain of the cloud provided the tornado is underneath it where you want it to rain.

It's possible that instead of a tornado and the lens, we might make a magnetic beam that's been solar powered charging it all night in the shade of the heat. The beam radiates down and this would make it so that it would spin a magnetic field into the cloud that itself would spiral. And that would also make the crystals melt and start to prime the pump. The flow of melted ice goes down to the bottom of the cloud and it then might prime the tornado at the bottom of the spiral. 

And this may be an all in one method of sending down the rain from the cloud simply by turning on a magnetic beam that spirals from an airship above the rain cloud. 

 A possible way to augment the power of this event might be by dropping crystals of silver iodide or something like salt from the airship into the spiral of the magnetic field and also down into the tornado.

 One problem is that tornadoes are not totally safe and so for safety measures we might try to control the tornado with the magnetic field by computer actuation or we might have special trucks with wide tops that are built to collect all the water, or special wide land collecting areas or other methods. Another possible way to do this might be to add more rain inside the tornado so it tends to be heavier and spin slower and thus more predictable.

On my main page about weather control I discuss using drones to actually go near the side of a tornado we might want to stop and use something like a water jet or a laser beam to interrupt the flow of the tornado and this could help disperse it more rapidly. This might also be a way to control artificial tornadoes we also might use, as to cause rain for the desert.

Also, I note that I think it's possible that we might be able to make use of the  recent discovery that lightning actually causes it to rain more by way of the shockwave.

So it's possible that we could control the lightning with lasers as they're doing from the ground with a way to guide it so it doesn't hit the building when it lands. But most of the lightning is between the clouds. So using crossed lasers or particle beams might be useful to send lightning between the clouds so lightning won't hit the ground and yet we can hopefully make it rain more at the time when rain the has most value. In the desert, for example we might be able to prime it and make enough lightning to make it rain.

 Another possibility is to use propellers. I thought of using propellers to move the cloud where you want to move it to because it's been found that helicopter shock waves actually cause rain, by way of the sonic boom. So we could move helicopters or large drones on one side of the cloud and probably move it away while generating more cooling rain at the same time where we might want it to rain.

 

 

 

Simulation Of Green Spaces and Finding Underlying Value of Oxygen, Shade, Pollution Reduction, and More..

 It's been well established that access to plants and pets is good for general health.

I think there may be several ways this is possible. One is that even a lawn or other area like this stays about 30 degrees cooler in the heat and the small animals flourish there. 

 Trees may help in other ways, with shade in the heat and by moisture, protection from the rain as well as in the winter evergreen trees even protect from the snow. Perhaps most important, green spaces give more oxygen..

 Since the grass doesn't give much shade or protection from the snow, one thing we might predict is how the health benefits of living near trees are greater than than for those who just live near lawns. 

And while in the winter it's cold even without the trees, and while it might be colder near the trees because they're evergreen and they give shade, in general there might be a slight effect of the tree to improve the health of a person in winter because they also give oxygen and they even protect from the snow at least if beneath them. 

 Since I walk a lot and I want to stay fit there is a line of trees up a hill near where I hill where they planted them, And so on the summer I walk in that line of the edge the shade all the way up and down two or three times for a cardio boost, sort of recycling the shade and this is a more comfortable in the heat and this is what I think may have been going on when we were living in the tropics.. Perhaps the rainforest wasn't so miserable because it's constantly raining, and when you're moist you feel five times cooler than when you're dry and because we were constantly in and out of the shade.

 Another aspect of green spaces may be about how as we looked around in evolution all the time we were seeing all kinds of plants around us except if we lived in the desert. 

 If, as has been noted, heredity is stored environment, the sight of plants themselves might have a strong influence on how we think and feel. Another influence may be by the wildlife that may live in the green space which gives another element of reality to the viewer.

 Therefore those who mostly live near concrete may show the smallest positive influence of green spaces like lawns, because they neither see the plants or animals as much, nor do they get the oxygen or the cooling in the heat. 

Those who live near lawns but no trees are getting some visual energy, by the wavelength of the greenness of the herbs to their vision ( our eyes are more sensitive to Green than any other color) oxygen, cooling, moisture, and the possible influence of some types of wildlife hey it's Saturday night! throw a party! 

 The sounds of wildlife may also have influence on health because if there is no sound in the room where you live it's been found that your brain doesn't have a loop of reaction back and forth to constantly refine the brain and sensation by these small sounds.

 The sounds of animals may be more valuable than just sounds around the house to our health (What's that RV doing in the living room!) in this respect because they create more dynamic tension and may exercise your brain more.

It's been found the plants grow faster when they give sound like classical music or mostly any vibration. So it might make us also do well if we have these same vibrations.. Even the sound of the wind through the trees may be good for our health and when we emerge out into the sunshine the sight of the clouds and the blue sky may be a boost to our health also as well as just as in evolution we can meet people there we see more often..

These are some of the reasons, not just the green spaces being outdoors is good for health.

It would seem that plants also filter out pollution so small oxygen filters that would go in the nose powered by nuclear batteries like the chinese have invented that would last 100 years and with a special oxygen compound that stores a large amount of oxygen may be of use.   

 This might also be a good way to defend against pollution for living in the city much more cheaply than a gas mask to wear is just for the rich! Just small fans in your nose that make you feel a lot better without pollution and to reduce covid or bird flu events. 

 This could be useful for doctors as they treat health issues and also about antibiotic resistance which may become worse than Covid according to some science sites. This might be useful for farmers and for the cows themselves to wear these filters and for people who live near the beach which is most ..3/4 of the bacteria in the air at the shore are bad bacteria caused by people. Evolution may never have been like this And now you can see why the real estate value of property with a view of the water is up 100%, well, somewhat!

 These aspects, oxygen, moisture, shade from the heat, reduction of pollution, the visual aspect of both the plants and the animals, natural sounds of animals to energize the brain that often are around green spaces, all these are measurable by experiment to find out which ones are the most valuable. We might imagine the visual aspects could all be simulated by virtual reality for the benefits of green spaces without living near them like for those who can't afford access, and oxygen might be used with this VR simulation, as well as the sounds of wildlife.

  The main part of the simulation about staying cool in the heat might be allowed by air conditioning, alternating with lots of heat to simulate going in and outside the sunshine as well as with sun lamps since it's become apparent that all the wonders of vitamin D actually have turned out to be caused by sunshine on skin..

 Other science has shown how alternating between hot and cool is good for your immune system.. of course because most people lived by the ocean In evolution as they do now before the invention of fire  "When will they invent fire?" I was attributing this health value of alternating hot and cold to how we would just go in and out of the water but I also realized that in the tropics we were also going in and out of the shade of the plants.. 

 This is why for an indoor simulation of a green space as I say we might want to alternate heaters with air conditioners for the most healthy event, or any rate to prove this.

  If some of these influences are more powerful than others it might be a lot easier to get the result than with the 100% VR simulation. And it seems possible some of these isolated influences could be multiplied up more than natural or with alternation etc. for an even more valuable boost to health.

 

 

 40 Years Earned of 1/3 Asleep Saved !

A Hungarian man once spent 40 years of his life without even once going to sleep until the time he died.

Here's a Reel from Instagram for you about this..

Paul Kern was in battle in WWI when a bullet wounded the frontal lobe of his brain.

Until his death in 1955, he didn't sleep from then on.

His curious condition made him the subject of several intense tests by brain and nerve specialists throughout Europe, but none could ever trace just why his body no longer needed sleep.

"From the moment Mr. Kern opened his eyes in Luxemberg, he did not sleep, nor did he express the slightest desire to do so."

Apart from the occasional headache, Kern's brain mysteriously did not require sleep as an essential form of rest, seeing as his work as a government administrator, which he continued doing after the incident, was never affected.

More than the lack of sleep, he reported that the many hours he spent awake in bed trying to lure sleep in exhausted him more than staying awake.

Later, Kern began a routine of laying down and closing his eyes for 2 hours every day.

While he was completely alert and responsive during this time, experts think his brain was able to rest for him to function seamlessly for the remainder of his active hours

.

My Comments..This might seem to be useful like for improving efficiency..If everyone didn't sleep we could do more work if this type of insomnia caused no harm and it could also be used for the military..

My question would be about Fatal Familial Insomnia FFI a form of insomnia also that goes on without sleep,

 Like it says on The Jug of Vivarin May Cause Drowsiness but Don't Count on It!.. 

 According to this Wikipedia link FFI is  fatal to most people who have it in about three months.. this is caused by prions like in Alzheimer's and this is why FFI is usually fatal, while as in the headline the other type of insomnia doesn't seem to even have adverse events.

I surely don't find insomnia more relaxing ..sleep is, and being awake is often so active!

Almost all types of animals sleep including even fish and birds and it seems so essential even to life, it makes me wonder if this example of insomnia is actually a hoax..

Since damage to the frontal lobe of the brain is common like with accidents or brain damage it would seem in the history of these events this would have repeated if it wasn't a hoax. 

  This might be provable with changes in the brain like deep ultrasound perhaps to change the brains of mice or the frontal lobes of other animals with larger brains. 

Research has found that you need to forget what you do quite well all night because while most people think 50,000 to 70,000 thoughts a day they forget most of the p.m. memories with amnesia. 

 Other science shows that you need to create new memories at the base of your brain to not become upset or edgy. I'd always read that while short-term memory in the brain is limited, we have unlimited long-term memory storage ability.. but if we're basically condensing the information while we sleep by forgetting unimportant memories it would seem there might also be a limit for this condensed information because there might be no extra room for it beyond a certain point.

On the other hand the brain is hugely complex with ten thousand different types of neurons so this might involve change to another area of the brain than FL.

Some scientists believe that as we get older our neural connections get more and more complex so it takes more and more energy to access them and that slows us down with age. A cat essentially has the same neurons we have, we just have more of them so if this idea is true We expect that cats might not slow down as much in cat years because they have fewer connections they're making with time.

Ways to Defend Against the Possibility of Megatsunamis (E and W.) And Earthquakes

 

  Recent findings "about old events!" have shown that the W. coast of the United States may be overdue for a giant 100 to 1000 foot high mega tsunami. Earthquakes, landslides, and volcanic eruptions have been relatively common in even recent history..these behemoths have struck 19 times over the last 10,000 years. Click here for the IFL Science Post or see the same link at the end of the page if you like.

  It's believed this may cause loss of many cities including much of Hawaii and coastal Alaska, and cause disruption of the world economy.

 On some of my other posts I've talked about finding ways to reduce or stop the impact of earthquakes including some  plans for urban areas like circular arrays of pendulums with plates above that move in the opposite direction as they oscillate around the balancing point between the weight and the plate above and this generates counteracting waves for input of the wave, reducing the damage to the city from the outside with a spherical set of lines of these arrays under the city. (This might also help defend buildings in earthquakes by automatically counteracting the shock wave by related methods. Large pendulums under buildings would allow the building if allowed to move under inertia to not move much as others have considered but using this type of counteracting force might also be more useful since it could be used anywhere in a building.)

Another type of zone under a city might have radial tunnels and with elastic lines at other angles under tension to much damp the shock wave from the quake.

 A more ambitious method I thought of reducing earthquakes might be to use nuclear or fusion power to power large gyroscopes that would store enough force to generate magnetic fields that could be focused down to the more magnetic mantle and melt more of the interface between the magma and the solid rock causing the flow of the magma current (as E to W) below them not to exert as much force by reduced friction on the crust and reducing the force of the plates moving against each other.

A related method (perhaps the best) for the West Coast mega tsunami hazard would be to dig wells along the fault line where the American Plate moving W is colliding with the Juan De Fuca plate from the west and make them out of something like super hardened ceramic concrete to withstand the heat of the magma and release it from that flow of the magma to the east that's moving the plates together.

 The flow of current goes upward where the plates meet and then to the E and W, but more to move the Juan Dr Fuca plate E. 

  This would be in a way of sort of volcano that would build up mountains of solid lava on the base of the ocean at the spreading center from the outflow that may otherwise cause the earthquake and tsunami. We might even have more Hawaii's by way of this..

 Without the currents moving the plates along underneath, the pressure doesn't build up and so there's no huge earthquake and the tsunami risk might also be reduced.

 

Scientists have also found there's a risk of an earthquake off the east coast by another cause.. an underwater landslide  "may cause a wave" And this could inundate the E. Coast including Washington.. for the solution to this I thought of another method and that would be a sort of net around and inside the underwater sand that may suddenly eventually collapse otherwise and cause the tsunami. The network along with the buoyancy of the sand under the water would at least slow down the submarine landslide if it ever started or perhaps even gradually lower it down. This may also be a good way to reduce the risk of avalanches.

 Originally I had thought of using a wall with explosives on the shore that generates a counter tsunami and stops it from causing damage.

  However I learned about the physics that the two waves would just go right through each other and you have two tsunamis. 

 

 With more consideration I realized that it might be possible to use drones from an airplane while the tsunami wave is still at sea. This wave is only about a foot high but it's traveling at hundreds of miles per hour much faster than other waves and often boats don't even notice them as they go through the ocean unless they know what they're looking at. Once a tsunami reaches the shore it's at an angle to the wave and it builds up to large height.

 On the other hand if the drones are sent out to right over where the wave is about to disperse since there are two forces on all moving waves, one tending to speed it up and the other tending to slow it down, if the drone hits the one foot wave with an explosion of the right type this allows the force trying to slow it down more influence and relatively soon with more explosions the tsunami is stopped.

 One of my first ideas about preventing earthquakes where the plates are built up was to have slow release of the force by smaller earthquakes by some method like injecting gas or fluid into the fault lines or or by  small well placed detonations that might not cause as much hazard.. and at first I even thought that immobilizing the plates on both sides of the fault with a strong enough bonding method might resolve the issue..these were my earlier ideas but they have some value for like fault lines where the pressure already had built up and can't be released as above by methods like the wells.

Here's the IFL megatsunami site link.

Thanks for reading..