Another, but very different Norway spiral

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic


100km is close to the earth when you are comparing it to the sun.

Now you want me to prove gravitational lensing? It's not a big secret.

The GRB you are proposing can not bend so quickly as demonstrated in the photos. It can't also explain the white, cloudy tail of the blue spiral.

I'd stick with mysticism and leave the science to scientists if I were you.

reply to post by davesidious


How many times must I say this? You cannot see gamma photons, they are way outside the visual spectrum. What we see is traces of deviant plasma particles making the electrons of nitrogen in the air excite.

As for gravitational lensing, which may let you see stars that are infact behind the sun given the right conditions, can be, and after my opinion, should be explained by other things than gravity. In my opinion it is an optical thing, not having anything to do with gravity, but I'm not the expert here. Similar phenomena can be seen here ion earth too. When the Moon looks bigger when it's close to the horizon, this has a few different reasons. The popular being that since it's closer to familiar objects like mountains and cities etc. visually, these referances make the moon look bigger. Another thing is how the atmosphere acts as an optical lense. I sincerelty doubt that gravity can do anything other than shaping let's say gassclouds which in turn can bend light, but in itself? Doubtful at best. How can something with no mass be manipulated by gravity in the first place? You'd have to use quite extended versions of Einsteins theorem to make such calculations work. Besides, given the calculations work, it doesn't mean it's like that in reality.

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic


Of for crying out loud. I'm not saying you can see the gamma photons. I'm saying that you can see their interactions with other particles, and so those interactions (visible light) must follow the path of the gamma photons, which will be a straight line.

As the spiral is not straight, your GRB idea is demonstrably false.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic

 

Of for crying out loud. I'm not saying you can see the gamma photons. I'm saying that you can see their interactions with other particles, and so those interactions (visible light) must follow the path of the gamma photons, which will be a straight line.

As the spiral is not straight, your GRB idea is demonstrably false.

Well, it's not the gamma photons which interact with what's around, but electrons, protons and ions from plasma and ripped appart molecules and they will naturally move around subjected to things like magnetic field of the Earth and even winds and temperature. Photons don't produce aurora, primary particles and ions produce relatively low energy protons from excitation when they hit atoms in the ionosphere, producing coloured outlets emitted from these atoms in the form of typically blue coloured photons in nitrogen. The Gamma rays would rip apart molecules in the atmosphere, producing a cloud of ions and loose particles, which would then crash into atoms around causing electrons to jump into higher energy states, and when they'd jump back to a lower state, photons would be released, also in the visual spectrum.

So again, you're wrong.

Try to visualise the small gamma burst I'm theorising around as the white ball at a pool table and the other 15 balls as a molecule. The gamma ray would break up the molecules into a bunch of ions. It's these ions running into every direction that would produce auroras as they'd make electrons in the atmosphere excitate in the atoms they belong to.

[edit on 14/3/2010 by Neo Christian Mystic]

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic


So why would these particles form a spiral, and why would it fall into the White Sea, at the exact same time a Russian sub launched a missile from there?

As I've asked you to do before, show us why the mountains of evidence that has been collected is wrong. Until you do that, you can add your argument to the "here's my pet theory as I can't be bothered to research anything" pile.

Your GRB idea is nonsense. Absolute nonsense. The sheer amount of radiation emitted by a GRB would be noticeable around the world. In fact, the GRB idea is about as stupid as it gets.

Originally posted by davesidious
In fact, the GRB idea is about as stupid as it gets.

After HAARP of course

So it's awfully cold in Norway just now and that's caused some sort of spiral eh?

Any chance someone could break the evidence into English and explain what or where this spiral is/was.

Cheers me dears.

-m0r

reply to post by m0r1arty


Like I said this spiral has been observed for over a month outside the coast of South-eastern Norway close to land between Norway and Denmark in what's called the Skagerrak, the sea between Norway Denmark and Sweden.

Normally, in this time of the year, we wouldn't even have drifting ice here, but now most ports in Southern Norway has frozen over and we see large blocks of drifting ice moving in a spiraling current at the place shown in the slideshow video (which btw also shows the Southern Norwegian coastline easily detectable), and this current which used to turn the other way, and would be invisible to the naked eye, and has never been reported to change direction ever before.

The ditrect cause of this has been identified by our brilliant meteorologists, with extremely cold winds coming in from western Sibiria, which in addition to changing oceanic currents in the Skagerrak has caused the coldest winter I have ever experienced here, and being in a time where everyone screams about global warming, and at a peak of solar spot activity which would normally increase temperatures even above what we have seen the last few decades.

This cold period started in December not many weeks after the Norway Spiral, and though the snow have started melting now, the temperature is still below what's normal, and way out of what the weather has been like here for the past 20-30 years.

And the extremely cold Sibirian winds causing this started moving from where the Norway Spiral must have been at at about the same time as when it happened. Coincidence? Well it's up to you to decide.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic

 

So why would these particles form a spiral,

They wouldn't like I have explained about ten times for you now. The spiral is the remaining empty space from disintegrating matter caused by a nuclear reaction which first would produce a spiraling disk, then focusing all the energy from the absorbed matter into a extremely high energy beam of gamma photons from each of the two poles of the collapsing nucleus, leaving behind a small black hole, which would then expand like a baloon in a vacuume or a vacuume inside an atmosphere if you like, seemingly absorbing the spiral. Nothing of what I have explained to you has gotten through to you, you seem to base your arguments from other sources than this thread already biased and set.

If you give me some time, I'll see if I can provide you with some estimate of exactly how many joulles of energy was produced here....

and why would it fall into the White Sea, at the exact same time a Russian sub launched a missile from there?

Like I said the missile releasing this weapon would have to fall down. You would need a missile to bring a warhead like this. Naturally. Or do you believe they used a cannon?

As I've asked you to do before, show us why the mountains of evidence that has been collected is wrong. Until you do that, you can add your argument to the "here's my pet theory as I can't be bothered to research anything" pile.

I am not saying anything in "your" research is wrong, only that you have gotten stuck in a scenario that has reached concensus, and got stuck there. This is not a contest over who's wrong and who's right, there's no prize at the end of the rainbow.

There was a missile indeed, but when, for as long as we have had missiles, has anything even remotely looking like this ever happen before? IE: WOULD a scenario where a missile malfunctioned act like this in the Spaceshuttle's crusing altitude, ie. in very low gravity?

Your GRB idea is nonsense. Absolute nonsense. The sheer amount of radiation emitted by a GRB would be noticeable around the world. In fact, the GRB idea is about as stupid as it gets.

Again, you show complete ignorance as to what a gamma ray burst is. You would only be able to measure radiation inside a nano sized beam running straight through the Earth. We are not talking about a conventional uncontrolled fision or fusion reaction here, we're laking about perhaps a small reactor made to collapse a core, and then focusing all the energy into a very narrow beam. Hence no downfall, no radiation outside the beam, only a rather small black hole remaining developing from the center of a spiral shaped disc. Or in other words. Exactly what seems to happen in the images provided.

Explain how this spiral seems to be "eaten up" from inside out by some black, growing ball. In one second the spiral "is lit by the sun" as you said, and in the other... what happened? Was there all of a sudden a solar ecclipse? Where did the spiralling smoke go? Wohoo, it turned into something black. Ah, it's just "the darkness of space" as the smoke dissappeared just as quickly as it showed up. They must have some magical fuel over there in Russia I guess.

[edit on 14/3/2010 by Neo Christian Mystic]

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic


Everything that we saw can be explained by a missile. The blue spiral, the white spiral, the white smoke, the origin of the spiral, and the trajectory along which it travelled, and the height it reached. As that is the most simple explanation, it is required that you show it to be incorrect before it is rational to start thinking it was anything else.

That's how critical thinking works, and that is precisely what you've not done. I'm not going to read paragraph after paragraph from someone who doesn't even have the common courtesy to act in a rational manner. You've yet to show why we should listen to your case. You've not shown why the missile can't explain everything we saw. Do that, then we can talk about your hilarious GRB idea.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic

 

As that is the most simple explanation, it is required that you show it to be incorrect before it is rational to start thinking it was anything else.

Are these some rules here at ATS that I haven't heared of before? 500 years back the Earth was the center of the universe. This was the simplest solution, so it was completely unheared of that there might be other ways to explain it. Kopernicus didn't need to dispoove his enemies, he simply presented his findings and left the rest to time. Critical thinking my arse. I'm just thinking outside the box, in whitch you are jammed inside like some Schrödinger's Cat who also had certain issues with photons.

I normally deal with language and religion, but since I'm Norwegian and quite used to having a nuclear threat just accross the border, I find this particular event, or series of events, quite interesting and rather peculiar, and I'd like to hear every facette of the story, and explore every possible solution. Is this site some kind of "read, submit to concencus and repeat" site, or is it the think tank I used to love where one could explore even the most unheard of things, since there might just be something in it?

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic

 

So why would these particles form a spiral,

They wouldn't like I have explained about ten times for you now. The spiral is the remaining empty space from disintegrating matter caused by a nuclear reaction

I'm sorry to say that after having read thru all your posts, that it becomes apparent that your knowledge of nuclear reactions, fusion in particular, is lacking badly in basic knowledge.

The nuclear reaction you refer to above I assume is a fusion based reaction ... the simplest being the fusion of 2 hydrogen nuclei by bringing them together close enough for their mutual electric repulsion to be overcome by the nuclear force to form helium with the subsequent release of energy.
This is the most basic fusion process and one that is actively being pursued by researchers worldwide and using huge and complex technology such as Tokomak reactors.
And yet you're trying to tell us that the fusion process has been solved and can now be initiated in space without the need for any of this sophisticated technology ? What an amazing break through !


As for your statement:
The spiral is the remaining empty space from disintegrating matter
Say what ????

How can you form anything from empty space ? Let alone a spiral ?

And where does the disintegrating matter come from ? Didn't you just get thru telling us that this is a fusion based process ? Matter doesn't disintegrate in fusion (hint: fuse means 'to come together') but it does if fission is involved.
So which is it going to be ? ... fusion or fission ?

... then focusing all the energy from the absorbed matter into a extremely high energy beam of gamma photons from each of the two poles of the collapsing nucleus ...

What ?????
Now the matter is being absorbed ! Whats it being absorbed by ?

Assuming that energy has been produced, then how is this energy being focused and by what mechanism ?
In a fusion reaction, energy indeed is produced ... but this energy is dispersed randomly and in all directions. So how would this random energy find itself 'gathered up' and focused ?

What the heck does ... from each of the two poles of the collapsing nucleus ... mean ?
In fusion, the nucleus does NOT collapse ... and what's this rubbish about a nucleus having two poles ... what, like a magnet ... or the Earth ??
I'd love to see a source reference for the above !!

... leaving behind a small black hole, which would then expand like a baloon in a vacuume or a vacuume inside an atmosphere if you like, seemingly absorbing the spiral.

A small black hole ??? WTF ???
That small black hole was calculated (by me) to have a diameter in the order of 100's of kilometers by the end of the event.
And with this 'black hole' located just above the atmosphere, have you even thought about the tidal forces that would be generated within the Earth ? Having a 'black hole' with that sort of diameter would be DISASTROUS if only from the point of view that the atmosphere would get sucked right into it at such close range. Having matter (atmosphere) flowing into such a black hole would generate incredibly massive amounts of outgoing hard radiation (gamma, x-ray, uv, etc) which most certainly wouldn't do any of us any good at all ... and I'm sure we'd all notice suddenly finding ourselves in the equivalent of a microwave oven being cooked right thru !!

If you give me some time, I'll see if I can provide you with some estimate of exactly how many joulles of energy was produced here....

Yes please .... give us an EXACT energy output.

Again, you show complete ignorance as to what a gamma ray burst is.

I beg to differ as I do happen to have a good understanding of how gamma rays are created.
They are primarily produced by sub-atomic particle interactions such as happens during fission, fusion, radioactive decay, electron-positron annihilation, etc and are a very short wavelength, very high frequency electromagnetic radiation and can carry energies in excess of 100kEv.

You would only be able to measure radiation inside a nano sized beam running straight through the Earth.

A nano sized beam ????
Where are you getting this stuff from ? I don't even know what a nano sized beam even means ... let alone how one would be created, controlled and manipulated !



Look, I'm really sorry but all you're apparently doing is spouting post after post of nothing but meaningless techno-babble.
It looks impressive in writing but is in reality completely meaningless.

Originally posted by tauristercus

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic

 

So why would these particles form a spiral,

They wouldn't like I have explained about ten times for you now. The spiral is the remaining empty space from disintegrating matter caused by a nuclear reaction

I'm sorry to say that after having read thru all your posts, that it becomes apparent that your knowledge of nuclear reactions, fusion in particular, is lacking badly in basic knowledge.

The nuclear reaction you refer to above I assume is a fusion based reaction ... the simplest being the fusion of 2 hydrogen nuclei by bringing them together close enough for their mutual electric repulsion to be overcome by the nuclear force to form helium with the subsequent release of energy.
This is the most basic fusion process and one that is actively being pursued by researchers worldwide and using huge and complex technology such as Tokomak reactors.
And yet you're trying to tell us that the fusion process has been solved and can now be initiated in space without the need for any of this sophisticated technology ? What an amazing break through !

Not a fusion reaction, but a collapsing fusion reaction, kind of an "imploding star". How they'd do it, like I said, I can only speculate. When under certain conditions a star dies (normally a huuuge one) it goes out with a bang that can be detected from everywhere in the universe. The Norway spiral, in my opinion, may be an extremely downscaled version.

As for your statement:
The spiral is the remaining empty space from disintegrating matter
Say what ????

How can you form anything from empty space ? Let alone a spiral ?

Vacuume as in an extremely downscaled black hole (compared to that left by a grb supernova).

And where does the disintegrating matter come from ? Didn't you just get thru telling us that this is a fusion based process ? Matter doesn't disintegrate in fusion (hint: fuse means 'to come together') but it does if fission is involved.
So which is it going to be ? ... fusion or fission ?

When a star (fusion) of a certain kind collapse in a supernova turning into a gamma ray burst in 4d space-time, it shadows the fifth (and possibly higher) dimentions, which we first would see as a spiral, which in turn will seem to be swallowed by a globular-looking black hole, until it itself would "disintegrate" allthough there is no matter left to turn into energy. The black hole is kind of the oposite of matter (anti-matter or dark matter?), which would be no matter, and the absence of matter (or heeping up dark- or anti-matter) would reach a status quo, and would itself collapse, leaving nothing much but an extremely cold area very close to zero Kelvin. which would suck in matter surrounding it until it dissapears.

... then focusing all the energy from the absorbed matter into a extremely high energy beam of gamma photons from each of the two poles of the collapsing nucleus ...

What ?????
Now the matter is being absorbed ! Whats it being absorbed by ?

Sorry for me using simple language here. The matter completely disintegrates into pure energy in the form of a gamma ray, collumn where the photons would move away from eachother with twise the speed of light (which may seem odd), leaving behind a growing black hole which will "absorb" the "sucked in" matter (which has turned into pure energy via the spinning nucleus (maybe as small as a single H-1 atom, or H-1 core or even a single neutron or for that matter an electron or some quant or quark, I don't know how they do it or how this could be even possible, or what the nucleus would look like, and what kind of nucleus would be used)

Assuming that energy has been produced, then how is this energy being focused and by what mechanism ?

I have no idea how, I can only speculate. I'm not a death-ray maker. I guess you'd have to look up "gamma ray burst, or GRB and go on from there.

In a fusion reaction, energy indeed is produced ... but this energy is dispersed randomly and in all directions. So how would this random energy find itself 'gathered up' and focused ?

Like I said, a supernove was a fusing star, which then collapse. Something like an "imploding" H-bomb".

What the heck does ... from each of the two poles of the collapsing nucleus ... mean ?
In fusion, the nucleus does NOT collapse ... and what's this rubbish about a nucleus having two poles ... what, like a magnet ... or the Earth ??
I'd love to see a source reference for the above !!

It can. It happens with stars. Just as an H-bomb simulates a regular fusion reaction like that inside the Sun, an "imploding" (with lack of better words) may simply act like that. The nature of the universe is compelling and diverse, looking out there we can study impossible things. My dad always says: "Nothing is impossible. The impossible only takes more time"

... leaving behind a small black hole, which would then expand like a baloon in a vacuume or a vacuume inside an atmosphere if you like, seemingly absorbing the spiral.

A small black hole ??? WTF ???
That small black hole was calculated (by me) to have a diameter in the order of 100's of kilometers by the end of the event.
And with this 'black hole' located just above the atmosphere, have you even thought about the tidal forces that would be generated within the Earth ? Having a 'black hole' with that sort of diameter would be DISASTROUS if only from the point of view that the atmosphere would get sucked right into it at such close range. Having matter (atmosphere) flowing into such a black hole would generate incredibly massive amounts of outgoing hard radiation (gamma, x-ray, uv, etc) which most certainly wouldn't do any of us any good at all ... and I'm sure we'd all notice suddenly finding ourselves in the equivalent of a microwave oven being cooked right thru !!

Except it would be dead cold in the center. The black hole itself would be infinitely small, the growing black area, would be the effect of this hole, and as you said, had it been bigger, it could indeed have sucked this whole solar system into it had it been bigger. I'm not a nuclear fysicist, I'm just an amateur, not using the correct lingo or methods to explain, and I see now that I may have been a bit too trivial in explaining a "growing black hole" and "balloon" when I should have used a phrase something in the direction of "an inverted balloon" or "black hole sucking in what matter would lie in it's surroundings" until the hole would be "filled". My guess is that had we had the instruments in place, we would have been able to detect gravity waves and quite powerful as such too.

If you give me some time, I'll see if I can provide you with some estimate of exactly how many joulles of energy was produced here....

Yes please .... give us an EXACT energy output.

Then I would need some help in calculating the disintegrated mass. I would also need to know the gravity in the center of the hole and so on. Since I can only speculate, and am a novise in most humanist sciences, I would need quite some time and a whole lot of studying. Guess it could easilly take a lifetime. But enough energy to create a hole in space-time would certainly take some serious amounts of energy indeed. All I know is that shortly after this temperatures in a vast area dropped to very cold, and as far away as Southern Norway (thousands of kilometers away) temperatures suddenly dropped 20 kelvins over night when the cold Siberian winds reached us, and which in about a month managed to turn the steady currents in Skagerrak, backwards and even increasing it, leaving a spiral of drifting ice ouside our shores which for all I know can still be seen from satallites.

Again, you show complete ignorance as to what a gamma ray burst is.

I beg to differ as I do happen to have a good understanding of how gamma rays are created.

Not you, the other guy. Read his last or second to last post before this one ( I may have meant gamma ray bursts, I'll have to look up the post I was replying to.

They are primarily produced by sub-atomic particle interactions such as happens during fission, fusion, radioactive decay, electron-positron annihilation, etc and are a very short wavelength, very high frequency electromagnetic radiation and can carry energies in excess of 100kEv.

Indeed.

You would only be able to measure radiation inside a nano sized beam running straight through the Earth.

A nano sized beam ????
Where are you getting this stuff from ? I don't even know what a nano sized beam even means ... let alone how one would be created, controlled and manipulated !

Me neither. In a stellar sized GRB the "channel" of this burst would be extremely narrow, and in a particle sized GRB the same channel would be "infinitely" narrow.

Look, I'm really sorry but all you're apparently doing is spouting post after post of nothing but meaningless techno-babble.
It looks impressive in writing but is in reality completely meaningless.

I'm learning as I move along. My knowledge is indeed marginal, and I may not use the correct words and phrases and am unable to express it in math, so until I actually learn more, I would probably dismiss many of the things I have already said, but starting nearly from scratch is a start. Thanks for questioning, and I hope you'd see this response as development. I only know the physics of this in a trivial fasion