Thanks Valich, you are a true trooper. >> the initial spin is clearly caused by the Coriolis effect >> yes indeed this is correct, we see spin eddies created by wind turbulence often. I have seen vertical and horizontal eddies. Clouds rolling across the sky. spherical "devils" scooting across the surface of the water, and running up the sand.. They are bipolar, two eyes as a focus, spinning around each other. Once the spin is started, (given conditions I don't know about) it is magnified like in an electrostatic /magnetic circuit. Motion (of static charged air)--->magnetism--->enhanced static----> enhanced motion..... etc The only containment of the spin vortex is friction. The surface field spin on Earth has a standing wave drift (curl) of 7.91 km/sec.... I do not know what the velocity of spin could be enhanced to if friction is reduced. see Katrina, it 'oiled' the Gulf's surface water so that the next hurricane that developed in the Gulf, had a record breaking 'spin up'. If you wish to know the mechanism, then more 'free minded' and talented people are needed for this, as i only have a cosmic theory, it works for the spin of hurricanes and cosmic matter, but that is about as far as I can go. I have not developed it enough to apply to the atmospherics of planets and the BXE configurations on the surface of planets/stars. But we know tornadoes occur on Mars (no water) and ?hurricanes on Jupiter.... etc. I expect the same mechanisms are occurring everywhere, if the conditions are set. I conjecture that a high E field in the area has to exist before the positive feedback BXE cycle can start. (maybe rising hot moist air gains excessive charge...etc ), (But I do think the enhancing conditions are set in the outer reaches of space, maybe even due to the Sun's pressure) see "Fair Weather" field to see there is a varying staticelectric potential of hundreds of thousands of volts between the ground and the ionosphere... this charge would travel, and focus etc..... I expect the causes are all high in the sky. The forces involved are very weak, but so many players and so concentrated makes for power. Thanks Valich for being thoughtful, rather than totally dismissive.
Light: I wasn't suggesting that you should "fire off" any emails, as I agree totally with everything you posted, and I mean't that I will now look over YOUR websites. Thanks. URI: I think the major reason for the containment of the vortex, aside from friction, is the resulting ouside downdraft and diminishing Coriolis effect. Once the warm updrafts cool off, they need to circulate down again, both in the center and the outside. But also, the farther out it goes, the more resistance the spin would get from the outside more stationary air.
All three of these websites imply an electric or EM disturbance due to the lightning within the tornado, but not the tornado itself; however, there is reference to an "electromagnetic frequency pulse" of a tornado (2nd source): http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_166b.html "Tornados create an electrical disturbance somewhere in the 55 megahertz range, close to the frequency band assigned to channel 2. With this phenomenon in mind, Newton Weller, an electronics technician, has devised the following method for using your TV set as a tornado warning device. Tune to channel 13 and turn the brightness control down tothe point where the image is nearly--not completely--black. Then turn to channel 2. Lightning will register as horizontal streaks on the screen. When the picture becomes bright enough to be seen, or when the screen glows with an even light, there's a tornado within 20 miles, and it's time to find Toto and head for the basement." http://umbc7.umbc.edu/~lharris/tornadoes.htm "Within funnel clouds, there are continuous discharges of lightning which, of course, will create an uninterrupted loud noise on the radio....The second way to detect tornadoes out of the home is through TV signals. "Channel 2 is the TV channel closest to the electromagnetic frequency of the pulse of a tornado" (Eagleman, Joe R. Thunderstorms, Tornadoes, and Building Damage. Lexington, KY: D.C. Heath and Company, 1975)." http://www.srh.noaa.gov/fwd/media/severe/weather.htm This website also only suggests that a TV or radio can be used to detect the lightning: "Research has shown that tornados can (and do) form when the parent cloud contains little lightning."
URI: You will be happy to read this article but I urge you to have great caution and restraint before posting anything about it as it is just one man's speculation - as you are too - and I do not know anything about his credibilty. It is pure speculation ("secret-science"?): http://www.peter-thomson.co.uk/secret-science-hidden-history/Creating_the_Vortex.html
The articles describing electromagnetic dynamic forces in tornados that I have read refer to solar vortexes (from or near the sun), or due to "ball lightning" within Earth's tornado's. I will not start sending out emails. “Twelve tornadoes, numerous funnel clouds and several hailstorms occurred during these storms. Eleven of the tornadoes appear to correlate with some type of enhancement of the recorded electromagnetic pulse rate”. http://ams.allenpress.com/amsonline....1175/1520-0469(1971)028<0436:ENSOSC>2.0.CO;2 “There are several cases when tornado was accompanied by ball lightning. Sometime short and wide sheet lightning surround a funnel. Sometime all the surface of a funnel shines a strange yellow glow. Sometime observers describe a bluish ball-like formations like ball lightning, but much larger, visible in a cloud. Sometime a slowly moving fire columns are seen . Jones, describes a pulse generator - some center of electric activity looking as a round bright blue spot in a parent cloud appearing 30-90 minutes before a funnel.” http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/planetary/tornado.html
Question asked : Are there any indications of electromagnetic fields or magnetohydrodynamics in the formation or sustaining of tornados or cyclones? Answer: "None whatsoever in a hurricane. Please read excellent review articles on hurricane electrification issues by Black and Hallett (1999, JAS, 56, 2004-2028)." Frank D. Marks, Jr. NOAA/AOML Hurricane Research Division
Valich, so may conflicting views... but you are a trooper. LOL Sometimes tradition (learning) restrains forward thought. I was just applying my theories/math on spin, to terrestrial spin system. Thanks for the info/links I log them on my website.... just more and more info/observations.
Valich, you found the mother load.... Just what my analysis would say..... however this still leaves the conditions for formation open. Is it "Sun" induced electrical pressure or is the electrical pressure a local effect caused by excessive heat in a region (maybe due to local terrain focusing the heat). Afterall there is "Tornado Alley". Hurricanes are a little different, due to the diamagnetic ring.
http://www.peter-thomson.co.uk/tornado/Dark_Matter_and_the_Expanding_Universe.html see image http://www.peter-thomson.co.uk/tornado/images/1991-01-a-full_jpg.jpg >> The most remarkable feature is a distinctive twisted ladder structure produced by two spiral filaments of plasma. The pair of strands are separated by about 500 light-years. (NASA photo)>>> Note in a cylinder, two foci are present, twisting (spinning) around each other. "Attractive gravity" is an illusion, IMO... matter actually repells matter, unless it is forcefully pushed together. 'Gravity' is the resultant of toroidal Poynting vectors. IMO
Peter Thomson, as I said, is purely speculating (much as science fiction does), that it would also apply to tornados: it does not. It applies to the sun because the surface of the sun is a plasma, not water. A plasma is an "ionized" gas, or molten metal, and has a positive electric charge to begin with that makes it readily respond to magnetic fields and is highly electrically conductive. Peter Thonpson is "experimenting with charged sheath vortexes, which self-organize into plasmas," posts his theories on his own home-made website, and as far as I can find he is not affiliated with any university or scientific organization. I asked that you exercise extreme caution and restraint before posting anything related to his article: but you did not. His theory DOES NOT apply to tornados or cyclones. You posted the diagram on Wikipedia's magentohydronamics page. Water is not a plasma: big difference here. If you go under their Wikipedia's plasma page you will see the exact same diagram with a full explanation of what plasmas are and why they so readily behave to electromagnetism: they already are great conductors of electricity. If you look more closely at the diagram, it does not even really look like a tornado because the diameter of the top is same as the bottom: there is no cone shape as most tornados have due to the water circulation. Again: Question asked : Are there any indications of electromagnetic fields or magnetohydrodynamics in the formation or sustaining of tornados or cyclones? Answer: "None whatsoever in a hurricane. Please read excellent review articles on hurricane electrification issues by Black and Hallett (1999, JAS, 56, 2004-2028)." Frank D. Marks, Jr. NOAA/AOML Hurricane Research Division
The only thing I've ever heard about such things are the crack-pot theories that come out of the blue every time there's a big outbreak, with folks maintaining that electromagnetic vorticies cause tornados. An elementary analysis will show you that even assuming continuous lightning, any possible electromagnetic forcing on a tornado is at least 4 orders of magnitude weaker than the kinetic energy in the wind, & so has no influence at all. That tornados may (or may not) have a detectable radio signal is more likely, & this is what is referred to as the "frequency pulse" of the tornado. For this to occur, charged particles would have to "clump" together & be advected as a whole around the storm. I think this is not very likely, but it could occur for a short time, leading to "pulsing" RF noise that arises from the accelleration of non-uniform charge about the tornado vortex. Robert A. Black Research Meteorologist 4301 Rickenbacker Cswy. NOAA/AOML/HRD Miami, FL 33149-1026 Ph: (305) 361-4314 FAX: (305) 361-4528 (NEW) E-Mail: Robert.A.Black@noaa.gov
The only thing I've ever heard about such things are the crack-pot theories that come out of the blue every time there's a big outbreak, with folks maintaining that electromagnetic vorticies cause tornados. An elementary analysis will show you that even assuming continuous lightning, any possible electromagnetic forcing on a tornado is at least 4 orders of magnitude weaker than the kinetic energy in the wind, & so has no influence at all. That tornados may (or may not) have a detectable radio signal is more likely, & this is what is referred to as the "frequency pulse" of the tornado. For this to occur, charged particles would have to "clump" together & be advected as a whole around the storm. I think this is not very likely, but it could occur for a short time, leading to "pulsing" RF noise that arises from the accelleration of non-uniform charge about the tornado vortex.
Again, Peter Thompson is a crack-pot. He is not even creating vortexes out of water! He's using a sheath that then develops into a plasma, not water, and he admits that! Very seldom does he even use the word tornado except at the very end of his papers where he says something on the order of that this is his "possible view or explanation." With regard to plasmas, there is some research - again, could be just science fiction - in developing a ray gun that is sometimes called a tornado gun. There is also an fighter aircraft called the Tornado and I'm sure that its exhaust gases also create a plasma vortex. The only conflicting view is your's. I will be receiving more replies from scientific associations and agencies over the next few days when they are forwarded to the appropriate departments.
Plasma Vortexes (vortices): see magnetohydrodynamics MHD. Plasma defined: an ionized gas where at least one electron has been removed from a significant fraction of the molecules. The free electric charges make the plasma electrically conductive so that it couples strongly to electromagnetic fields. Common Plasmas: fluorescent lamps (low energy lighting), neon signs, an arc welder, flames, lightning, the ionosphere, the polar aurorae, the Sun, stars. Plasma Temperatures: a cold plasma is typically several thousand degrees. A hot plasma, such as the Sun (10,340 degrees Fahrenheit). Plasma Sheath: an electrostatic sheath, called a Debye sheath, where a plasma contacts a material surface.
>> The only conflicting view is your's >>> indeed, and that warms my heart. Thanks I see all matter as a plasma, some just less electric that others. Water was proposed as a medium for magnetohydrodynamic electricity production, some time ago. A plasma really is something that carries charge, IMO. Some plasmas are contained (frozen), some can flow.... no difference really So you see, I will always be on the outside of this.... even if all the observable evidence is easily explainable by ESGT..... but like Peter Thompson, I maintain my secrets until I publish, LOL. Thanks Valich, your efforts have extended my model to the ground level and I do not mind being called a crackpot, because my results are so accurate that they can't be wrong. Even down to explaining observed anomalies of established models. Ta, mate.
Peter Thompson is a true nutcase who started his own website, likes to write, and just keeps on adding and adding to it from there. Check out his home page to see what he mostly does: mostly writing novels, life on Mars, vegetarian diets, romantic novels, "hidden history, "coral castles", "How many people did it take to build pyramids." He's a kook. And he even includes a picture of himself draped in a black robe, supposedly holding something that looks like a rolled-up degree to make him look like a scholar, but really makes him look more like Dracula. What a phoney nutcase! If you check out his homepage on tornados "Introduction to," he starts out by stating the erroneous assumption that "two particles of the same electrical charge moving in parallel will develop a force of attraction." A plasma is an ionized gas: not a "frozen" whatever you are talking about. Are you sure that you're not confusing physic's plasma with frozen blood plasma??? Earth to base here?
>> you're not confusing physic's plasma with frozen blood plasma??? LOL, Oh my past is catching up with me. >> YOU HAVE NO RESULTS!!! Peter Thompson may be a nut case..... That does not stop me picking up bits and pieces. I am not. I am a qualified serious researcher, I fear not when I walk into pseudoscience.... afterall what I pick up is what I consider integrates into my world picture. My path has shown me that much that is established is very shakey underneath. But true, all people consider me a nut case...... >> the erroneous assumption that "two particles of the same electrical charge moving in parallel will develop a force of attraction." >> I am not too sure of this, I know that some similar phenomenon exists with moving charges...... ?
>> Post the details of your experiments! >> Valich This is where the whole castle falls down.... I won't at this stage of my life.. I am really sorry about this, I was open once, because I needed help and I needed reassurance, and I thought others could extend the logic and make something really crude, much more beautiful and useful. I did REALLY think scientists would help each other, instead I have found a sad truth The people of the net forums are an incestuous bunch of big heads, that will destroy anything not status quo.... they are basically unable to step outside the rote. I set up a forum to find seriously minded talented people..... LOL..... I think I prefer to be a loner in this day and age. Think of me as you will, I am beyond needing other people's endorsement.
Maybe you might like to read http://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/physics/mag/node10.html >> Thus, wire #1 will be attracted towards wire #2. (same direction of travel) >> It is a good exercise to show that if the wires were carrying currents in the opposite directions that the resulting forces will have the same magnitude as in Eq.(1.11) but are such as to cause a repulsion between the wires.>> http://webphysics.davidson.edu/physlet_resources/bu_semester2/c14_forcewires.html [nice Java applet] << By the right-hand rule, a current out of the page in a field up gives a force to the left. Two parallel wires carrying currents in the same direction attract one another; wires with currents going in opposite directions repel. >>
