Astrophisical Explanation to Global Warming and..

Well, I was reading this interesting article about a recent discovery that led to the idea that we are not from here! ..Meaning that we are not from the Milky Way, the big galaxy that somewhere is still naked-eye visible. So our “father” galaxy is the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy.

Well, interesting, but not related to the purpose of this blog/report.

But the article linked this new discovery to other particular phenomenons, that we may call Solar System Warming, you can read a previous post for further information.

More than anything I found interesting this part:

It has been postulated that this is the real reason for both global warming since higher energy levels of the Milky Way are almost certain to cause our Sun to burn hotter and emit higher energies. Indeed, temperatures have been seen to rise on virtually all the planets in our system. This seems quite apart from any local phenomenon like greenhouse gases etc.

This grand turning is possibly the root cause for the discontinuation of the Mayan calendar (the most accurate on the planet) because the ‘read-point’ of the Pleiades star cluster, which many believe the calendar was based upon, can no longer be

a constant as we begin to steer away from the earlier predictable movements.

I do not have enought knowledge to say that is possible, but what red above brought to my mind the electric model of the sun, well, if I’m not wrong they said that the energy emitted from te sun does not come directly from the sun itself, but from an outher source, and if it’s the energy that comes from the higly energetic center of the galaxy? Probably the changes in alignment to the milky way will have a certain influence onto the solar output, as it was already recorded.

Well, surely it’s more original as a theory than the Nibiru One..

Aand.. I searched for further informations, and found out that article (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html) from space.com.. According to that article it’s something really happening, BUT, the highest level of sun activity is not now, it’s increasing, but yet, you have to see this..

Month	Average solar flux at Earth	International sunspot number	Smoothed sunspot number
2000.04	184.2	125.5	120.8 cycle 23 sunspot max.
2000.07	202.3	170.1	119.8
2001.12	235.1	132.2	114.6 (-0.9)
2007.05	74.4	11.7	8.6 (-1.2)
2007.06	73.7	12.1	7.6 (-1.0)
2007.07	71.6	9.7	6.9 (-0.7)
2007.08	69.1	6.0	6.0 (-0.9)
2007.09	67.1	2.4	5.9 (-0.1)
2007.10	67.4	0.9	6.0 (+0.1)
2007.11	69.6	1.7	5.7 (-0.3)
2007.12	78.5	10.1	4.9 (-0.8)
2008.01	74.3	3.4	4.2 (-0.7)
2008.02	71.1	2.1	(3.7 predicted, -0.5)
2008.03	72.9	9.3	(3.8 predicted, +0.1)
2008.04	70.2	2.9	(4.3 predicted, +0.5)
2008.05	68.4	2.9	(5.1 predicted, +0.8 )
2008.06	65.8	3.1	(5.9 predicted, +0.8 )
2008.07	65.7	0.5	(6.9 predicted, +1.0)
2008.08	66.0 (1)	0.0 (2)	(8.7 predicted, +1.8 )

From http://www.dxlc.com/solar/index.html

And this

Taken from space.com

(Thanks to the respective owners for the data and images)

As you can see the solar flux is NOT at its maximum, but in any case it seems to have also a kind of annual flux variability, and now (August 2008) it seems to be in the increasing period, we’ll see the levels it will reach.

Also, the sun surface seemed to be at it’s maximum activity level at the end of 1999, pretty cool.. but, this does not correspond to the maximum solar flux to earth, that was in late 2001. Well, surely there is an explanation for this.

It will be interesting to see if the increased activity correspond to particular alignments, to planets or to the galaxy itself! This could become the proof of the theory of cosmic alignment leading to excessive solar activity (= big problems to earth).

Site explaining about planets alignment: http://www.etsu.edu/physics/etsuobs/starprty/22099dgl/planalign.htm

Cosmic Rays and Solar activity

A german scientist believes that there is a tight relation between cosmic rays levels and solar activity:

http://www.klimamanifest-von-heiligenroth.de/borcherte.pdf

Quoting what the scientist wrote:

“In the last thirty years the main increase of temperature in Central Europe happened within the short period of 4 years between 1987 and 1991. This event was coincidental with increasing sun activities, increasing intensities of sun winds and with decreasing cosmic radiation (neutron rates) with the consequences of reducing cloudiness, increasing global radiation and increasing ground near temperature. It leads to the opinion that Climate Change in the past century in Central Europe seems to be mainly Sun made.”

How the cosmic radiation is related to the sun activity is not clear (at least to me), he states that lower cosmic rays activity leads to lower cloudiness and consequently to higher ground temperatures.
Cosmic Rays more clouds? How can this be? Explanations? I’ll try to find out more next.

Asteroid Impact Made Mars Two-Faced

A massive impact with an asteroid that measured around 400 miles across is the reason that Mars is a planet of two distinct halves, where the northern and southern hemispheres look different. An ancient asteroid impact is thought to have dramatically changed the face of Mars This strange feature was first observed by Nasa’s Viking missions to Mars in the 1970s and ever since scientists have puzzled over why there are relatively young, smooth, low-lying plains in the north and relatively old, heavily cratered highlands in the south. The mystery deepened 20 years later, when the Mars Global Surveyor probe showed that the crust of the planet is much thicker in the south and also revealed magnetic anomalies in the southern hemisphere but not in the north. The culprit was either some internal process related to the planet’s internal structure, or an ancient impact. Now the theory that it was subject to a cataclysmic collision between 3.9 billion and 4.5 billion years ago has received strong support from computer simulations carried out by two groups. advertisement A third study has identified what appears to be by far the largest impact scar found in our Solar System, four times bigger than the closest rival. The latter analysis by researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Nasa suggests that a giant basin that covers about 40 percent of the surface of Mars, sometimes called the Borealis Basin, is actually the remains of a colossal impact very early in the solar system’s formation, measuring about the size of the combined area of Asia, Europe and Australia. Planetary scientists at the University of California, Santa Cruz, were involved in both computer simulation studies – which also appear in the journal Nature – and come to the same conclusion: that Mars once collided with an object about one-half to two-thirds the size of the Moon, striking at an angle of 30 to 60 degrees to leave a massive oval shaped basin. “It’s a very old idea, but nobody had done the numerical calculations to see what would happen when a big asteroid hits Mars,” said Dr Francis Nimmo, one of the authors. “The impact would have to be big enough to blast the crust off half of the planet, but not so big that it melts everything.” The impact would have been a million-billion times more energetic than the atom bomb that exploded over Nagasaki, said another group member, Dr Craig Agnor of Queen Mary University, London. “Whereas an atom bomb might destroy an area a few tens of miles wide, this impact overturned the surface of half the planet [an area thousands of miles wide].” Dr Nimmo’s group worked out the impacts in two dimensions. The effects in three dimensions, but at a lower resolution, were tackled in the second paper is by Drs Margarita Marinova and Oded Aharonson of the California Institute of Technology, working with colleagues in California. “The two approaches are very complementary; putting them together gives you a complete picture,” Dr Nimmo said. “The two-dimensional model provides high resolution, but you can only look at vertical impacts. The three-dimensional model allows nonvertical impacts, but the resolution is lower so you can’t track what happens to the crust.” Shock waves from the impact would travel through the planet and disrupt the crust on the other side, causing changes in the magnetic field recorded there. The predicted changes are consistent with observations of magnetic anomalies in the southern hemisphere. In addition, new crust that formed in the northern lowlands would be derived from deep mantle rock melted by the impact and should have significantly different characteristics from the southern hemisphere crust. Certain Martian meteorites may have originated from the northern crust, Nimmo said. The study also suggests that the impact occurred around the same time as the impact on Earth that created the Moon. There are one or two even larger impacts thought to have occurred in the early solar system – a controversial theory that there was one on the innermost planet Mercury, and a widely accepted one that the Earth was struck by a planet as big as Mars, melting the crust and ejecting it into space where some of it clumped together to form our moon. But in both of those cases, the impacts were so enormous that they completely obliterated all visible signs of the event. It is only through indirect analysis, including study of rocks brought back from the moon by the Apollo astronauts, that these giant ancient impacts have been reconstructed. The new finding adds yet another major event to the growing list of large impacts that have been recognized over the last few decades as having the shaped the planets and moons of the solar system as we know them today. “The early solar system was a very dangerous place to be a planet,” said one of the MIT team, Dr Jeffrey Andrews-Hanna, who did his study with Prof Maria Zuber and Bruce Banerdt of NASA-Jet Propulsion Laboratory. “But without those impacts, we wouldn’t have the planets as we know them today.” The basin that resulted from the Mars impact, 5,300 miles across and 6,600 miles long, is about four times wider than the next-biggest impact basins known, the Hellas basin on Mars and the South Pole-Aitken basin on the moon. “A key finding of our study is that the northern lowlands is actually elliptical in shape, and thus resembles other smaller impact basins such as Hellas and the South Pole-Aitken basin.”

This news was taken here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/earth/2008/06/25/scimars125.xml