Would magn. pole reversal actually mess up electronic equipment?
in [Design]
|
Prev: Integrated AGC 100kHz-10MHz
Next: Piezo Amplifier
From: Archimedes' Lever on 30 Dec 2009 22:39 On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 12:42:41 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia(a)not.at.this.address> wrote: >Archimedes' Lever wrote: >> On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:31:17 +1100, Sylvia Else >> <sylvia(a)not.at.this.address> wrote: >> >>> JJ wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> this has perhaps been asked before(?) >>>> >>>> Apologies in that case. >>>> >>>> What I wanted to ask is, if earths magnetic pole now would manage to >>>> flip in a really quick timespan (let's say less than 5 minutes), would >>>> that have any effect on electronic equipment, and if so, why? >>>> >>>> I mean I would think that the would not be any effect. After all, >>>> electronic equipment do not rely on earths magnetic field in some way. >>>> How would they? >>>> >>>> Or would there be some effect on electronic equipment if the flip >>>> happened in less than 30 seconds? >>>> >>>> Thanks in advance, >>> Some people would have to turn their televisions off and on at the >>> mains, so that they get degaussed. >>> >>> A number of perfectly good TVs would get put out for refuse collection, >>>from where they could be recycled by those in the know. >>> Sylvia. >> >> >> The number of dopes that still have CRTs by that time all deserve >> whatever cluelessness they have at the time. >> >> The rest of us will be just fine display wise. > >By what time. The OP didn't specify when this hypothetical event might >occur. Could be tomorrow. > >CRT TVs work fine. There's nothing much to be gained by replacing them >before they break. > >Sylvia. The topic was pole reversal, which has pretty much been accepted as being coincident with our crossing through the Galactic Equator. So, IF you know what that is, you might be able to get back on track. That would be 2012, if you are still in the dark. Hell, most folks with half a brain have already phased CRTs out of their lives.
From: Paul Keinanen on 31 Dec 2009 06:42 On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:39:36 -0800, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: > > The topic was pole reversal, which has pretty much been accepted as >being coincident with our crossing through the Galactic Equator. Our solar system makes a full period around the galaxy in about 200 million years, so if the orbital plane is inclined against the galactic plane, our solar system will cross the galactic plane about every 100 million years. On the other hand, there has been 2-4 polar flips in a million years.
From: Archimedes' Lever on 31 Dec 2009 11:15 On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:42:39 +0200, Paul Keinanen <keinanen(a)sci.fi> wrote: >On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:39:36 -0800, Archimedes' Lever ><OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: > >> >> The topic was pole reversal, which has pretty much been accepted as >>being coincident with our crossing through the Galactic Equator. > >Our solar system makes a full period around the galaxy in about 200 >million years, So what? The discussion is not about the rotational speed of the galaxy, and the rotational speed of the galaxy has nothing to do with how often we pass above or back below the galactic equator. > so if the orbital plane is inclined against the >galactic plane, our solar system will cross the galactic plane about >every 100 million years. Excpt that you logic is flawed. The arm of the galaxy we are in does not follow a path that matches the rotational period of the galaxy. It never did. The arm itself rotates as a whole at that speed, but the place the arm sits with respect to the galactic equator rises and fall above and below that equator at a vastly different rate. > >On the other hand, there has been 2-4 polar flips in a million years. You're an idiot. The arm of the galaxy our solar system is in follows a sinusoidal trail and that trail rises above and falls below the galactic equator about once every twenty six thousand years. That, by the way, matches the cycle rate of pole reversals. That, by the way, is a known fact as well. The galaxy forms a disc like shape, but the "thickness" of that disc is nebulous. ALL of the arms of the galaxy move through this "thickness" differently, but the real equator of the galaxy as a whole is a very thinly defined disc from an energy POV. So, as we near that more energetic equatorial disc, we WILL be affected more by it, and our planets poles will be performing a reversal as a result, and that result will be held in place by our new position with respect to said equatorial plane. I find it very funny that so many folks that claim to have a great depth of knowledge about physics still find it so hard to believe that the forces at the center of our galaxy can affect us so far away. I find it impossible to ever consider that it would not. After all, it IS the same force that holds all the arms of the galaxy where they are. If it were as weak a force as you idiots portray it, there would be no galaxies anywhere in the universe. It would ALL be a homogeneous distribution
From: Sylvia Else on 31 Dec 2009 20:04 Archimedes' Lever wrote: > On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:42:39 +0200, Paul Keinanen <keinanen(a)sci.fi> > wrote: > >> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:39:36 -0800, Archimedes' Lever >> <OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: >> >>> The topic was pole reversal, which has pretty much been accepted as >>> being coincident with our crossing through the Galactic Equator. >> Our solar system makes a full period around the galaxy in about 200 >> million years, > > So what? The discussion is not about the rotational speed of the > galaxy, and the rotational speed of the galaxy has nothing to do with how > often we pass above or back below the galactic equator. Where did he mention the rotational speed of the galaxy? Indeed there is no such thing anyway - it's not a solid object. You might as well talk about the rotational speed of the solar system. Sylvia.
From: Archimedes' Lever on 31 Dec 2009 21:27
On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 12:04:46 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia(a)not.at.this.address> wrote: >Archimedes' Lever wrote: >> On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:42:39 +0200, Paul Keinanen <keinanen(a)sci.fi> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:39:36 -0800, Archimedes' Lever >>> <OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: >>> >>>> The topic was pole reversal, which has pretty much been accepted as >>>> being coincident with our crossing through the Galactic Equator. >>> Our solar system makes a full period around the galaxy in about 200 >>> million years, >> >> So what? The discussion is not about the rotational speed of the >> galaxy, and the rotational speed of the galaxy has nothing to do with how >> often we pass above or back below the galactic equator. > >Where did he mention the rotational speed of the galaxy? Indeed there is >no such thing anyway - it's not a solid object. You might as well talk >about the rotational speed of the solar system. > >Sylvia. Learn to read, Sylvia. "Our solar system makes a full period around the galaxy in about 200 million years," |