The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: Art on August 29, 2019, 03:53:53 PM
-
For a flat Earth, disc shaped with North Pole in the middle, how can an ordinary old-school magnetic compass work?
If you were somewhere in the middle, the needle would perhaps align itself facing North, but if you travelled the Earth in a circle,
staying somewhere closer to some circular South Pole, the South direction would always change to the point of the outside of the disc closest to you.
-
For a flat Earth, disc shaped with North Pole in the middle, how can an ordinary old-school magnetic compass work?
If you were somewhere in the middle, the needle would perhaps align itself facing North, but if you travelled the Earth in a circle,
staying somewhere closer to some circular South Pole, the South direction would always change to the point of the outside of the disc closest to you.
In the flat disk north pole center the word South does not really apply as it does not have a south pole.
I would imagine that how the compass works is that it points toward the north pole which is at the center of the flat disk. If you travel to anywhere on the circle it will always point to the center of the circle which is the north pole.
-
I would imagine that how the compass works is that it points toward the north pole which is at the center of the flat disk. If you travel to anywhere on the circle it will always point to the center of the circle which is the north pole.
But the key question is "Why would it point there?" What mechanism on a flat earth would cause a magnetic field to be centered somewhere near the center of the disk?
-
A monopole magnetic field would be needed. But how you would generate such a thing is another matter. Has one ever been produced? Not as far as I can tell.
-
Toroidal magnetic field .
Can't figure out how a compass would work on the globe model when I look at this site http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/poles.html
-
Toroidal magnetic field .
OK how does that work then on a flat Earth model?
-
Toroidal magnetic field .
OK how does that work then on a flat Earth model?
Inner radius of toroidal field would be what we call North . Outer radius at Antarctica is a weaker magnetic field. The compass needle would always align to the direction of inner radius , North , since this is where the field is strongest. The field progressively weakens southward .
-
Ok and how is the magnetic field created? I assume not by a coil of copper wire surrounding the edge of the flat Earth.
-
Fair assumption .
Don't know what forms earth's magnetic field , same as the mainstream scientists as you can see from the BGS site I linked . Could be some interaction between aether , light and the circulation of the electrolyte which is the worlds oceans . Who knows ?
-
Well clearly no one can dive down to the core of the Earth and verify for definite the current RE theory about the solid/molten core which generates a magnetic field as a result of the Earths rotation. However models of such an arrangement have been set up and confirmed a magnetic field would be created in this way. So at least RE have come up with a realistic and plausible theory which is supported by scientific theory.
The FE explanation on the other had seems to be very vague and non-commital in this respect. Aether? I don't think so. Why would you need to involve something that has already been shown not to exist? I know the non-existence of the aether would be disputed by many FE theorists but there are several websites that I have checked through which unanimously make this claim. Example below.
https://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~rwest/wikispeedia/wpcd/wp/l/Luminiferous_aether.htm
-
Earths magnetic field does not correspond to any model - that is what BGS tells you. The toroidal model is just as valid , more so in my opinion . Why pretend the compass proves the globe ?
-
I don't think we should use the word prove on either side really. Because no one can prove for definite how the Earths magnetic field is created for sure.
The RE side presents the similarity with that of a bar magnet with the polar axis of the Earth representing the N and S poles of the magnet. Can you explain how your toroidal model works better than the bar magnet field pattern of RE.
Where ever you place yourself on Earth the compass aligns itself exactly as if there were a distinct N pole and S pole.
-
All the BGS thing says is "it's complicated". But the model we have is based on evidence. We can't know what is at the centre of the earth for sure, but we can make a model based on things we do know like what the universe seems to be made of and seismology - waves go through the earth and that gives us clues about what the waves are passing through. Some info here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/story/20150814-what-is-at-the-centre-of-earth
It's not perfect but it's the best we can do. Using evidence and analysis has to be a more sensible way of making a model than saying stuff like "could be some interaction between aether , light and the circulation of the electrolyte which is the worlds oceans". You might as well have said magic and fairy-dust.
-
I don't think we should use the word prove on either side really. Because no one can prove for definite how the Earths magnetic field is created for sure.
The RE side presents the similarity with that of a bar magnet with the polar axis of the Earth representing the N and S poles of the magnet. Can you explain how your toroidal model works better than the bar magnet field pattern of RE.
Where ever you place yourself on Earth the compass aligns itself exactly as if there were a distinct N pole and S pole.
Actually, the compass aligns with a single pole.
The label on the opposite end simply denotes direction and serves as no cause for alignment.
-
Earths magnetic field does not correspond to any model - that is what BGS tells you. The toroidal model is just as valid , more so in my opinion . Why pretend the compass proves the globe ?
No, that isn't what the site says. It very clearly explains how the magnetic field corresponds to a spherical model.
1 Introduction
The Earth's magnetic field is generated in the fluid outer core by a self-exciting dynamo process. Electrical currents flowing in the slowly moving molten iron generate the magnetic field. In addition to sources in the Earth's core the magnetic field observable at the Earth's surface has sources in the crust and in the ionosphere and magnetosphere.
The sunlight not only makes the air conduct, it also heats it causing winds. These winds combine with the tidal winds caused by the gravitational pull of the Sun and Moon and the resulting thermo-tidal winds drive the ionospheric dynamo. This dynamo generates currents as the conducting ionosphere is driven through the Earth's magnetic field. These current systems form two closed loops: an anti-clockwise vortex in the northern hemisphere and a clockwise vortex in the southern hemisphere, like those shown in Figure 15. Because it is solar radiation that produces the charges that in turn let the atmosphere conduct, the currents remain predominantly on the sunlit side of the Earth. It is these currents that produce the daily magnetic field fluctuations as the Earth rotates beneath, which explains why the magnetic field varies throughout the day. The shape, size and location of these vortices also explain why the Sq variation depends on latitude. As the amount of solar radiation falling upon the northern and southern hemispheres varies with the seasons and solar cycle, the Sq variation also varies.
3.2 The present magnetic field
In a source-free region near the surface of the Earth the magnetic field is the negative gradient of a scalar potential which satisfies Laplace's equation. A solution to Laplace's equation in spherical coordinates is called a spherical harmonic expansion and its parameters are called Gauss coefficients. There are internal or external coefficients, modelling the field generated inside or outside the Earth respectively. A separation of the core and crustal fields, both internal, is not perfect. The internal field is often called the main field.
-
Actually, the compass aligns with a single pole.
The only difference being that following the direction of the magnetic flux in the south direction would lead you to a point where all the field lines converge once again at the south pole. That would not be the case for the FE where there is no south pole as such. Just a south 'circumference' which really makes no sense at all.
The magnetic field pattern that we get with the Earths magnetic field is that of a bar magnet. You couldn't get that with this torriodal magnet idea which somerled is on about. The RE explanation about the geomagnetic field is based on real theory which can be demonstrated to be true to science. FE seems to be struggling in the magnetic field aspect.
-
Read the introduction to Magnetic Poles - since we are discussing how a compass works then these are central to the debate . How you think earth's magnetic field is produced isn't central to the debate .
The model dip poles and the geomagnetic poles cannot be located by measurement. That is clearly stated . They are theory
IGRF models include a fictional magnetic dipole at the centre of the globe - clearly stated. All theory . These models do not match their predictions .
Nice to see the sun's rotation around the stationary plain affecting the mag field though , my interpretation .
-
I did read it. My point is that the same site you reference clearly supports an RE interpretation of the data, so it is misleading to say that the website indicates "Earths magnetic field does not correspond to any model - that is what BGS tells you."
If you read the whole site, what it tells us is that despite some unknowns, the Earth's magnetic field corresponds with the RE model.
http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/earthmag.html#_Toc2075552
-
If you read the whole site, what it tells us is that despite some unknowns, the Earth's magnetic field corresponds with the RE model.
Correct. Take a bar magnet and then rotate the field pattern through 360 degrees. That's exactly what the Earths magnetic field looks like. The bar being represented by the Earths axis. I would like to see how FE theorists explain that if the Earth is flat. It would necessarily create a completely different pattern.. esp in the southern hemisphere. In reality the magnetic field is equatorially symmetric.
-
I did read it. My point is that the same site you reference clearly supports an RE interpretation of the data, so it is misleading to say that the website indicates "Earths magnetic field does not correspond to any model - that is what BGS tells you."
If you read the whole site, what it tells us is that despite some unknowns, the Earth's magnetic field corresponds with the RE model.
http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/earthmag.html#_Toc2075552
So the magnetic dip poles are not antipodal . And global models of the geomagnetic field such as the IGRF include a fictional dipole at the centre of the globe .This fictional dipole defines the antipodal geomagnetic poles which are then used to compute dip pole position which in turn do not agree with measured dip pole position . This is all in the intro .
Amazing that the bar magnet thing is touted as scientific fact.
-
In that first sentence in the intro it talks about the magnetic field being generated in the fluid outer core by self-exciting dynamo.
Where exactly is the core of a flat Earth?
-
Actually, the compass aligns with a single pole.
The only difference being that following the direction of the magnetic flux in the south direction would lead you to a point where all the field lines converge once again at the south pole. That would not be the case for the FE where there is no south pole as such. Just a south 'circumference' which really makes no sense at all.
The magnetic field pattern that we get with the Earths magnetic field is that of a bar magnet. You couldn't get that with this torriodal magnet idea which somerled is on about. The RE explanation about the geomagnetic field is based on real theory which can be demonstrated to be true to science. FE seems to be struggling in the magnetic field aspect.
How do you know there is a magnetic south pole?
-
Well the fact that auroral activity is seen both in the northern (Borealis) and southern (Australis) hemispheres is one clue. There are oval shaped regions in each hemisphere which are near to but offset from each pole. These regions represent those areas where auroral activity is most common. The centres of these ovals would approximately coincide with what could be regarded as the north and south magnetic poles.
https://www.spaceweatherlive.com/en/auroral-activity/auroral-oval
-
The polar aurorae are not symmetrical as thought , apparently most intense before dawn in the north but at dusk in the south . Iffy for the bar magnet field scenario.
https://mentalfloss.com/article/93830/5-facts-about-aurora-australis-southern-lights
Intriguing . Local sun moving around the flat plane ?
-
Well thanks for the link but I think I will keep my aurora monitoring to spaceweather.com. It has always worked for me and doesn't fill my screen with needless adverts. Just done a page search for the word 'flat' on that link and it came up with zero. So what makes you think anything on that page relates to a flat plane in any way?
-
Intriguing . Local sun moving around the flat plane ?
No, solar winds hitting the poles at different angles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cosklfb90fA
-
What do you mean by 'local Sun'?