|
NEWS
ITEM
21 December 2005
Electric
Earthquakes
Civilization's interest
in predicting the location and time of damaging earthquakes is clear. The
potential for devastation of property that otherwise could be secured, and
the loss of life that otherwise could be prevented, are powerful reasons
to find predictive factors. 
>>Picture Credit: history.library.ucsf.edu/imagelib/
Chart: New Scientist
[Click on image to enlarge]
Some
scientists have become aware of a correlation between sunspots and
Earthquakes and want to use the sunspot data to help predict earthquakes.
The theory is that an intensification of the magnetic field can cause
changes in the geosphere. The NASA and the European Geosciences Union have
already put their stamp of approval on the sunspot hypothesis, which
suggests that certain changes in the sun-earth environment affects the
magnetic field of the earth that can trigger earthquakes in areas prone to
it. It is not clear how such a trigger might work.
In the Journal
of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 37–71, 2003, there is an
excellent report that addresses the more down-to-earth problems facing
geophysicists trying to understand earthquakes. The paper is titled, Rocks
That Crackle and Sparkle and Glow: Strange Pre-Earthquake Phenomena, by
Dr. Friedemann T. Freund, a professor in the Department of Physics, San
Jose State University, and a senior researcher at NASA Ames Research
Center. Dr. Freund writes, "Many strange phenomena precede large
earthquakes. Some of them have been reported for centuries, even
millennia. The list is long and diverse: bulging of the Earth’s surface,
changing well water levels, ground-hugging fog, low frequency
electromagnetic emission, earthquake lights from ridges and mountain tops,
magnetic field anomalies up to 0.5% of the Earth’s dipole field,
temperature anomalies by several degrees over wide areas as seen in
satellite images, changes in the plasma density of the ionosphere, and
strange animal behavior. Because it seems nearly impossible to imagine
that such diverse phenomena could have a common physical cause, there is
great confusion and even greater controversy."
Freund outlines the
basic problem, "Based on the reported laboratory results of electrical
measurements, no mechanism seemed to exist that could account for the
generation of those large currents in the Earth’s crust, which are needed
to explain the strong EM signals and magnetic anomalies that have been
documented before some earthquakes. Unfortunately, when a set of
observations cannot be explained within the framework of existing
knowledge, the tendency is not to believe the observation. Therefore, a
general malaise has taken root in the geophysical community when it comes
to the many reported non-seismic and non-geodesic pre-earthquake
phenomena… There seems to be no bona fide physical process by which
electric currents of sufficient magnitude could be generated in crustal
rocks."
Freund makes an excellent attempt to explain all of the
phenomena in terms of rock acting like a p-type semi-conducting material
when placed under stress. Normally rock is a good insulator. For example,
the emission of positive ions from the Earth’s surface may act as nuclei
for the ground-hugging fog that sometimes occur prior to earthquake
activity. And although the surface potential may only be in the 1–2-Volt
range, the associated electric field across a thin surface layer can reach
hundreds of thousands of volts per centimeter, enough to cause corona
discharges, or "earthquake lights." Thermal anomalies seen from space
before an earthquake may be due to the emission of infra-red light where
the semi-conductor charge recombines at the surface. Disturbed animal
behavior may be due to the presence of positive ions in the air.
As Freund says, this theory places an explanation in the realm of
semiconductor physics, which means that geoscientists are not the best
people to judge it. That explains why the paper appears in a speculative
journal. Freund laments, "the peer review system often creates
near-insurmountable hurdles against the publication of data that seem
contrary to long-held beliefs." Freund has identified a source of charge
in stressed rocks that was not believed possible. He says, "…once fully
told and understood, the "story" [of p-holes] is basically so simple that
many mainstream geoscientists are left to wonder why it has taken so long
for them to be discovered. If they are so ubiquitous as they appear to be,
why did p-holes go unnoticed for over a hundred years?" Confronted with
this question, by a twist of logic, many 'mainstreamers' succumb to the
impulse to reject the p-hole concept out of hand. Other geologists find it
hard to believe that positive holes liberated so deep down could flow to
the Earth's surface and collect there without being reabsorbed. However,
earthquake lights are a real phenomenon, and some kind of mechanism must
be creating them. Whatever it is, says Chris Marone, who works on the
physics of rock deformation at Pennsylvania State University in University
Park, it will involve maintaining charge over surprisingly large
distances. "This is a very, very hard problem."
The difficulties
encountered in connection with p-holes are similar to others that have
punctuated the history of science. The discovery of the p-holes as dormant
yet powerful charge carriers in the Earth’s crust calls for a new paradigm
in earthquake research and beyond. More often than not, any call for a new
paradigm elicits opposition. Freund closes with a quote from the
philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer: "all truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is
accepted as being self-evident."
If Freund has a problem getting
such a simple idea accepted, how much more difficult is it going to be to
get both astronomers and geoscientists to accept that the Earth is a
charged body in an Electric Universe?
The missing link between the
sunspots and earthquakes is the fact that the electric discharges to the
Sun that cause sunspots can also affect the Earth's ionosphere. The
ionosphere forms one "plate" of a capacitor, while the Earth forms the
other. Changes of voltage on one plate will induce movement of charge on
the other. But unlike a capacitor, the Earth also has charge distributed
in rock beneath the surface. And if the subsurface rock has become
semi-conducting because of stress, there is an opportunity for sudden
electrical breakdown to occur through that rock. We should expect similar
processes to occur underground as is found in atmospheric lightning. There
will be precursor electromagnetic effects due to the small-scale
travelling of charge – rather like "stepped leaders" between cloud and
ground. That may be the limit of activity in small tremors. But in a large
earthquake, the entire circuit may be involved, from below the Earth,
through the atmosphere to the ionosphere. This would explain the massive
disturbance of the ionosphere over a large area accompanying a major
earthquake.
The mystery of the source of the current is solved –
it comes from a charged Earth. And the link with sunspots via the
ionosphere is exposed. Subterranean lightning causes earthquakes! Seismic
waves are the rumble of underground thunder. The energy released may be
equivalent to the detonation of many atomic bombs but only a small
proportion need come from the release of strain in the rocks. Most of it
comes from the Earth's stored internal electrical energy.
The
latest issue of the IEEE journal, SPECTRUM, features an article based on
Freund's work that looks at ways of predicting earthquakes. Once again, it
seems that scientific advances fare better today in the hands of
electrical engineers.
See http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/dec05/2367.
………………………………………………………………………………….
There is a corollary to this story, which concerns the mysterious
fragmentation of comets. The observation of more than 20 cases of comet
fragmentation led to the thought that comet nuclei are poorly cohesive
rubble piles. But comet nuclei that have been imaged closely show that
they are cohesive, rocky bodies with sharp relief (notwithstanding
theoretical speculations about their origin from dust and erroneous
densities derived from gravitational theory). Comet Tempel 1 was no
exception yet surprising quantities of extremely fine dust were seen in
the Deep Impact experiment. The dust came from electrical sputtering of
the rocky comet surface. An impact will dislodge much larger particles.
>> The Hubble picture shows that the comet Linear nucleus
has been reduced to a shower of glowing "mini-comets" resembling the fiery
fragments from an exploding aerial firework. Credit: NASA, Harold Weaver
(the Johns Hopkins University), and the HST Comet LINEAR Investigation
Team.
So, being rocky bodies like the Earth and in the same
electrical environment of the solar system, comets will carry significant
electrical charge distributed throughout the nucleus. However, unlike the
Earth, conducting plasma is in contact with the comet nucleus so that
electrical discharges reach right down to the surface where they are
concentrated in cathode jets, seen emanating from the nucleus.
The
rocks in the comet nucleus are not under mechanical stress so they are
good insulators. However, the increasing loss of charge from the surface
of the comet nucleus, as it rushes toward the Sun, develops electrical
strain within the nucleus. If a subsurface discharge results, the comet
suffers a "cometquake," which may disrupt the nucleus. The small
velocities imparted to rocks by the quake are sufficient for them to
escape the gravity of the nucleus.
Original article: Holoscience.com
Fair Use Notice
 BACK
|
