The Moon: Electromagnetic dynamo?

I was going through some material cataloging the chemical contents of lunar materials.

One study I read indicated that the moon was comprised of 13% iron.

Could this be true? Given that the moon orbits within the Earth's magnetic field, should that not produce an electric charge? Has the effect been measured?

I harken back to TLP theory and wonder if TLP's couldn't just be electrostatic discharge...

[edit on 20-11-2008 by cogburn]

Originally posted by cogburn
I was going through some material cataloging the chemical contents of lunar materials.

One study I read indicated that the moon was comprised of 13% iron.

Could this be true? Given that the moon orbits within the Earth's magnetic field, should that not produce an electric charge? Has the effect been measured?

I harken back to TLP theory and wonder if TLP's couldn't just be electrostatic discharge...

[edit on 20-11-2008 by cogburn]

interesting..

care to elaborate further?
I'd like to hear more about what you're tinking.

-

nah. The moon is geologically dead. It's cold all the way through. Without the moving currents of molten iron at it's core, the moon has no meaningful magnetic field. Without that, it doesn't have much of an effect on the earth's magnetic field. You can move lumps of magnetized iron around more iron, or even a magnet, and it won't do anything; there has to be a change in flux to create a current. The moon does not have the properties it takes to do this.

reply to post by mdiinican


You get a star... my Phys 101 teacher would be really, really angry at me. I was just taking stabs at TLPs and seeing what stuck.

That's got an interesting knock on effect when you think about it... if the moon is geologically dead, that does nothing for theories that TLPs are a natural expulsion of material. If the moon were geologically active in the slightest it would generate a charge (as it and the Earth's fields interact) and TLPs would have a probable source as well.

The internal dynamo effect has never been proven and all attempts to replicate it have failed, Mercury is a good example, it has a magnetic field and yet it shouldn't according to standard theory.

As far as TLP goes, I agree with the OP and also believe it is an electric discharge.

During the full moon phase the Earth's plasma tail (magneto tail) intersects with the moon. This causes a build up of negative charge in the fine lunar dust, they repel against each other and levitate from the surface, this is what has led to the speculation that there is wind on the moon, well there is, except this is an ion wind. I believe a similar effect occurs at the terminator from the charge differential between the dark and lit sides. Even the astronauts reported seeing flashes on the lunar surface.

Further evidence for electrical discharge can be seen all over the moon, there is more to craters than just kinetic impact. Deep gorges carved into the surface, crater chains, litchenberg patterns, hexagonal and squarish craters all defy standard impact theory. Craters have been recreated electrically and with startling accuracy.

Craters are Electric

Here's a link to Thunderbolts member Plasmatic's awesome ionizer experiments replicating cratering.

www.youtube.com...

And here's the real thing in action.



Geologist recently in Australia have also proposed the electrical interaction between meteors and the Earths geomagnetic fields. Tunguska anyone?

See the article : Geological Consequences of Large Meteoric Bodies Approaching the Earth — The Electrical Factor.
aig.org.au...


Just to add - This does not belong in skunk works it's just as speculative as the proposed theories for TLP or the magical hidden internal dynamo theory.

[edit on 20-11-2008 by squiz]

I post in the wrong forum all the time accidently. I figure a mod'll fix it or warn me or something.

I was researching possibilities for TLPs and came across just that... but where does the current come from?

I'm just not all that satisfied with the current run of theories and wanted a little more of an educated opinion.

I'm beginning to wonder if most extra-planetary electrical effects aren't driven by the solar wind. Time to crack out the calculator and Gauss's law. (thanks again, mdiinican)

Thanks for the links, but I'm not a fan of the electric universe model. I think that it leaves a lot to be desired in that the conclusions it reaches about neutrino emissions are misleading almost to the point of intent.

The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory released a series of papers in the past 10 years documenting the various effects that the electric sun model claims could not be produced from nuclear fusion in the sun.

The determination that the electron neutrinos from the Sun transform into neutrinos of another type is very important for a full understanding of the Universe at the most microscopic level. This transformation of neutrino types is not allowed in the Standard Model of elementary particles. Theoreticians will be seeking the best way to incorporate this new information about neutrinos into more comprehensive theories.

[edit on 20-11-2008 by cogburn]

Don't forget the sparky electrostatic Tesla craft ( aka UFO) if
either exist and if the annoying earth sightings in the skies and
NASA low orbit videos are any indication of existence there might
be a chance of Moon landings to give us sparks on the Moon.

Given the sparky activity on earth I'd say Moon sparks are Tesla made.

reply to post by cogburn


No worries, I thought maybe the thread had been moved by a mod.

Yes this is an aspect of electric universe theory, to be objective we shouldn't maintain emotional responses to various theories, we should ask if the evidence fits the observations. And it does. It is also supported by other theories from other science. eg. the Aig paper. You can't throw out everything the theory has to offer based on one assumption.

I believe you are correct once again, for someone not believing in EU theory you are making the same connections, the solar wind is responsible for the charge exchange. Again recently confirmed by the discovery of Birkeland currents transferring charge from the sun to the Earth.

BTW the neutrino experiment is flawed, regardless of the scientists patting themselves on the back. There is no way, no way that changing neutrinos' can be confirmed by examining them at one end of their journey.
A nill result for a multi million dollar experiment would not sit well for future funding.
Also the neutrino problem is not a problem for the electric sun model since fusion at the core is not part of the electric sun hypothesis.

On the original question-
Any charged rotating body will have a magnetic field, no internal dynamo necessary.

Even if the Moon doesn't have a core that's in flux, it's moving through the Earth's magnetic field, which induces current, and it's also moving through the "vacuum" of space which has its own fluxes in magnetic currents. Any movement whatsoever of a conductor through a magnetic field will induce current.

At the same time, magnetic materials exhibit magnetic fields without necessarily having any electrical fields around them, except those generated by the magnetic source as per Maxwell's equations. The source for this magnetism still hasn't been established, but I have definitely read a lot of interesting theories.

Due to the deformation of the Earths magnetosphere by the solar wind, less than half of the moon's orbit lies within it. Since there is no circuit (as required by Faradays' law), there is no electrical current generated. But the relatively small about of iron in the Moon's core does affect the magnetosphere to a small degree via the Lenz effect.


[edit on 20-11-2008 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage
there is no electrical current generated.

No current generated? it IS an electric current.

Earth's powerful magnetic field is shaped by the solar wind into a tear-like elongated structure, enveloping the planet. This so called magnetotail spans well beyond the orbit of the Moon, meaning that the Moon passes through it once a month, during the full moon phase, determining lunar dust storms and electrostatic discharges on the surface of our natural satellite....

....During this time, the Moon is actually crossing through a stream of electrically charged particles trapped inside the magnetic field of the Earth. Most of these particles, especially electrons, reach the surface, giving it a negative charge. On the dark side of the Moon, the electric charge can build up an electric field of up to several thousand volts, while the illuminated side of the Moon maintains a relatively low and constant electric field due to the action of ultraviolet light which ejects electrons right back into space.

news.softpedia.com...

Not constant but an electric current none the less. However the solar wind is constant.
The lit side emits electrons back into space. I wouldn't say no circuit just yet. The Moon's plasma sheath was only discovered a few years ago. More data is required though.

Just for the record, magnetic fields cannot exist without electricity, whether in a current or at the atomic level as in the case of permanent magnets.
Modern astronomy ignores this simple truth.

[edit on 20-11-2008 by squiz]

reply to post by squiz


The reference is talking about an electrostatic field, not an electric current. Two different things.

The magnetosphere catches negative ions. When the moon passes through the ion cloud they collect on the surface (like scuffing your shoes on a rug). The transfer is not related to a magnetically induced current.

Originally posted by squiz
I wouldn't say no circuit just yet.

There isn't always an obvious or conventional "circuit" present anyway, especially in space and on such huge scales of electron movements. I have a book Nikola Tesla authored, where he shows, among other amazing things, a single coil of wire with nothing hooked to either end, an incomplete circuit in the obvious sense, through which he made a significant current flow and discharge into the air. Frequency throws another curve into the equation.

Just for the record, magnetic fields cannot exist without electricity, whether in a current or at the atomic level as in the case of permanent magnets.

Magnetic sources still aren't that well understood. We know they generate electrical currents and vice versa as per Maxwell's equations, but we still don't really know what makes a rock give off constant magnetic radiation despite being an electrical insulator through which no electrical current can flow, for example. There are theories, but there are also unanswered questions, and no real experimental data to prove anything.

A writer for Discover magazine found out the same thing, trying to figure out what the force of magnetism really consisted of:

When you get right down to it, the mystery of magnets interacting with each other at a distance has been explained in terms of virtual photons, incredibly small and unapologetically imaginary particles interacting with each other at a distance. As far as I can tell, these virtual particles are composed entirely of math and exist solely to fill otherwise embarrassing gaps in physics, such as the attraction and repulsion between magnets. And as far as I can tell, because I’ve had it repeatedly and rather pityingly told to me, to want to pursue the matter any further is an impulse that marks its sufferer out as a man who doesn’t know an awful lot about physics, or science, or the pursuit of truth in general.

Three Words That Could Overthrow Physics: “What Is Magnetism?”

There was an interesting book I read not too long ago by a Dr. William Tiller, who suggested that there are particles that exist on the other side of the speed of light, and outside of our conception of time, for which the speed of light is the boundary. According to Tiller, who had plenty of symmetrical equations to go along with his theory, and other supporting evidence you'd have to read in his book, every electron particle has a very real (not just mathematically imaginary) particle he terms the "magnon," which exists on the other side of the speed of light but interacts with electrons on a quantum level through a 9th-dimensional particle he calls a "delta" that couples the electron and magnon to result in the behaviors that are well-known as Maxwell's equations. Every time an electron moves, a magnon moves respectively with it as per Maxwell, through a 9th-dimensional interaction. We can't observe the magnon itself since the speed of light acts as a barrier, but we can observe its symmetrical effects on the electron, argues Dr. Tiller. If you look deeply into what makes up magnetism, this new theoretical stuff is about as satisfactory of an answer as you'll get. Probably not much relation to the OP, but for what it's worth, very interesting stuff anyway.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by squiz

 

The reference is talking about an electrostatic field, not an electric current. Two different things.

The magnetosphere catches negative ions. When the moon passes through the ion cloud they collect on the surface (like scuffing your shoes on a rug). The transfer is not related to a magnetically induced current.

Yep, sorry I misinterpreted your post. However that's not quite true.

My point was that the magneto tail constitutes as an electric current that has a charge exchange with the Moons plasma sheath periodically. So it's not a magnetically induced current. This is a highly complex plasma exchange and cannot be simplified to electrostatics, although there may be what could be considered electrostatics at the surface. It's when the sheaths touch is when the exchange happens.There are lots of papers on the plasma exchange, easy to find. It ain't a pith ball. Only kidding

Anyways static electricity was named badly, there's nothing static about it. It should have been called charge separation.

There are other clearer examples of what I had in mind, such as Io that has a continuous charge exchange with Jupiter, of course it's referred to as a rain of particles by NASA but it's really just semantics, a stream of charged particles is an electric current.

As for the moon it has a negligible magnetic field, so I don't consider the moon to be an electric dynamo. But I do believe the TLP to be an electric discharge effect. And that the moons terrain has been shaped by large scale plasma currents, electric discharge more so than impact from differentially charged bolides, and of course the electrostatics.
So I know I'm not inside the box with these ideas. Not mine of course I'm not that smart.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the magnetic crust, with patches of magnetism throughout the surface. Assumed to be from meteor impacts no less. Only one man predicted the magnetic moon rocks, Velikovsky.
I know that comment will get me some greif. he he





[edit on 21-11-2008 by squiz]

reply to post by bsbray11


That's good info thanks, very cool, and you are right about the mysteries magnetism and the same could be said for electricity, And plasma? Well, that goes without saying.

Even more ironic is that the Big Bang and all our conventional modeling of the universe is based on the most mysterious force of all, gravity.

Cheers.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by squiz]

reply to post by squiz


Ah yes, magnetic substorms. Sort of like a short circuit in the magnetic tail (as I understand it).

And yes, the current vs. static electricity concepts can lead to confusion.

My bad, I missed a word when writing.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by mdiinican]