Prove That Antarctica Is A Continent.

Quote from: N30 on September 05, 2016, 01:42:06 AM

"Computer simulation of the Earth's field in a period of normal polarity between reversals. The lines represent magnetic field lines, blue when the field points towards the center and yellow when away. The rotation axis of the Earth is centered and vertical. The dense clusters of lines are within the Earth's core."

Image and quote from the following link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field

  Its a picture about computer simulation and it does not illustrate the current state but state throughout 40 000 years as stated in section Causes

I am reading that as we are now between reversals.............

I found it interesting reading the talk page of the Wiki article (there was nothing there about that image specifically)  that the north magnetic pole is actually in antarctica! 

 

Ie the north pole of a magnet points to what we call north, which is the south magnetic pole.

 

I suppose some bright spark must have been looking at a magnet that was freely floating and saw one end aligned itself with the North and so he called that end the north pole of the magnet which then forever required the south magnetic pole of the Earth to be in the North!

 

I did not mean that a singular pole meant only one magnetic polarity.
Actually, if the north pole had both positive and negative polarities, our compasses would still point north.
Making the need for a south pole obsolete on a FE model.
Nevertheless, one must believe what they must.
Entertain whichever reality you choose.
Oh, and I only stated that the south pole shifts to make a point of how ludicrous the globe model has become.

What on earth do you mean by "Actually, if the north pole had both positive and negative polarities"?

If by that you mean that there is both a North Magnetic Pole and a South Magnetic Pole near the North Geographic Pole, then
no compasses would not generally point north.
If that magnet was "across" the North Pole, the directions of the iron filings would indicate where a compass would point, but if the poles were close together the field far from the North Pole would be very weak.

And you "only stated that the south pole shifts to make a point of how ludicrous the globe model has become"!

Well, no it doesn't, because both poles move, though at present the North Magnetic Pole is moving much more slowly.


Mind you the sun rising
          in the South East and setting in the South West at Punta Arenas, Ireland in mid-summer, and
          in the North East and setting in the North West at Dublin, Ireland in mid-summer really does make the Flat Earth model of sun movement ridiculous!

Please, enlighten me then, show me an instance where one magnetic polarity causes another magnet to spin.
Also are you ignoring my point about the equator?
So you mean to tell me Antarctica and the south pole are not connected? I don't believe another thread is required.
Tell me, how am I supposed to empirically prove that the earth has a magnetic pole in Antartica?
Teaching kids that compasses do not work across the equator was not something I learned in school.
Right now, if I tried to sail around the south pole to record a compass flipping, I would be arrested.
Unless I am mistaken, in all other instances of magnetism, movement of one pole should effect the other as well.
This is not the case with the geomagnetic coordinate of the poles.
Help me understand why this happens.

Please, enlighten me then, show me an instance where one magnetic polarity causes another magnet to spin.

Where did that come out from? Why should one magneric polarity cause another magnet to spin and how is it related to earth magnetic field?

Right now, if I tried to sail around the south pole to record a compass flipping, I would be arrested.

And you would be arrested anywhere if you went without permissions. But take a part of Antartica Cup Ocean Race and you can do it.

Please, enlighten me then, show me an instance where one magnetic polarity causes another magnet to spin.
Also are you ignoring my point about the equator?
So you mean to tell me Antarctica and the south pole are not connected? I don't believe another thread is required.
Tell me, how am I supposed to empirically prove that the earth has a magnetic pole in Antartica?
Teaching kids that compasses do not work across the equator was not something I learned in school.
Right now, if I tried to sail around the south pole to record a compass flipping, I would be arrested.
Unless I am mistaken, in all other instances of magnetism, movement of one pole should effect the other as well.
This is not the case with the geomagnetic coordinate of the poles.
Help me understand why this happens.

It's not like there is a big fysical pole through the Earth like a cocktail pick.

The  Earth's magnetic field changes over time because it is generated by a geodynamo (in Earth's case, the motion of molten iron alloys in its outer core).

The Earth's rotation causes the molten iron to rotate beneath the surface, which causes the magnetic field.

The way I understand it (but please correct me) is that the molten iron can move freely below the crust and the rotation of the molten iron is influenced by the tilt of the axis ofnthe Earth and convection within the fluid.

It's more complicated than that, but this is going a bit outside my usual field of knowledge.

The  Earth's magnetic field changes over time because it is generated by a geodynamo (in Earth's case, the motion of molten iron alloys in its outer core).

The Earth's rotation causes the molten iron to rotate beneath the surface, which causes the magnetic field.

There is strong evidence that convection is impossible within the earth's fluid core. This leads many to question the Orthodox position on the earth's geomagnetic field.

Please, enlighten me then, show me an instance where one magnetic polarity causes another magnet to spin.

No, it is not true that "one magnetic polarity causes another magnet to spin".

I know that many people (both Flat and Globe supporters) claim that when over a magnetic pole that a compass "spins".

A freely suspended compass needle (one free of all constraints) will align itself with the magnetic field at that location.
So over either Magnetic Pole the (unconstrained) compass needle would point straight down.

But of course the usual navigation compass is constrained to only rotate horizontally, so it could point anywhere - which I suppose is where the idea of spinning comes from.

This angle of the earth's magnetic field is called the "magnetic dip" or "magnetic inclination", see

Quote from: Wikipedia Magnetic dip Magnetic dip, dip angle, or magnetic inclination is the angle made with the horizontal by the Earth's magnetic field lines. This angle varies at different points on the Earth's surface. Positive values of inclination indicate that the magnetic field of the Earth is pointing downward, into the Earth, at the point of measurement, and negative values indicate that it is pointing upward. The dip angle is in principle the angle made by the needle of a vertically held compass, though in practice ordinary compass needles may be weighted against dip or may be unable to move freely in the correct plane. The value can be measured more reliably with a special instrument typically known as a dip circle. From: Magnetic dip.

Illustration of magnetic dip from Norman's book

The dip angle (or magnetic declination) varies all over the earth. This would make compass needles tend to foul the mount, so better compasses have the needle weighted to roughly balance this, see

UNDERSTANDING BALANCING ZONES
The Earth’s magnetic field does not flow evenly between the magnetic poles along the surface of the planet. Rather the magnetic field lines tilt into the ground increasingly as you approach a pole. At the magnetic poles, the field lines are completely vertical, flowing perpendicular to the surface.

To learn more about the behavior of the earth magnetic field a good place to visit is the National Geophysical Data Center website of the NOAA.

Any practical magnetic compass must show the horizontal component of the local magnetic field line to be precise. To accomplish this without having to manually compensate for the natural tilt in the magnetic lines, compass manufacturers usually use the weight of the needle or card to account for the vertical component of the magnetic field. This is referred to as magnetic zone balancing.

From Suunto, Understanding Balancing Zones. "Suunto" are an importing Finnish company the manufactures high-quality compasses.

We don't usually think much about the weighting compasses, but good quality ones would be weighted for the region in which they are sold.

(You did want the tl;dr version, didn't you?)

Also are you ignoring my point about the equator?
So you mean to tell me Antarctica and the south pole are not connected? I don't believe another thread is required.
Tell me, how am I supposed to empirically prove that the earth has a magnetic pole in Antartica?

I don't know just what you mean by connected, but the simple fact is that the Magnetic South Pole is not in Antarctica and not even within the Antarctic Circle. There's nothing you or I can do about it.

And, you can't "prove that the earth has a magnetic pole in Antartica" because as you have been told numerous times the Magnetic South Pole is not in Antarctica.

Teaching kids that compasses do not work across the equator was not something I learned in school.

That's nonsense! Whoever claimed that "compasses do not work across the equator"? Of course, they do.
In fact, the equator is probably the region with least "dip" and least errors, but you should have a compass "weighted for the region" it will be used in. The only decent compass I have is a "Silva Type 1". On the "Orienteering Shop" website there is this note:

Did you know...
Compass needles are weighted for different regions to counteract the downward magnetic deflection exerted on the needle, which may cause the needle to stick in the compass housing.  Australia and New Zealand are in the Magnetic South hemisphere region, so the correct compasses for use here have the MS suffix.  So, if you are travelling to another magnetic region, your Aussie-bought compass may not work!

From: Orienteering Shop

Right now, if I tried to sail around the south pole to record a compass flipping, I would be arrested.

No, you wouldn't! The Magnetic South Pole is in international waters, though the Australia Government might not like it you try to catch whales! Mind you you might freeze or be sunk by a blizzard, just little things that nature might throw at you!

Unless I am mistaken, in all other instances of magnetism, movement of one pole should effect the other as well.
This is not the case with the geomagnetic coordinate of the poles.
Help me understand why this happens.

All I can say here is that there is no big solid bar magnet inside the earth. The core of the earth is much too hot to be that sort of magnet in any case.
You can look up references as to the possible cause of the earth's magnetic field as well as I.

<< I hope there aren't too many errors, I don't the time for a proper proof-read >>

Quote from: Omega

The  Earth's magnetic field changes over time because it is generated by a geodynamo (in Earth's case, the motion of molten iron alloys in its outer core).

The Earth's rotation causes the molten iron to rotate beneath the surface, which causes the magnetic field.

There is strong evidence that convection is impossible within the earth's fluid core. This leads many to question the Orthodox position on the earth's geomagnetic field.

Rotation of electric charge will create magnetoc field with or without convection.

If total charge of Earth is zero (charge-neutrality principle), and charge of surface is negative, it means inner charge is positive.
We don't need convection to see that charge distribution fluctuates and changes in magnetic field follow.

Please, enlighten me.....
 if I tried to sail around the south pole to record a compass flipping,....

The compass only flips if you travel over the magnetic pole.    In any case the magnetic pole is not an absolutely precise area in terms of what a navigator can detect using a compass.  A compass becomes fairly useless within many hundreds of miles of the pole.    It was only in 1954 that the first great circle routes were possible from scandanavia to anchorage alaska when the Polar Path Gyro was made by the Bendix corporation.  Polar path revolutionised far north aviation.

The Polar path gyro had a drift rate of only 1.5 degrees per hour.  The earths rotation rate is 360/24 = 15 degrees per hour.   The computer compensated for Earths curvature to enable the navigator to follow a course for several hours without reference to a radio beacon.  By 1962 the Litton Ln3 had a drift rate of only .1 of a degree per hour.   Today the best gyro has a drift rate of a mind boggling 1 hundreth billionth of a degree per hour!!!   

I have personally made a north seeking gyro and yet according to the flatties, aviation gyros prove the world is flat.          There have been tens of thousands of these devices made in the last 60 years which have to compensate for Earth curvature and which also show the world is rotating, and they are all designed and maintained and used by ordinary men and women.  It is just heart breaking to me that no amount of my efforts was able to get a single flatty to question their belief.

Every single time you switch on an inertial navigation system it performs foucaults gyro to detect Earth rotation, find latitude and then iteratively find true North,  and yet the flatties keep claiming foucaults gyro was never repeated and aviation gyros are not compensating for the curvature of the Earth.   

How is it possible in 2016 so many people can be so unrelentingly ignorant of technology and the simplest things we know about the Earth??   

>>Please, enlighten me....

Nobody can enlighten another person.   Enlightenment is something that begins from within you.    Nobody can change you.  You have to be the change that you want in the World.

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 01:58:46 PM

Quote from: Omega

The  Earth's magnetic field changes over time because it is generated by a geodynamo (in Earth's case, the motion of molten iron alloys in its outer core).

The Earth's rotation causes the molten iron to rotate beneath the surface, which causes the magnetic field.

There is strong evidence that convection is impossible within the earth's fluid core. This leads many to question the Orthodox position on the earth's geomagnetic field.

Rotation of electric charge will create magnetoc field with or without convection.

If total charge of Earth is zero (charge-neutrality principle), and charge of surface is negative, it means inner charge is positive.
We don't need convection to see that charge distribution fluctuates and changes in magnetic field follow.

Can you point out a model of geodynamos featuring a liquid outer core and Coriolis without convection?

I ask because I am unaware of one,  and I find your asserted scenario capable of producing a field of sufficient of strength to generate that of the earth's incredible.

I enjoy being wrong, so I look forward to a citation and learning something new.

Quote from: SpJunk on September 05, 2016, 08:40:25 PM

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 01:58:46 PM

Quote from: Omega

The  Earth's magnetic field changes over time because it is generated by a geodynamo (in Earth's case, the motion of molten iron alloys in its outer core).

The Earth's rotation causes the molten iron to rotate beneath the surface, which causes the magnetic field.

There is strong evidence that convection is impossible within the earth's fluid core. This leads many to question the Orthodox position on the earth's geomagnetic field.

Rotation of electric charge will create magnetoc field with or without convection.

If total charge of Earth is zero (charge-neutrality principle), and charge of surface is negative, it means inner charge is positive.
We don't need convection to see that charge distribution fluctuates and changes in magnetic field follow.

Can you point out a model of geodynamos featuring a liquid outer core and Coriolis without convection?

I ask because I am unaware of one,  and I find your asserted scenario capable of producing a field of sufficient of strength to generate that of the earth's incredible.

I enjoy being wrong, so I look forward to a citation and learning something new.

Googling this I found it is believed at the moment convection is happening, however a problem has been suggested for convection billions of years ago because of the thermal conductivity of iron.  The evidence suggest the Earth had a magnetic core billions of years ago.

http://phys.org/news/2016-01-theory-magnesium-key-earth-magnetic.html

Abstract
Earth's global magnetic field arises from vigorous convection within the liquid outer core. Palaeomagnetic evidence reveals that the geodynamo has operated for at least 3.4 billion years, which places constraints on Earth's formation and evolution. Available power sources in standard models include compositional convection (driven by the solidifying inner core's expulsion of light elements), thermal convection (from slow cooling), and perhaps heat from the decay of radioactive isotopes. However, recent first-principles calculations and diamond-anvil cell experiments indicate that the thermal conductivity of iron is two or three times larger than typically assumed in these models. This presents a problem: a large increase in the conductive heat flux along the adiabat (due to the higher conductivity of iron) implies that the inner core is young (less than one billion years old), but thermal convection and radiogenic heating alone may not have been able to sustain the geodynamo during earlier epochs. Here we show that the precipitation of magnesium-bearing minerals from the core could have served as an alternative power source.



   

I have personally made a north seeking gyro and yet according to the flatties, aviation gyros prove the world is flat.   

Do you mean a DG? Because that is not a gyrocompass (which is what I assume you mean when saying, "north seeking gyro". A DG needs constant adjustments as gyro drift compounds error quickly.  Especially in an aircraft which acquires drift more quickly than say a ship. Ships frequently use a gyrocompass. I do not know of any gyrocompasses in an aircraft as rapid movements would send your compass adrift while it gradually reset. Not as big an issue on a ship. There are gyromagnetic compasses for aviation. That is simply a DG slaved to a flux valve. Sometimes a computer does that for you. That makes it easier than being slaved to your pilot/nav, but isn't a gyrocompass either. It also starts functioning as a regular DG at high latitudes making you do the work again. You need to correct your DG every 10 to 15 minutes (on long trips it should be checked more frequently).  A gyrocompass aligns itself along the axis of celestial rotation, and will eventually correct itself. A gyromagnetic compass points to, you guessed it, magnetic north.

Every single time you switch on an inertial navigation system it performs foucaults gyro to detect Earth rotation,

INS units typically have multiple gyros. None of them to my knowledge feature a gyrocompass nor can I imagine what good it would do, but perhaps you could point one out (I've not shopped for an INS lately). INS is also prone to drift, though less because of the accompanying accelerometers,  etc.

How is it possible in 2016 so many people can be so unrelentingly ignorant of technology and the simplest things we know about the Earth??   

I don't know, but your post seems to demonstrate that it is very possible.

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 10:54:30 PM

Quote from: SpJunk on September 05, 2016, 08:40:25 PM

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 01:58:46 PM

Quote from: Omega

The  Earth's magnetic field changes over time because it is generated by a geodynamo (in Earth's case, the motion of molten iron alloys in its outer core).

The Earth's rotation causes the molten iron to rotate beneath the surface, which causes the magnetic field.

There is strong evidence that convection is impossible within the earth's fluid core. This leads many to question the Orthodox position on the earth's geomagnetic field.

Rotation of electric charge will create magnetoc field with or without convection.

If total charge of Earth is zero (charge-neutrality principle), and charge of surface is negative, it means inner charge is positive.
We don't need convection to see that charge distribution fluctuates and changes in magnetic field follow.

Can you point out a model of geodynamos featuring a liquid outer core and Coriolis without convection?

I ask because I am unaware of one,  and I find your asserted scenario capable of producing a field of sufficient of strength to generate that of the earth's incredible.

I enjoy being wrong, so I look forward to a citation and learning something new.

but thermal convection and radiogenic heating alone may not have been able to sustain the geodynamo during earlier epochs.

This, and a) the earth's silicate mantle is an excellent insulator makes stable convection in the fluid core impossible, and b) the compression of the base inner core makes thermal expansion impossible, it being more dense than the top of the liquid core.  When discussing Rayleigh numbers for convection the Orthodoxy assumes an incompressible fluid of uniform density.
This makes the Orthodox position untenable.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

I have personally made a north seeking gyro and yet according to the flatties, aviation gyros prove the world is flat.   

Do you mean a DG? Because that is not a gyrocompass (which is what I assume you mean when saying, "north seeking gyro". A DG needs constant adjustments as gyro drift compounds error quickly.  Especially in an aircraft which acquires drift more quickly than say a ship. Ships frequently use a gyrocompass. I do not know of any gyrocompasses in an aircraft as rapid movements would send your compass adrift while it gradually reset. Not as big an issue on a ship. There are gyromagnetic compasses for aviation. That is simply a DG slaved to a flux valve. Sometimes a computer does that for you. That makes it easier than being slaved to your pilot/nav, but isn't a gyrocompass either. It also starts functioning as a regular DG at high latitudes making you do the work again. You need to correct your DG every 10 to 15 minutes (on long trips it should be checked more frequently).  A gyrocompass aligns itself along the axis of celestial rotation, and will eventually correct itself. A gyromagnetic compass points to, you guessed it, magnetic north.

Quote

Every single time you switch on an inertial navigation system it performs foucaults gyro to detect Earth rotation,

INS units typically have multiple gyros. None of them to my knowledge feature a gyrocompass nor can I imagine what good it would do, but perhaps you could point one out (I've not shopped for an INS lately). INS is also prone to drift, though less because of the accompanying accelerometers,  etc.

Quote

How is it possible in 2016 so many people can be so unrelentingly ignorant of technology and the simplest things we know about the Earth??   

I don't know, but your post seems to demonstrate that it is very possible.

I am impressed you do have some knowledge of the topic.   However............

I made a north seeking gyro.  It is not used in avionics.   Yes gyrocompasses of the kind found in ships are not used in aircraft.    However, the term gyrocompassing is used to describe how an inertial navigation set up detects earths rotation, finds approximate latitude and finds true north.

Directional gyros of the type found in most light aircraft and in older aircraft are basic devices.   The polar path gyro was a directional gyro with extremely good drift rate of only 1.5 degrees per hour (I said 1 degree earlier?) plus it had a computer.      So it is not a comparable device to the basic device.   The navigator also used a special polar square grid map where all lines were aligned with greenwhich (something like that) the map was developed in ww2 by the british.  The best estimate of latitude was fed into the computer by the navigator.    The polar path system used secret technology at the time and arose out of the minute man missile program.     I have one of these gyros, it is beautifully made and gives no clues to it being from the 1950's.    Polar path was developed to enable the military to fly in the arctic but was released for commercial aviation.

http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/8.9230?journalCode=jasps

Yes,  Inertial navigation devices are dead reckoning devices so will drift.    However if you have a new unit, while on the ground in one location it will detect earth rotation, find approximate latitude and find true north (so called gyrocompassing) but it will take a long time to do it if it is given no positional information.      The device has no way to precisely work out true north from first principles if you are moving.

As for a north seeking gyro they were used more before GPS for surface measurements and today they are mainly used for tunnelling mining and in well oil exploration for directional drilling - fairly mind boggling that can be done.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 11:27:31 PM

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 10:54:30 PM

Quote from: SpJunk on September 05, 2016, 08:40:25 PM

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 01:58:46 PM

Quote from: Omega

The  Earth's magnetic field changes over time because it is generated by a geodynamo (in Earth's case, the motion of molten iron alloys in its outer core).

The Earth's rotation causes the molten iron to rotate beneath the surface, which causes the magnetic field.

There is strong evidence that convection is impossible within the earth's fluid core. This leads many to question the Orthodox position on the earth's geomagnetic field.

Rotation of electric charge will create magnetoc field with or without convection.

If total charge of Earth is zero (charge-neutrality principle), and charge of surface is negative, it means inner charge is positive.
We don't need convection to see that charge distribution fluctuates and changes in magnetic field follow.

Can you point out a model of geodynamos featuring a liquid outer core and Coriolis without convection?

I ask because I am unaware of one,  and I find your asserted scenario capable of producing a field of sufficient of strength to generate that of the earth's incredible.

I enjoy being wrong, so I look forward to a citation and learning something new.

but thermal convection and radiogenic heating alone may not have been able to sustain the geodynamo during earlier epochs.

This, and a) the earth's silicate mantle is an excellent insulator makes stable convection in the fluid core impossible, and b) the compression of the base inner core makes thermal expansion impossible, it being more dense than the top of the liquid core.  When discussing Rayleigh numbers for convection the Orthodoxy assumes an incompressible fluid of uniform density.
This makes the Orthodox position untenable.

I am impressed again.  However are you really a flatty??  Surely not.

A compass becomes fairly useless within many hundreds of miles of the pole.

Why is that? Exactly where does this "magnetic anomaly" begin? You say ONE pole, is the south pole not the same?

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

A compass becomes fairly useless within many hundreds of miles of the pole.

Why is that? Exactly where does this "magnetic anomaly" begin? You say ONE pole, is the south pole not the same?
[/quote]

OK I learn't a compass can be used if the appropriate corrections are applied but it  would not be used if celestial navigation is possible. 

Either way it is better to use celestial navigation or use a directional gyro referenced to some good landmark or observation than rely on a magnetic compass in the polar areas.

https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1tzjea/how_did_explorers_during_the_race_to_the/

"Amundsen, upon reaching what he believed to be the South pole, spent 3 days taking sextant readings at points near the presumed pole. He sent his men out 20 kilometers around the poles to take additional readings; when he was satisfied with what the sextant readings were telling him, he pitched a tent at his best guess for where the geographic south pole was. Amundsen reached the pole in mid to late December, when the Sun was the furthest south, and very nearly at constant latitude, making the Sun's altitude nearly constant over the course of the day (since they were at the pole).

Scott, upon reaching the pole more than a month after Amundsen, took theodolite readings."   A theodolite reading is a more accurate way of taking a sextant reading.

"A compass becomes fairly useless within many hundreds of miles of the pole."

"OK I learn't a compass can be used if the appropriate corrections are applied but it  would not be used if celestial navigation is possible."

Well aren't we all learning. Exactly why is celestial navigation not possible with a compass, then?

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

"A compass becomes fairly useless within many hundreds of miles of the pole."

"OK I learn't a compass can be used if the appropriate corrections are applied but it  would not be used if celestial navigation is possible."

Well aren't we all learning. Exactly why is celestial navigation not possible with a compass, then?

Perhaps because the stars are in the sky, and not on the compass?

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

"A compass becomes fairly useless within many hundreds of miles of the pole."

"OK I learn't a compass can be used if the appropriate corrections are applied but it  would not be used if celestial navigation is possible."

Well aren't we all learning. Exactly why is celestial navigation not possible with a compass, then?

celestial:


    positioned in or relating to the sky, or outer space as observed in astronomy.
    "a celestial body"

   -----------------

Celestial navigation uses the stars, moon, Sun and planets.

"Before mariners had a coordinate system, they developed tools which allowed then to travel in a straight line (east/west) and find a port-of-call. The simplest and earliest known navigational tool is the Latitude Hook. The Latitude Hook can be as simple as a stick broken to a specific length." - http://www.southernfriedscience.com/

Then, all one truly needs to navigate celestially is to look up and use their eyes.
Really all a compass would do, is make it infinitely easier.
Ultimately, this alone is sufficient for navigation.
Exactly what is the point of posting definitions?

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

I have personally made a north seeking gyro and yet according to the flatties, aviation gyros prove the world is flat.   

Do you mean a DG? Because that is not a gyrocompass (which is what I assume you mean when saying, "north seeking gyro". A DG needs constant adjustments as gyro drift compounds error quickly.  Especially in an aircraft which acquires drift more quickly than say a ship. Ships frequently use a gyrocompass. I do not know of any gyrocompasses in an aircraft as rapid movements would send your compass adrift while it gradually reset. Not as big an issue on a ship. There are gyromagnetic compasses for aviation. That is simply a DG slaved to a flux valve. Sometimes a computer does that for you. That makes it easier than being slaved to your pilot/nav, but isn't a gyrocompass either. It also starts functioning as a regular DG at high latitudes making you do the work again. You need to correct your DG every 10 to 15 minutes (on long trips it should be checked more frequently).  A gyrocompass aligns itself along the axis of celestial rotation, and will eventually correct itself. A gyromagnetic compass points to, you guessed it, magnetic north.

Quote

Every single time you switch on an inertial navigation system it performs foucaults gyro to detect Earth rotation,

INS units typically have multiple gyros. None of them to my knowledge feature a gyrocompass nor can I imagine what good it would do, but perhaps you could point one out (I've not shopped for an INS lately). INS is also prone to drift, though less because of the accompanying accelerometers,  etc.

Quote

How is it possible in 2016 so many people can be so unrelentingly ignorant of technology and the simplest things we know about the Earth??   

I don't know, but your post seems to demonstrate that it is very possible.

You've never heard of GPS???  INS went out with the dinosaur.  all planes and ships use GPS for the rather obvious reason that they are both cheap and spectacularly accurate.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

"A compass becomes fairly useless within many hundreds of miles of the pole."

"OK I learn't a compass can be used if the appropriate corrections are applied but it  would not be used if celestial navigation is possible."

Well aren't we all learning. Exactly why is celestial navigation not possible with a compass, then?

Doesnt sound like YOU are learning!  If you cannot work out what CELESTIAL navigation is then it probably explains the utter stupidity of the rest of your posts.

"Before mariners had a coordinate system, they developed tools which allowed then to travel in a straight line (east/west) and find a port-of-call. The simplest and earliest known navigational tool is the Latitude Hook. The Latitude Hook can be as simple as a stick broken to a specific length." - http://www.southernfriedscience.com/

Then, all one truly needs to navigate celestially is to look up and use their eyes.
Really all a compass would do, is make it infinitely easier.
Ultimately, this alone is sufficient for navigation.
Exactly what is the point of posting definitions?

You wanted to know why a compass would not be accurate at the poles.
You then became confused between navigating with reference to celestial objects and navigating using a north pointing needle.

You did not appear to know what was meant by celestial.   

So that was the point of posting that definition.

----------------------

To navigate using a compass you have to have a map and know where the magnetic pole is.     Additionally as far as I know you also have to have a map of where all the local variations in magnetism are.    Somebody travelling to the South pole for the first time would have almost no knowledge of magnetic deviations.

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 11:30:39 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

I have personally made a north seeking gyro and yet according to the flatties, aviation gyros prove the world is flat.   

Do you mean a DG? Because that is not a gyrocompass (which is what I assume you mean when saying, "north seeking gyro". A DG needs constant adjustments as gyro drift compounds error quickly.  Especially in an aircraft which acquires drift more quickly than say a ship. Ships frequently use a gyrocompass. I do not know of any gyrocompasses in an aircraft as rapid movements would send your compass adrift while it gradually reset. Not as big an issue on a ship. There are gyromagnetic compasses for aviation. That is simply a DG slaved to a flux valve. Sometimes a computer does that for you. That makes it easier than being slaved to your pilot/nav, but isn't a gyrocompass either. It also starts functioning as a regular DG at high latitudes making you do the work again. You need to correct your DG every 10 to 15 minutes (on long trips it should be checked more frequently).  A gyrocompass aligns itself along the axis of celestial rotation, and will eventually correct itself. A gyromagnetic compass points to, you guessed it, magnetic north.

Quote

Every single time you switch on an inertial navigation system it performs foucaults gyro to detect Earth rotation,

INS units typically have multiple gyros. None of them to my knowledge feature a gyrocompass nor can I imagine what good it would do, but perhaps you could point one out (I've not shopped for an INS lately). INS is also prone to drift, though less because of the accompanying accelerometers,  etc.

Quote

How is it possible in 2016 so many people can be so unrelentingly ignorant of technology and the simplest things we know about the Earth??   

I don't know, but your post seems to demonstrate that it is very possible.

You've never heard of GPS???  INS went out with the dinosaur.  all planes and ships use GPS for the rather obvious reason that they are both cheap and spectacularly accurate.

Steady on.  I was the one who first mentioned INS.  He was the one who did not realise how the term gyrocompassing was being used during the start up alignment process to find true north and approximate latitude using the detected earth rotation rate at that position on earth.

INS is still used in military and commercial aircraft and anybody who can afford to have the back up it provides to GPS

Quote from: fliggs on September 06, 2016, 02:34:59 AM

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 11:30:39 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

I have personally made a north seeking gyro and yet according to the flatties, aviation gyros prove the world is flat.   

Do you mean a DG? Because that is not a gyrocompass (which is what I assume you mean when saying, "north seeking gyro". A DG needs constant adjustments as gyro drift compounds error quickly.  Especially in an aircraft which acquires drift more quickly than say a ship. Ships frequently use a gyrocompass. I do not know of any gyrocompasses in an aircraft as rapid movements would send your compass adrift while it gradually reset. Not as big an issue on a ship. There are gyromagnetic compasses for aviation. That is simply a DG slaved to a flux valve. Sometimes a computer does that for you. That makes it easier than being slaved to your pilot/nav, but isn't a gyrocompass either. It also starts functioning as a regular DG at high latitudes making you do the work again. You need to correct your DG every 10 to 15 minutes (on long trips it should be checked more frequently).  A gyrocompass aligns itself along the axis of celestial rotation, and will eventually correct itself. A gyromagnetic compass points to, you guessed it, magnetic north.

Quote

Every single time you switch on an inertial navigation system it performs foucaults gyro to detect Earth rotation,

INS units typically have multiple gyros. None of them to my knowledge feature a gyrocompass nor can I imagine what good it would do, but perhaps you could point one out (I've not shopped for an INS lately). INS is also prone to drift, though less because of the accompanying accelerometers,  etc.

Quote

How is it possible in 2016 so many people can be so unrelentingly ignorant of technology and the simplest things we know about the Earth??   

I don't know, but your post seems to demonstrate that it is very possible.

You've never heard of GPS???  INS went out with the dinosaur.  all planes and ships use GPS for the rather obvious reason that they are both cheap and spectacularly accurate.

Steady on.  I was the one who first mentioned INS.  He was the one who did not realise how the term gyrocompassing was being used during the start up alignment process to find true north and approximate latitude using the detected earth rotation rate at that position on earth.

Just a little stunned by N30 and the level of ignorance on display. He appears to not understand... well anything really. Nothing at all.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 06, 2016, 02:40:58 AM

Quote from: fliggs on September 06, 2016, 02:34:59 AM

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 11:30:39 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

I have personally made a north seeking gyro and yet according to the flatties, aviation gyros prove the world is flat.   

Do you mean a DG? Because that is not a gyrocompass (which is what I assume you mean when saying, "north seeking gyro". A DG needs constant adjustments as gyro drift compounds error quickly.  Especially in an aircraft which acquires drift more quickly than say a ship. Ships frequently use a gyrocompass. I do not know of any gyrocompasses in an aircraft as rapid movements would send your compass adrift while it gradually reset. Not as big an issue on a ship. There are gyromagnetic compasses for aviation. That is simply a DG slaved to a flux valve. Sometimes a computer does that for you. That makes it easier than being slaved to your pilot/nav, but isn't a gyrocompass either. It also starts functioning as a regular DG at high latitudes making you do the work again. You need to correct your DG every 10 to 15 minutes (on long trips it should be checked more frequently).  A gyrocompass aligns itself along the axis of celestial rotation, and will eventually correct itself. A gyromagnetic compass points to, you guessed it, magnetic north.

Quote

Every single time you switch on an inertial navigation system it performs foucaults gyro to detect Earth rotation,

INS units typically have multiple gyros. None of them to my knowledge feature a gyrocompass nor can I imagine what good it would do, but perhaps you could point one out (I've not shopped for an INS lately). INS is also prone to drift, though less because of the accompanying accelerometers,  etc.

Quote

How is it possible in 2016 so many people can be so unrelentingly ignorant of technology and the simplest things we know about the Earth??   

I don't know, but your post seems to demonstrate that it is very possible.

You've never heard of GPS???  INS went out with the dinosaur.  all planes and ships use GPS for the rather obvious reason that they are both cheap and spectacularly accurate.

Steady on.  I was the one who first mentioned INS.  He was the one who did not realise how the term gyrocompassing was being used during the start up alignment process to find true north and approximate latitude using the detected earth rotation rate at that position on earth.

Just a little stunned by N30 and the level of ignorance on display. He appears to not understand... well anything really. Nothing at all.

I was replying to Ski

 

Quote from: fliggs on September 06, 2016, 02:53:15 AM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 06, 2016, 02:40:58 AM

Quote from: fliggs on September 06, 2016, 02:34:59 AM

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 11:30:39 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

I have personally made a north seeking gyro and yet according to the flatties, aviation gyros prove the world is flat.   

Do you mean a DG? Because that is not a gyrocompass (which is what I assume you mean when saying, "north seeking gyro". A DG needs constant adjustments as gyro drift compounds error quickly.  Especially in an aircraft which acquires drift more quickly than say a ship. Ships frequently use a gyrocompass. I do not know of any gyrocompasses in an aircraft as rapid movements would send your compass adrift while it gradually reset. Not as big an issue on a ship. There are gyromagnetic compasses for aviation. That is simply a DG slaved to a flux valve. Sometimes a computer does that for you. That makes it easier than being slaved to your pilot/nav, but isn't a gyrocompass either. It also starts functioning as a regular DG at high latitudes making you do the work again. You need to correct your DG every 10 to 15 minutes (on long trips it should be checked more frequently).  A gyrocompass aligns itself along the axis of celestial rotation, and will eventually correct itself. A gyromagnetic compass points to, you guessed it, magnetic north.

Quote

Every single time you switch on an inertial navigation system it performs foucaults gyro to detect Earth rotation,

INS units typically have multiple gyros. None of them to my knowledge feature a gyrocompass nor can I imagine what good it would do, but perhaps you could point one out (I've not shopped for an INS lately). INS is also prone to drift, though less because of the accompanying accelerometers,  etc.

Quote

How is it possible in 2016 so many people can be so unrelentingly ignorant of technology and the simplest things we know about the Earth??   

I don't know, but your post seems to demonstrate that it is very possible.

You've never heard of GPS???  INS went out with the dinosaur.  all planes and ships use GPS for the rather obvious reason that they are both cheap and spectacularly accurate.

Steady on.  I was the one who first mentioned INS.  He was the one who did not realise how the term gyrocompassing was being used during the start up alignment process to find true north and approximate latitude using the detected earth rotation rate at that position on earth.

Just a little stunned by N30 and the level of ignorance on display. He appears to not understand... well anything really. Nothing at all.

I was replying to Ski

 

Fliggs just wants to fit in, let him be.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 06, 2016, 02:55:43 AM

Quote from: fliggs on September 06, 2016, 02:53:15 AM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 06, 2016, 02:40:58 AM

Quote from: fliggs on September 06, 2016, 02:34:59 AM

Quote from: Ski on September 05, 2016, 11:30:39 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on September 05, 2016, 09:05:15 PM

I have personally made a north seeking gyro and yet according to the flatties, aviation gyros prove the world is flat.   

Do you mean a DG? Because that is not a gyrocompass (which is what I assume you mean when saying, "north seeking gyro". A DG needs constant adjustments as gyro drift compounds error quickly.  Especially in an aircraft which acquires drift more quickly than say a ship. Ships frequently use a gyrocompass. I do not know of any gyrocompasses in an aircraft as rapid movements would send your compass adrift while it gradually reset. Not as big an issue on a ship. There are gyromagnetic compasses for aviation. That is simply a DG slaved to a flux valve. Sometimes a computer does that for you. That makes it easier than being slaved to your pilot/nav, but isn't a gyrocompass either. It also starts functioning as a regular DG at high latitudes making you do the work again. You need to correct your DG every 10 to 15 minutes (on long trips it should be checked more frequently).  A gyrocompass aligns itself along the axis of celestial rotation, and will eventually correct itself. A gyromagnetic compass points to, you guessed it, magnetic north.

Quote

Every single time you switch on an inertial navigation system it performs foucaults gyro to detect Earth rotation,

INS units typically have multiple gyros. None of them to my knowledge feature a gyrocompass nor can I imagine what good it would do, but perhaps you could point one out (I've not shopped for an INS lately). INS is also prone to drift, though less because of the accompanying accelerometers,  etc.

Quote

How is it possible in 2016 so many people can be so unrelentingly ignorant of technology and the simplest things we know about the Earth??   

I don't know, but your post seems to demonstrate that it is very possible.

You've never heard of GPS???  INS went out with the dinosaur.  all planes and ships use GPS for the rather obvious reason that they are both cheap and spectacularly accurate.

Steady on.  I was the one who first mentioned INS.  He was the one who did not realise how the term gyrocompassing was being used during the start up alignment process to find true north and approximate latitude using the detected earth rotation rate at that position on earth.

Just a little stunned by N30 and the level of ignorance on display. He appears to not understand... well anything really. Nothing at all.

I was replying to Ski

 

Fliggs just wants to fit in, let him be.

I see you are still wearing that chip on your shoulder like a badge of honour. That $60/hr you are so proud of 'or else people die' looks pretty lame since I was paid more than that 16 years ago.

Time for you to grow up.

That $60/hr you are so proud of 'or else people die' looks pretty lame since I was paid more than that 16 years ago.

Come on.  We all know that was a once in a thousand years opportunity