How are tornadoes and electricity related? Can such a relation be used to stall or stop tornadoes? Can such a relation be used to form tornadoes?

JMG.

Tornadoes, like a number of other phenomenon produce electricity. This often results in lightning. The tornadoes in themselves are produced by temperature differences in the atmosphere.

The electric phenomenon associated with weather systems like tornadoes, typhoons, and thunderstorms are a by-product of the thermal convections inside cloud systems. The energy involved in the electrical charges is only a tiny fraction of the energy of the weather system and has no influence on its development. Electricity can neither be used to retard nor accelerate such systems.

Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Tornadoes, like a number of other phenomenon produce electricity. This often results in lightning. The tornadoes in themselves are produced by temperature differences in the atmosphere.

The electric phenomenon associated with weather systems like tornadoes, typhoons, and thunderstorms are a by-product of the thermal convections inside cloud systems. The energy involved in the electrical charges is only a tiny fraction of the energy of the weather system and has no influence on its development. Electricity can neither be used to retard nor accelerate such systems.

Hans

Good answer. However, there is a thing known as stirring stuff with magnetic fields. Using that approach, electromagnetism can stir the air to form tornadoes. Such fields would be strong, to say the least.

JMG.

Originally posted by GodLied
Good answer. However, there is a thing known as stirring stuff with magnetic fields.

Please provide evidence for this 'stirring stuff'? None of my text books on Magnetics mention this.

Isee yet, again, you have asked a question not to gain knowledge or clear a misconception but to further your agenda. Else you would have accepted Hans' answer and not sought to 'correct' them with psuedoscientific claptrap. What next, a thread on "What is the relation between Electricity and Vulcanism/Earthquakes/GRB's or similar.

Originally posted by GodLied
Good answer. However, there is a thing known as stirring stuff with magnetic fields.

Is "stirring stuff with magnetic fields" the technical name for it?:rolleyes:

Originally posted by one_raven
Is "stirring stuff with magnetic fields" the technical name for it?:rolleyes:

Not the technical name... It is the practical generalization of what can happen. Some science labs want to stir stuff without touching the stuff. Such stirring can be done by magnetic fields. I will have to do a Google search for the devices so that the reality of stirring stuff with magnetic fields becomes recollected to suggest that appropriate name of the apparatus. Oh, it so happens that those devices, as I recall, also heat what is stirred. Essentially, the heating is what those devices are designed for. Such stirring and heating conforms with the initial responder's observation of stirring and thermal properties. If we want to get scientific we could replace "stuff" with "matter". Some people might say a magnetic stirrer cannot stir solids; however, those people can be sent to Google to search for spooky stories of caskets that moved on their own as if by a poltergeist when it was later found that those caskets moved because of both some magnetic fields in the tomb and also the iron nails used in the coffins.

Oh, another Google seach can allow one to see the websites on levitating frogs to the center of a solenoid magnetic field. Using that concept, one can move an object in air from ground to a higher point if the apparent center of the solenoid field is at the desired destination. Such a field has to be quite strong for animals that are a considerable distance from the desired destination.

JMG.

Originally posted by thed
Please provide evidence for this 'stirring stuff'? None of my text books on Magnetics mention this.

Isee yet, again, you have asked a question not to gain knowledge or clear a misconception but to further your agenda. Else you would have accepted Hans' answer and not sought to 'correct' them with psuedoscientific claptrap. What next, a thread on "What is the relation between Electricity and Vulcanism/Earthquakes/GRB's or similar.

Thed, your incomplete information leads you to dispute the capacity of stirring and heating something with magnetic fields? Hmmm. Because of your incomplete database you then chose to advise me that I am pushing false science. To break such misconceptions and establish broadened brains or reaffirm foundations of thought, one might perform research. To assist you in your failure to find the reality of the scientific principle in question, I will perform a Google search on the devices which heat and stir stuff for laboratories to get stuff stirred heated to a particular temperature. It will then be your problem to apologize for your ignorant accusations and, at your option, search the US Patent Office to find the patents of those devices to see how they work.

Previously, James, I and another poster have suggested having a Sciforums FAQ. Such a FAQ can end some misconceptions with facts and examples. We, as well as anyone else that stumbles into Sciforums Physics and Math, will benefit from such a FAQ.

Enjoy learning!

JMG.

Here are two of many links to look up magnetic stirrers:

http://www.labcraftsmen.com/page3.htm

http://www.thomasregister.com//SearchListing.aspx?search_type=product&search_string=magnetic+stirrer&pn=80570807&uuid=&src=go


Anyone disputing magnetic stirrer/heater technology like Thed can find more websites by performing a Google search for "magnetic stirrer." Magnetic stirrers are real and they do heat what is stirred. I expect an apology from Thed who claimed such devices are the realm of false science.

Thed, you are welcome for expanding your mind.

JMG.

Originally posted by GodLied
Here are two of many links to look up magnetic stirrers:

http://www.labcraftsmen.com/page3.htm

http://www.thomasregister.com//SearchListing.aspx?search_type=product&search_string=magnetic+stirrer&pn=80570807&uuid=&src=go
::snips::
I expect an apology from Thed who claimed such devices are the realm of false science.


Bwahahaha.

Now explain how that explains tornadoes? Give your evidence that tornadoes are created by a rotating electromagnetic or magnetic field! To remind you ,

However, there is a thing known as stirring stuff with magnetic fields. Using that approach, electromagnetism can stir the air to form tornadoes

Note also that electromagnetism (light and radio waves for example) are not quite the same as magnetism. A magnetic stirrer is not the same as a putative electromagnetic stirrer, as you claimed.

Which is it to be and how do you create meterological phenomena with it? Why does Tornado Alley exist?

No evidence need be given that tornadoes result from electromagnetic effects; unless, you choose to fund said research. Do you? I will charge a fee of US$500,000,000.00 payable by paypal to godlied@yahoo.com. The terms will be to prove or disprove the presence of magnetic fields which cause tornadoes; and, you assume all responsibility for any property damage in the process of making a tornado machine. Advise me if an artificial tornado is sufficient for proof of possibility.

Thed, your curiousity on storm activity and intense magnetic fields should send yourself searching into relations between electrical storms in the ionosphere and storm systems on Earth. Those ionosphere storms can disable power plants on Earth. I suggest you start learning.

Remember, if you want to know how magnetic stirrers work, see the patents at the patent office.

Post your queries not answering or discussing the concept of tornadoes and electricity to another thread. That includes your query about tornadoes and tornado alley.

JMG.

Originally posted by thed
Bwahahaha.

Now explain how that explains tornadoes? Give your evidence that tornadoes are created by a rotating electromagnetic or magnetic field! To remind you ,



Note also that electromagnetism (light and radio waves for example) are not quite the same as magnetism. A magnetic stirrer is not the same as a putative electromagnetic stirrer, as you claimed.

Which is it to be and how do you create meterological phenomena with it? Why does Tornado Alley exist?

Originally posted by GodLied
No evidence need be given ::snips::

Post your queries not answering or discussing the concept of tornadoes and electricity to another thread. That includes your query about tornadoes and tornado alley.

JMG.

For the sake of the gentle reader of this thread let us recap the argument.

You asked if there was a relation between electricity and tornados. Hans said no and you rebutted with the statement However, there is a thing known as stirring stuff with magnetic fields. Using that approach, electromagnetism can stir the air to form tornadoes.

Two of us asked for further information. Note you said magnetic stirrers, not electromagetic stirrers, two very different things. Then you posted links to a common piece of lab kit. To remind you, you implied these are responsible for tornados.

But you are mixing up two different phenomena and making an extraordinary claim based on a misconception. It is commonly accepted that,

<ul>
<li>The burden of proof lies on the claimant
<li>Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
</ul>

So where is your evidence. Saying 'No evidence need be given' is the sign of a very closed mind. I would like to see the logic behind your thinking that led you from Tornados->electricity->magnetic stirrers->electromagnetic stirring causing tornados.

Magnetic stirrers for laboratories work by putting a small plastic encapsulated magnet into the jar and spinning it with a magnet field from the outside.

Electromagnetic fields can not, reperat NOT, set air in motion. Even extremely powerful radar beams only interact slightly with air (otherwise radar would be impossible).

GodLied:
No evidence need be given that tornadoes result from electromagnetic effects;

Wrong. To support such a theory, evidence is needed. None exists.

*Snipped: Nonsense*



Hans

The problem with the tornado being "stirred" electrically is that the air particles are not charged. I don't remember the physics of it, but I remember when a charged particle crosses a magnetic field it at a perpendicular angle takes on a corkscrew flight pattern. This would work if we could demonstrate that the air was charged and that something was creating a magnetic field. However, I don't really see that occurring.

This brings up the interesting question, who here has watched a tornado form? I almost saw one form, it was really quite amazing watching the clouds swirld together. The air was definitely very electical and moist.

Originally posted by spoilsport
The problem with the tornado being "stirred" electrically is that the air particles are not charged. I don't remember the physics of it, but I remember when a charged particle crosses a magnetic field it at a perpendicular angle takes on a corkscrew flight pattern. This would work if we could demonstrate that the air was charged and that something was creating a magnetic field. However, I don't really see that occurring.

This brings up the interesting question, who here has watched a tornado form? I almost saw one form, it was really quite amazing watching the clouds swirld together. The air was definitely very electical and moist.

When organic stuff like frogs and bugs are brought to the center of a solenoid field by the solenoid field, the organic stuff rotated. Clouds are not organic but all one has to do is see if dirty clouds rotate in the presence of an appropriate magnetic influence. Some heaters have flat plates upon which a pot is placed to melt or heat stuff. When the heaters are magnetic, the stuff eventually stirs without being touched. Such stirring is used when one does not want to contaminate what is bieng stirred.

I will have to look up another reference to those heaters to see that they stir stuff without the presence of a magnet placed within the stuff.

JMG.

Sure. Anything conductive can be made to move in a rotating magnetic field. As long as you don't mind pretty strong electrical currents being induced in it (I think a frog might mind).

However, clouds are not conductive, as proved by the fact that thunderclouds can build up millions of volts before the charge is released through lightning.

Also, of course, to stir a tornado (assuming it could somehow be done) one would need a gigantic magnet field, drawing terawatts of power and playng havoc with electrical systems for miles around, and probably disturbing magnetic compasses on most of the planet.


I'm sorry, but this parrot wouldn't woom if you put a million volts through it.

Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Magnetic stirrers for laboratories work by putting a small plastic encapsulated magnet into the jar and spinning it with a magnet field from the outside.

Electromagnetic fields can not, reperat NOT, set air in motion. Even extremely powerful radar beams only interact slightly with air (otherwise radar would be impossible).

GodLied:


Hans

Hans, I did not know there are more kinds of devices by the same name. You are correct that there are devices called magnetic stirrers which stir stuff without heating it. Examples of those things are

http://www.pdcmachines.com/magnetic_stirrers.asp

However, the magnetic stirrers I originally referenced are both heaters and stirrers. Such devices affect liquids and might be used in the manufacture of homemade soap. Once liquified, the heated liquid stirs without an additional apparatus immersed in the liquid. The link to that kind of a device is in one of my prior posts.

Oh, if air cannot be set in motion by electromagnetic devices, how then can those air cleaners without fan blades suck air pollutants to it? Such suction in itself results in air motion by non-mechanical means.

Hmm. Ionized gas squishes to the center of a solenoid just as a soda can squishes in the middle of a sufficient solenoid field. Your consideration that storm clouds which form into tornadoes cannot be manipulated by electromagnetic fields is to become tornadoes is now considered. Let us say that dirty clouds tend to become tornado clouds rather than clean white clouds. Dirty clouds consist of contaminants in solution with gaseous water. Such contaminants may make the cloud electrically conductive. So, the storm cloud is a mass of conductive material. Conductive materials in motion in the presence of a magnetic field become electrically charged. Conductive material in the presence of an alternating magnetic field become electrically charged. Electrically charged particles move in the presence of magnetic fields. Storms in the ionosphere can impose strong magnetic fields on Earth and can therefore impose stronger magnetic fields on clouds which are a considerable distance from Earth. An appropriate storm in the ionosphere can charge a dirty storm cloud and potentially give it a swirl. To test the idea, build a high powered magnetic stirrer that stirs by magnetic fields rather than mechanical parts. See if the device can make a small tornado. See if the tornado follows the device. See if the tornado stops when the device is turned off. If so, a tornado machine might be manufacturable such that a terrorist could destroy anything anywhere anytime. Such a machine need only expel a conductive gas, manipulate the gas to swirl towards the ground, intensify the motion of the swirl with intense magnetic fields, move the machine everywhere destruction is desired. Such a machine would reak havoc on navies, armies, and airforces. Wall of tornadoes in a desert would allow one millitary of few soldiers wipe out the other side with rapid, sand blasting action. Any defense cannot last long against a sandblasting tornado's edge. I firmly believe a tornado machine can be designed because it operates on the principle of magnetic stirrers. It remains up for testing to see if one can build a tornado machine with the appropriate superconducting materials which cost a lot, to say the least.

Oh, if one could make a tornado, one can stop an existing tornado by placing the tornado machine above it and then effecting a reverse force from the direction the existing tornado spins. Because some tornadoes are quite wide, an anti-tornado machine is quite expensive to manufacture. So, it might be easier to apply something to the storm cloud to dissipate or eliminate the cloud so that the conductive element is removed from the mangetic fields driving it to manufacture a tornado.

JMG.

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
....

However, clouds are not conductive, as proved by the fact that thunderclouds can build up millions of volts before the charge is released through lightning.

Also, of course, to stir a tornado (assuming it could somehow be done) one would need a gigantic magnet field, drawing terawatts of power and playng havoc with electrical systems for miles around, and probably disturbing magnetic compasses on most of the planet.

...

Vandergraff generators generate electric sparks and are conductive. For dirty clouds to emit eletrical sparks, dirty clouds should be conductive. Their immersion in the insulation of air limits the amount of discharge options for clouds.

Storms in the ionosphere have been known to cause damage to power plants. The ionosphere can impose tremendous magnetic fields on parts of Earth. When those fields become alternating fields, damage happens. I do not know if magnetic compasses worldwide become dysfunctional when there is an electric storm in the ionosphere over Quebec.

Has anyone noticed dysfunctional magnetic compases in the presence of a tornado? Has anyone ever taken magnetic field readings as a tornado nears, while the tornado moves over a location, and then once the tornado leaves? Any variation in magnetic field readings would suggest a tornado is fueled by magnetic fields.

JMG.

As Wikipedia, http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tornado, points out Tornados are dominant in America. Specifically in Tornado Alley.
If this idea was even vaguely good there is something in America that causes more Tornados. Don't suppose Godlied would care to explain that within the framework of your theory.

For a more realistic view on Tornados have a read of

http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/NWSTornado/
http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/researchitems/tornadoes.shtml

We can already make Tornados in the lab without the need for magnetic fields; http://www.exploratorium.edu/exhibit_services/ebtp/exhibits/group4/tornado/index.html

Now, to provide a balanced argument I have found a web site detailing the idea of Tornados being caused by J and B fields in more depth. It can be read here, http://www.cafes.net/wallytul/ttheory.htm. It is worth noting that it has not been through the peer review system.

Originally posted by GodLied
Vandergraff generators generate electric sparks and are conductive.

No, they are not conductive. Not the parts that generate the charge.

For dirty clouds to emit eletrical sparks, dirty clouds should be conductive. Their immersion in the insulation of air limits the amount of discharge options for clouds.

No, electrical charges are built within the clouds. They are not conductive.

Storms in the ionosphere have been known to cause damage to power plants.

You mean by lightning strikes? Otherwise please elaborate (and document).

The ionosphere can impose tremendous magnetic fields on parts of Earth. When those fields become alternating fields, damage happens.

They do not become alternating fields.

I do not know if magnetic compasses worldwide become dysfunctional when there is an electric storm in the ionosphere over Quebec.

The electric storm is a by-product of the thermal processes generating the storm. I'm talking about the power needed to GENERATE a storm.

Has anyone noticed dysfunctional magnetic compases in the presence of a tornado? Has anyone ever taken magnetic field readings as a tornado nears, while the tornado moves over a location, and then once the tornado leaves? Any variation in magnetic field readings would suggest a tornado is fueled by magnetic fields.

I'm sure somebody has. Tornadoes have been studied extensively. Such an effect would hardly have gone unnoticed.

JMG.

Look, mate: This is a DEAD parrot. You had an idea; fine, but it did not hold water. Live with it.

Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Look, mate: This is a DEAD parrot. You had an idea; fine, but it did not hold water. Live with it.

Hans

Hi Hans,

I went on the internet and found a website in dirt devils. That site stated how dust devils, snow devils, tornadoes, and hurricanes form. It suggested such things form from temperature differentials. In the case of dust devils, a voltage is generated by the dust devil. It did not say if the voltage kept the devil spinning or if the thermals kept the devil spinning. It also did not suggest one could use the dust devil to harvest power from temperature gradients.

Hmm.

JMG.

Originally posted by thed
As Wikipedia, http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tornado, points out Tornados are dominant in America. Specifically in Tornado Alley.
If this idea was even vaguely good there is something in America that causes more Tornados. Don't suppose Godlied would care to explain that within the framework of your theory.

For a more realistic view on Tornados have a read of

http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/NWSTornado/
http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/researchitems/tornadoes.shtml

We can already make Tornados in the lab without the need for magnetic fields; http://www.exploratorium.edu/exhibit_services/ebtp/exhibits/group4/tornado/index.html

Now, to provide a balanced argument I have found a web site detailing the idea of Tornados being caused by J and B fields in more depth. It can be read here, http://www.cafes.net/wallytul/ttheory.htm. It is worth noting that it has not been through the peer review system.

Thed, a tornado is nothing more than a dust devil connected to a thunder cloud. Dust devils do not have as much power as tornadoes. So, ridding the cloud from the tornado, reduces the tornado to a dust devil. Once a dust devil, the tornado winds should begin to decrease to the maximum speed observed for dust devils. Dust devils destabilize over a pile of dust. So, one can destroy a tornado in two parts: part one is destroying the cloud, part two is letting the resulting dust devil destabilize over a pile of dust.

JMG.

Please address the points raised.

How come the Exploratorium can create tornados without using magnetic stirrers. This surely negates your idea.

Why are larger tornados found mainly in America. What is different in America that creates them, using your model.

Originally posted by GodLied
Thed, a tornado is nothing more than a dust devil connected to a thunder cloud. Dust devils do not have as much power as tornadoes. So, ridding the cloud from the tornado, reduces the tornado to a dust devil. Once a dust devil, the tornado winds should begin to decrease to the maximum speed observed for dust devils. Dust devils destabilize over a pile of dust. So, one can destroy a tornado in two parts: part one is destroying the cloud, part two is letting the resulting dust devil destabilize over a pile of dust.

JMG. You are confusing cause and effect. Rotating weather phenomenon, from dust devils to cyclones, are caused by hot air rising. As the air rises, the air rushing in to replace it begins to rotate because of the coreolis effect. Condensing moisture, and later freezing water droplets release energy to fuel the system in case of the large phenomenon from thunderstorms, over tornadoes to cyclones. A by-product if the actions is electrical charges.

If you take away the thunder cloud, you deprive the system of its energy, but this has nothing to do with electricity; the energy comed from water vapour. However, there is no way of "taking away the thunder cloud", it is an integral part of the system.

Hans

Originally posted by thed
Please address the points raised.

How come the Exploratorium can create tornados without using magnetic stirrers. This surely negates your idea.

Why are larger tornados found mainly in America. What is different in America that creates them, using your model.


Wind can be made to travel in a vortex fashion without magnetic fiels. Coloring the wind with illuminated steam can create tornado without magnetic fields. Such vortexes involve suction. Earth does not suck the spiraling tornado to it. Therefore, vortexes involving suction do not model actual tornado formation.

Without data an answer cannot be obtained. However, using the thermal model for tornado formation, planting trees to prevent spiraling wind from forming a long enough column to reach the clouds will stop tornado formation. How thick one wants the tree lines to be and how close the tree lines should be can be determined by trial and error.

JMG.

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
....
If you take away the thunder cloud, you deprive the system of its energy, but this has nothing to do with electricity; the energy comed from water vapour. However, there is no way of "taking away the thunder cloud", it is an integral part of the system.

Hans

Why cannot one, at extreme expense, dump liquid nitrogen into the storm cloud to freeze it? Wouldn't a frozen cloud fall?

JMG.

Originally posted by thed
Please address the points raised.

How come the Exploratorium can create tornados without using magnetic stirrers. This surely negates your idea.

Why are larger tornados found mainly in America. What is different in America that creates them, using your model.

Thed, I looked up Tornado Alley and found that the most common tornado locations are flatlands. It may therefore be possible to reduce tornado activity in those areas by changing the topography of the landscape. Either adding hills or planting trees of various heights might reduce the existence of tornados in tornado alley. If so, then the thermal observation is absolutely correct and tornados might cease to happen in tornado alley.

Is there any record of a tornado forming over a hilly forested region?

JMG.

Yes, you might dump large amounts of liquid nitrogen on a tornado and defuse it. Of course, the rapid cooling of the atmosphere would trigger torrential rain or heavy snow, and the local temperature differences might trigger formation of new super-cells (the name of the phenomenon that drives a tornado).

Yes, terraforming Tornado Alley into a hilly forest landscape might reduce the number of tornadoes there, although it is not just the local landscape, but the regional climatic conditions that make it what it is.

And you point is?

Hans

You missed the point entirely.

You are proposing that tornados form from some wierd magnetics/electromagnetic spinning system. If so, there is something in parts of America that lends itself to this happening more frequently. Care to speculate? If only so we can have a giggle.

I also note that after dismissing my earlier questions on Tornado Alley you have only just looked up what that is. This hardly paints a picture of you as a tornado expert. Why should we accept your explanations over those of a Meteorologic expert.

Originally posted by thed
You missed the point entirely.

You are proposing that tornados form from some wierd magnetics/electromagnetic spinning system. If so, there is something in parts of America that lends itself to this happening more frequently. Care to speculate? If only so we can have a giggle.

I also note that after dismissing my earlier questions on Tornado Alley you have only just looked up what that is. This hardly paints a picture of you as a tornado expert. Why should we accept your explanations over those of a Meteorologic expert.

Possibilities in reality are endless. Alternate solutions for similar results might exist for many problems. Testing possibilities suggest the appropriate method(s) to solve a given problem or exhibit a given phenomena. Without data, many potential solutions are possible. With data, certain solutions are incorrect methods to solve a problem or explain a phenomena. Neither do I have sufficient data to render an expert opinion of all solutions nor do I have sufficient data to suggest an expert opinion of solutions in reference to tornados.

Anyone choosing to accept a possibility without proof of concept is gullible. It is the decision of the observer to be gullible or not. Neither may I make that decision nor may I mandate such a decision for others. It is up to an observer to form their own decisions on correct solutions.

Decide for yourself what you choose to be correct with absence of data.

Have a good Day!

JMG.

How are tornadoes and electricity related? Can such a relation be used to stall or stop tornadoes? Can such a relation be used to form tornadoes?

JMG.
I'm not a scientist or teacher, just an above average carpenter, yet i could not help but wonder if tornadoes were a product of magnetism. Could the spinning of the clouds in the atmosphere produce this magnetic field and if so, then would it be the right polarity to be pulled by the earth? Is the rotation of a tornado the same in both hemispheres? Some might wonder why they are more previlent in certain areas. I live on south-west missouri and I think there is a lot of Iron Ore in the ground. Could this maybe magnify the earths magnetic pull? Well lots of questions but no answers. thanks for your time

Please address the points raised.

How come the Exploratorium can create tornados without using magnetic stirrers. This surely negates your idea.

Why are larger tornados found mainly in America. What is different in America that creates them, using your model.
I have a shower in my basement it is open on top and after about 10 minutes of a hot shower, cold water dropplets fall from the pipe. I Know this is similar to the process of the forming of rainclouds. However there are no visible clouds in my basement and yet I seem to be able to make it rain. Does this mean clouds are not needed to produce rain? Does the ability to produce a tornado in a completely controlled setting with out the use af a magnetic field mean its not needed?

Maybe the elevation, geographic features, or even the amount of magnetic minerals found in north america can contribute the pull of magneticly charged cloud? Just a thought. (sorry for the spelling)

Thed, I looked up Tornado Alley and found that the most common tornado locations are flatlands. It may therefore be possible to reduce tornado activity in those areas by changing the topography of the landscape. Either adding hills or planting trees of various heights might reduce the existence of tornados in tornado alley. If so, then the thermal observation is absolutely correct and tornados might cease to happen in tornado alley.

Is there any record of a tornado forming over a hilly forested region?

JMG.
in response to the hilly forested region, the answer is YES. about 2 hours from where i live, in southeast MO. theres a town by the name of eminence, on one particular weekend while canoeing guess what developed? you got it and the area is very hilly and very forested. just thought you would like a personal experience.

The USPTO is very congenial about granting patents as far as the workability is concerned. Almost anything can be patented whether it works or not, as long as other criteria are met.

Could the spinning of the clouds in the atmosphere produce this magnetic field and if so, then would it be the right polarity to be pulled by the earth? Hi dweezil, welcome to SciForums,

Clouds generally have some charged particles in them, and in a tornado they would circulate giving rise to a circulating current. The circulating current then would form a magnetic field. But the amount of current would be very small (even a lightning-bolt has a small current) so very little of a tornado's energy would be generated by or dissapated in the magnetic field.

I am not a meterologist, but my understanding is that the majority of a tornado's energy is gravitational PE. A cold, dense air mass gets on top of a warm, less-dense mass. As the dense air moves down it gains KE which generates the high winds and the destruction.

-Dale

PS If we had cold pipes in the sky then we could indeed get rain without clouds. All that is needed is some place for water to condense and form drops.

thanks for the welcome and reply Dale. It would be interesting to know how much magnetic energy is created by a tornado. I was also wondering that if the spinning of the tornado could cause the molecules in the wall to change density and thus make them heavier. Is it possible that the wall is heavier in larger tornadoes due the increase speed?

if the spinning of the tornado could cause the molecules in the wall to change density and thus make them heavier. Is it possible that the wall is heavier in larger tornadoes due the increase speed?Actually it is the opposite. As the speed of any fluid increases the pressure actually decreases. This is the operating principle of an airplane wing. The air must go faster over the top of the wing so the pressure is slightly lower than on the bottom, which generates the lift. Hurricanes and tornados generate some incredibly low pressures with their extremely fast winds.

-Dale