MAP

Sunday, 11 October 2015

HOW WE DISCOVERED THAT THE EARTH'S INNER CORE IS OLDER THAN PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT October 9, 2015 by Andrew John Biggin, The Conversation

1.  Earth's deep interior may not have been as hot in the deep past as some have argued.

2nd OPINION: I AGREED. I have already given a NEW HYPOTHESIS for the FORMATION OF SOLAR SYSTEM on the basis of Dark Energy & Dark Atom along with white atom [UNIVERSAL SCIENCE - based on 4% + 96%]. In it I clearly explained how & why pebbles of heavy elements start gathering & how temperature of surrounding start increasing. It explains many unsolved topics that our existing theory/hypothesis can’t.

Reference: It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & formation of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15]


2.“…core is transferring heat to the surface more slowly than previously thought,..”

3.“Knowing the point in time at which the Earth's centre cooled down sufficiently to first freeze iron gives us a fundamental reference point for the entire thermal history of the planet”

2nd OPINION:  As core starts condensing, ENERGY LAYER starts increasing. This thick energy layer starts trapping Dark Energy & the temperature of cores’ surrounding increases. 

Reference: It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & formation of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15] 


4.  “Just after the Earth formed from collisions in a huge cloud of material that also formed the Sun, it was molten”

2nd OPINION:  I contradict the words ‘it was molten’. It was solid at initial stage.


5.  “… ball of solid iron at the centre of our planet surrounded by an outer core of molten iron alloyed to some, as yet unknown, lighter element.

2nd OPINION:  in my NEW HYPOTHESIS for the FORMATION OF SOLAR SYSTEM, I have already said that why after supernova blast heavy elements came out first & how & why these elements combines to form PEBBLES. [OTHER THEORY/HYPOTHESIS UNABLE TO EXPLAIN IT]

Reference: It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & formation of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15]


6.The magnetic field of the Earth is generated by the movement of electrically conducting molten iron in the outer core.”

7.“Furthermoremodeling needs to verify whether some other event could have created the magnetic strengthening at this time.”

2nd OPINION:  AGREED, but the movement is due to the Dark Energy. Hence, the magnetic field is also controlled by Dark energy.

Reference Please refer 4th POINT written by me  on 24th, Jan’15



8.  “This movement is generated by light elements released at the inner core boundary as it grows.” 

2nd OPINION:  DISAGREED,  light element appears there due to …PHILIC PROPERTY of different element

Reference: It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & forma tion of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15] 

9.  “The signal can then be recovered in the laboratory by measuring how the magnetisation of the rock changes as it progressively heated up in a controlled magnetic field”.

2nd OPINION:  Magnetisation is due to the flow of D.E  & its companion “electron”. The D.E is …PHOBIC,  so they varies accordingly.

Reference: It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & forma tion of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15] 


10.  “… tectonic plates move and is also a source of plume volcanism at the Earth's surface”.

2nd OPINION:  the reason is Dark Energy [D.E].

Reference: It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & forma tion of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15] 


11.  “… MEANING EARTH SCIENTISTS MAY HAVE TO REVISE THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PLANET'S HISTORY”.

2nd OPINION:  I have already given a NEW HYPOTHESIS for the FORMATION OF SOLAR SYSTEM on the basis of Dark Energy & Dark Atom along with white atom [UNIVERSAL SCIENCE - based on 4% + 96%]


Reference: It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & forma tion of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15] 



According to recent estimates, the Earth's solid inner core started forming between half a billion and one billion years ago. However, our new measurements of ancient rocks as they cool from magma have indicated that it may actually have started forming more than half a billion years earlier.
While this is still relatively late in the Earth's four-and-a-half billion year history, the implication is that the Earth's deep interior may not have been as hot in the deep past as some have argued. That means the core is transferring heat to the surface more slowly than previously thought, and is less likely to play a big role in shaping the Earth's surface through tectonic movements and volcanoes.
Just after the Earth formed from collisions in a huge cloud of material that also formed the Sun, it was molten. This was because of the heat generated by the formation process and the fact that it constantly collided with other bodies. But after a while, as the bombardment slowed, the outer layer cooled to form a solid crust.
The Earth's inner core is, today, a Pluto-sized ball of solid iron at the centre of our planet surrounded by an outer core of molten iron alloyed to some, as yet unknown, lighter element. Despite the Earth being hottest at its centre (about 6,000°C), liquid iron freezes into a solid because of the very high pressures there. As the Earth continues to cool down, the inner core grows at a rate of about 1mm per year by this freezing process.
Knowing the point in time at which the Earth's centre cooled down sufficiently to first freeze iron gives us a fundamental reference point for the entire thermal history of the planet.
The magnetic field of the Earth is generated by the movement of electrically conducting molten iron in the outer core. This movement is generated by light elements released at the inner core boundary as it grows. Therefore, the time when iron was first frozen also represents a point in time when the outer core received a strong additional source of power.
It is the signature of this boost of the magnetic field – the largest long-term increase in its entire history – that we think we have observed in the magnetic records recovered from igneous rocks formed at this time. Magnetic particles in these rocks "lock-in" the properties of the Earth's magnetic field at the time and place that they cool down from magma.

The signal can then be recovered in the laboratory by measuring how the magnetisation of the rock changes as it progressively heated up in a controlled magnetic field. Hunting for this signature is 
not a new idea but has only just become viable – a combination of having increased amounts of measurement data available and new approaches to analysing them.
The Earth has maintained a magnetic field for most of its history through a "dynamo" process. This is similar in principle to a wind-up radio or a bicycle-powered light bulb in that mechanical energy is converted to electromagnetic energy. Before the inner core first started to solidify, this "geodynamo" is thought to have been powered by another entirely different and inefficient "thermal convection" process.
Once iron started to freeze out of the liquid at the base of the core, the remainder became less dense, providing an additional source of buoyancy and leading to much more efficient "compositional convection". Our results suggest that this efficiency saving happened earlier in the Earth's history than previously thought, meaning that the magnetic field would have been sustained for longer with less energy overall. Since the energy is mostly thermal, this implies that the core as a whole is likely cooler than it would have been if the inner part formed later.
Heat and plate tectonics

A cooler core implies lower heat flow across the core-mantle boundary. This is important for all of Earth sciences because it could be one of the drivers for making tectonic plates move and is also a source of 
plume volcanism at the Earth's surface. We know that these processes are a result of mantle convection produced, ultimately, by the flow of heat out of the planet at a rate that we can measure rather precisely. What we still do not know is how much of this heat lost at the Earth's surface is from the mantle and how much is from the core.
Heating from the core is thought to produce plumes welling up from just above the core-mantle boundary, which might help drive the flow within the mantle. The suggestion from our findings is that the core contribution to the surface heat flow is lower than implied from other studies and that subduction in the ocean, when one tectonic plate goes under another down into the mantle, are much more important in driving mantle convention than the heat rising from the core.
The debate about the age of the inner core and the resulting thermal evolution of the Earth is not yet over. More palaeomagnetic data are needed to confirm that the sharp increase in magnetic field strength that we have observed is really the largest in the planet's history. Furthermore, modelling needs to verify whether some other event could have created the magnetic strengthening at this time.
Nevertheless, as things stand, theory and observation combine to indicate that the Earth was two-thirds of its present age before it started growing an inner core – meaning earth scientists may have to revise their understanding of the planet's history.

Sunday, 13 September 2015

NEW THEORY—IF WE WANT TO DETECT DARK MATTER WE MIGHT NEED A DIFFERENT APPROACH - August 20, 2015

“They believe that dark matter particles annihilate into so-called dark radiation when they collide”

2nd OPINION

Normally Dark matter not collide, they readjust itself because our atmosphere is stable now.

REFERENCE: 

Since 2013 I have been writing




If these particles collide with white atom then some energy is released but not at our atmospheric condition [not even below the earth where various experiments have been conducted]. 


"There is no way of predicting what we can do with dark matter, if we detect it. But it might revolutionize our world.”

“He and his colleagues now suggest looking for the signs of dark matter activity rather than the dark matter particles themselves” 

2nd OPINION:

We study terrestrial science [on the basis of 4% stuffs], the universal science is different [on the basis of 4% + 96% stuffs].
My hypothesis [based on UNIVERSAL SCIENCE] can explain & re-explain everything.

REFERENCE: 

Since 2013 I have been writing





“The hope is that one of these detectors will one day catch a dark matter particle passing through Earth.”

2nd OPINION:

“THIS IS THE BIG MISTAKE WE HAVE BEEN DOING WITH DARK MATTER DETECTION EXPERIMENTS”

Since our system is now more stable the chances of detecting dark atom in under ground experiment is very less.

Large amount of Dark matter may be detected when

1.some white atoms escape from nearby area of the detector due to entry of  Dark energy in our earth’s core

2.some asteroid or other heavenly body hits the earth surface.

REFERENCE: 

DARK MATTER & ITS PROPERTY IS BRIEFED IN MY ORAL PRESENTATION ON 24TH, JULY’2015 IN VIETNAM, INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE, IT WILL HELP US TO DETECT THE DARK MATTER

[“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15]. The title of my oral presentation is “Regeneration of Star & formation of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept”




Physicists suggest a new way to look for dark matter: They believe that dark matter particles annihilate into so-called dark radiation when they collide. If true, then we should be able to detect the signals from this radiation.
The majority of the mass in the universe remains unknown. Despite knowing very little about dark matter, its overall abundance is precisely measured. In other words: Physicists know it is out there, but they have not yet detected it.
It is definitely worth looking for, argues Ian Shoemaker, former postdoctoral researcher at Centre for Cosmology and Particle Physics Phenomenology (CP3), Department of Physics, Chemistry and Pharmacy, University of Southern Denmark, now at Penn State, USA.
"There is no way of predicting what we can do with dark matter, if we detect it. But it might revolutionize our world. When scientists discovered quantum mechanics, it was considered a curiosity. Today, quantum mechanics plays an important role in computers," he says.
Ever since dark matter was first theorized, there have been many attempts to look for it, and now Ian Shoemaker and fellow scientists, Associate Professor Mads Toudal Frandsen, CP3, and John F. Cherry, postdoctoral researcher from Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA, suggest a new approach. They present their work in the journal Physical Review Letters.
Look in underground caves
On Earth, several detectors are located in underground cavities, where disturbing noise is minimized. The hope is that one of these detectors will one day catch a dark matter particle passing through Earth.
According to Ian Shoemaker, it is possible that this might happen, but given how little we know about dark matter, we should keep an open mind and explore all paths that could lead to its detection
One reason for this is that dark matter is not very dense in our part of the universe.
"If we add another way of looking for dark matter, then we will increase our chances of detecting dark matter in our underground cavities", says Shoemaker.
He and his colleagues now suggest looking for the signs of dark matter activity rather than the dark matter particles themselves.
The researchers believe that when two dark matter particles meet, they will behave just like ordinary particles; that they will annihilate and create radiation in the process. In this case, the radiation is called dark radiation, and it may be detected by the existing underground detectors.
"Underground detection experiments may be able to detect the signals created by dark radiation", Shoemaker says.
The researchers have found that the Large Underground Xenon (LUX) experiment is, in fact, already sensitive to this signal and can, with future data, confirm or exclude their hypothesis for dark matter's origin.
Don't forget to look in the Milky Way, too
The attempt to catch signals from dark radiation is not a new idea—it is currently being performed in several regions in space via satellite-based experiments. These places include the center of our galaxy, the Milky Way, and the sun is another possible location.
"It makes sense to look for dark radiation in certain places in space, where we expect it to be very dense—a lot denser than on Earth", explains Shoemaker, adding, "If there is an abundance of dark matter in these areas, then we would expect it to annihilate and create radiation."
None of the satellite-based experiments however have yet detected dark radiation. According to Shoemaker, Frandsen and Cherry, this could be because the experiments look for the wrong signals.
"The traditional satellite-based experiments search for photons, because they expect dark matter to annihilate into photons. But if dark matter annihilates into dark radiation, then these satellite-based experiments are hopeless."
In the early days of the universe, when all matter was still extremely dense, dark matter may have collided and annihilated into radiation all the time. This happened to ordinary matter as well, so it is not unlikely that dark matter behaves the same way, the researchers argue.
How to find dark matter
Physicists have three ways to try and detect dark matter:
Make it: Slam matter together and produce dark matter. This has been tried at high-energy particle colliders, the most famous of which is CERN's Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Geneva, Switzerland. So far, no success.
Break it: This is the "annihilation" process in which two dark matter particles meet and produce some sort of radiation. This can happen whenever dark matter is dense enough so that the probability of two dark matter particles colliding is sufficiently high. So far no success.
Wait for it: Set up detectors and wait for them to catch dark matter particles or signs of them. So far no success.