Magnetic Flow (Simplified)

Greetings all! Ok, so if anyone would like all sorts of scientific references, data, etc. just ask - but I shall first pose the simple question that I think can be the start of a good debate.

If the Earth is Flat, how can we explain the magnetic field's orientation?

It has been argued consistently that a compass will work normally and as expected in a Flat Earth, and therefore Magnetic North is the Center of our Earth, while the Magnetic South would encircle it.

This would, not for debate here, be ok for a generic compass direction. The problem lies with the vast amount of archeological finds - Specifically volcanic for the easy stuff - that show us specific directional orientation of the magnetic field of the Earth.

Here we find that the magnetic field or 'lines' if you will run North to South in what would be a more "linear" fashion than one would expect on a Flat Earth.

One would expect that as you found evidence from various sites throughout the plane, that you would find the orientation of material to 'point' slowly evermore "outward" toward the 'perimiter South' would you not?

So what do you all think? Let me know if I did not do a good enough job of explaining, and I will try to draw up some diagrams of what I mean later today. Gotta go over to Mom's for her birthday here in a few though.

Take care all!!
- Optimus

Do transformers have parents?

That's awesome!

Sure we do.. Vector Sigma! As we understand it, the closest comparison to you humans would be 'Creator' or 'Mom'. I like Mom.

Speaking of which I gotta grab the guys and hit the nearest space-bridge, but before I go I wanted to add let's not worry about pole-shifts, etc. on any RE arguments as that is not really a comparable argument. Standard magnetic fields provable by various archeological finds, mineral deposits such as iron, etc. You konw - keep it simple.

Take care,
- Optimus

Therefore Magnetic North is the Center of our Earth, while the Magnetic South would encircle it.

But, the Magnetic Poles are at different locations than the geographic poles, aren't they?  I looked it up and marked their (general) locations on the FE "map."  If anyone has a problem with my map, just let me know.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/Ejak2021/FEpoles.jpg

The FE magnetic field is REALLY wonky.

Thank you Ejak, much appreciated on the clarification.

Ok, so if we go with that model, then we REALLY have some wonky magnetic structures to figure out in the deposits of our Earth....

Hrmmmm... Ok going to the drawing pad here. Be back after while!!!

Take care,
- Optimus

Hrmm.. upon starting to draw this up... I am not so sure about the magnetic field of the Flat Earth being at 2 singular points... if that IS the case, then I don't think a compass would work properly at all, plus the further 'past' North and say East you went, the way WAY out of whack your compass would be...

I'm drawing field lines now... it is looking really weird. Going to plug it into a modeler I have and see if that helps any. :\

c-me!
- Optimus

I'm not having any luck with this single point south pole field... anyone else want to take a stab at it?

Standard entire rim as the south 'pole' works out ok, as you can just imagine the center as north, and a sort of 'spoke wheel' effect of field lines radiating outward to the rim. But, whenever I try to work out the field lines for a single point on a plane, it all ends up going either in a single straight line, or a small width overlapping line.

The best I could come up with is assume a large area effect at the north pole, and you still get a warped u shaped field that comes back down to a single point, leaving 80% of the Earth without any sort of magnetic field! lol

Take care,
- Optimus

It'd be the rim, and the single other point would be on the "under" side of the earth.

Yeah either way I think we are going to have to go with the rim to achieve even a remote possibility here. even using a point under the Flat Earth, the field lines become compacted and 'column-like'.

Ok, so based on that assumption, here are the problems apparent with the known, non-conspiratorial evidence as shown by mineral deposits, etc.

They indicate a magnetic field that is linear in fashion from a point A, to a point B, as if the land masses were on the face of a spheroid object. Basically samples from all over the world line up 'up and down'.

If the Flat Earth theory were true as described earlier and many other places here, with North as center and South as rimward, the samples should show a gradual 'angle outward' from a central starting point on all land masses as if they were on the face of a flat surface.

So... discuss!

Take care,
- Optimus

The reason you aren't having luck with it is probably that the Earth isn't flat.  Anyway, those points (roughly) have been proven to be the magnetic poles.  From what I gather, the Canadian government watches the northern pole, while Vostok Station in Antarctica watches the southern one.  There could be others involved, too.  So, while making the FE's edge "south" might work, it is false because the geographic south pole (the edge) is not the the magnetic south pole. 

Something I learned from Wikipedia:  There are the magnetic poles, and the geomagnetic poles.  The magnetic poles are the points on the surface of the Earth where the magnetic field is vertical.  The geomagnetic poles are the points where an axis that best-represents (because the Earth isn't perfectly dipole) the Earth's field intersects the Earths surface.  Basically, because of variables in the Earth, the field isn't vertical directly over the would-be axis of the Earth's magnetic field.  Not sure if this is relevant info or not.

Ok so - I let this one lie for a while to give people plenty of time to take a stab at it. Bump time.

How 'bout it FET? Can we get an explanation for the Earth's magnetic field that is clearly shown within its geological makeup to reflect that of a spheroid shape?

Anyone?

Thanks,
- Optimus

How can a field have a spherical shape?!

How can a field have a spherical shape?!

I didn't say that - I said that it "reflects" a spheroid shape... as in the evidence found from deposits, etc. in the earth - that have been affected by the Earths magnetic field - indicate that the Earth must be a sphere in order for the deposits to "line up" with said field.

Is that a little better?

You have to know that even on RE, the magnetic field lines are not parallel to the Earth's surface. There is something called inclination in addition to declinaation.

Agreed, however you must also realize that you are simply nitpicking - and you are going outside the bounds necessary for this debate: (*SIMPLIFIED*) - the magnetic field and the relation of it and the deposits that react to it within the earth are what's in question.

I've already made several generous attempts to look at various possibilities of the Flat Earth's magnetic field using Center North, and Rim South, Under South, and a Proposed single point South. The closest I could get using one of the modelers on campus was using the Rim as a "South" It still tends to radiate in a more 'spoked' effect compared to a Globe or Sphere.

Therefore in a nutshell - why aren't the vast majority of deposits such as ores, etc. that are affected by the earths magnetic field, found to be in more of a 'spoked wheel' configuration as measured throughout the earth?

because they are and you don't have accurate data for mineral deposits.

because they are and you don't have accurate data for mineral deposits.

This is a very unfashionable reply for you... where is all the data to back up this claim? Links, or a mile long post proving your statement?

Sorry to disappoint you, but especially iron ore and volcanic flows have been used for many years to track the record of earths magnetic fields, and changes in it.

In any given state or position of the poles, one fact (*as in supported by data*) remains - you can chart the layout of North to South along any given landmass as rocks or deposits will nearly always form in parallel with the ambient magnetic field.

I've yet to find any geologist or geographical data that argues with that point.

That being the case - Flat Earth cannot possibly work without some strange form of physics, because its magnetic field, would be so askew from what we physically observe - it simply doesn't add up.

Take care,
- Optimus

All I can say is, the Burden of Evidence is on you, making the claim.

I refuse to go through hours of collecting links and research together until SOMEBODY comes up with something better than 'the burdeon of proof is on ewe' - that cop out is older than the FES.

Come on, not one person?

Don't make me declare Win. I'll do it! I schwear!!!

Ok, perhaps I have been too evasive.

What I want to know is, what does this 'rock alignment data' consist of? What quantity do you measure and how?

Oh lord - do you really want to be that bored to oblivion? Ok - no problemo... it'll be a bit, but I'll have a not-so-brief brush-over of what geomagnetic field observations are, how they are observed, and some resources for you to look at. I'll make sure to look over my resources and ensure at least one of 'em is a non-government individual. A lot of them are either university guys or industrial gone private.

For now, to be brief and have something to ponder think of it this way... you have molten rock with some ferrous materials in it. It's just a floatin there waiting to cool. Since there is nothing else to do, all the particles in the molten material that are magnetic start to line up with the ambient magnetic field. The substance finally cools and sets into rock, ore, pyroclastic leftovers of whatever kind... and you end up with an absolute indicator of the N/S alignment of the magnetic field of the earth when that sample was created.

So, take that a step further - you go to several sites (heck, three will do) along a general N/S track on any given land mass. You look at the orientation of the deposits at each site. You draw your line 'down' the map. Now everyone tends to agree that we at least know the general shape of most continents... and if not, then pick an island.

Here is where the problem comes in... when you draw your line, the North and South orientation would end up going from North to an arbitrary spot at an angle to the rim of the Flat Earth, rather than 'straight down' to the familiar 'Polar' South depending on where you are on the Flat Earth and how far South you are as it will be more and more exaggerated as the geomagnetic data would show increasing rotation discrepancies around the circumference of the plane the closer you get to the rim - or the farther you get from the center.

Hopefully, that made a bit more sense with a bit more detail. I'll work on the data stoofs tomorrow. Just realized I gotta hit it. Gotta go get tomatoed by my class tomorrow and Thursday.

Take care,
- Hap

yeah, it's called declination of the magnetic north.

EDIT:

I'm not sure if I understood you correctly, but it's 3am and I'm getting my drink on, so this is the best I could do:


N is Geographical North
MN is magnetic SOUTH (I thought north when i drew the pic)

The red lines are geographic meridians and the black ones would be the projections of the magnetic field lines when looked from above. Clearly there is declination, i.e. the mag. field lines are at an angle with the direction of north. BTW, i mixed you up with Diego Draw until now. HI OPTIMUS PRIME!

Dammit - that's a much simpler picture than what I cobbled together. ROFL

Oh and Hello back!     [EDIT: Dioptimus Drime may drivel at will. The REAL Optimus Prime has spoken. lolz]

I havent been able to enjoy a reallllly good drink for eons because of my soopid epilepsy... have an extra for me.

I still have some fun stuffs for this I've already started on that I will throw up here after the holidays. For now I am all about shooting the breeze, over-eating, opening presents, and watching my nephew try to drive around on snow for the first time in his life   - assuming we get the promised snowfall tomorrow.

Take care,
- Optimus