We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon
Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
I believe this to be the case as we are NOW at a solar cycle 24 minimum with Zharkova's work indicating that further weakening of sunspot cycle 24 activity is unlikely. I am also noticing that there has started an increase in the appearance of "active" areas on the solar disc, especially at higher latitudes. Although these features are not very "sunspotty", they are, nonetheless "active features" corresponding to what one would expect as cycle 25 gets into low gear.
There have also been similar occurrences noted in a few other recent smAsho mAsh videos as they examine solar activity daily. One includes a sunspot exhibiting polarity expected for cycle 25 sunspots.
So, the point of this post: I continue to search in an effort to figure out why there are so many discrepancies among the GSM community.
This post concerns the statements made about the cause of greater geologic activity and questions as to the completeness of the information seen to date. Most attribute it to the theory proposed in the cosmic ray/muon/magma paper that I have also earlier referenced. researchgate.net
Recently I have been roundaboutly led toward another theory.
The two theories may not, however, be mutually exclusive since the very significant shifting of gears in geologic activity is roughly coincident with the drop-off from the "Modern Maximum Double Peaks":
Although, as seen in Figure 2 below, during most of the "Little Ice Age" seismic activity appears to be very low in comparison with today. The Little Ice Age had very low solar activity so presumably also had a high cosmic ray environment and thus a higher level of muon bombardment imposed on subsurface magma structures.
Anyhoooooo...on with the show:
"The Correlation of North Magnetic Dip Pole Motion and Seismic Activity" omicsonline.org
First a chart from the paper exploring this theory. (I included solar cycle maxes and mins.)
Getting some definitions straight: "This paper looks at the relationship between this geological activity and the motion of the NMDP. That is, the locations where inclination is 90 degrees, i.e. where the field is perpendicular to Earth’s surface; the Black dots in Figure 1. This is not the geo-magnetic poles which define a theoretical dipole arrangement that is the sum of all the magnetic anomalies due to the earth’s complex magnetic field. The geo-magnetic field is shown in red dots."
Materials and Methods: The geological activity values were taken from the paper by Viterito [ 1]. The position of the NMDP was retrieved from NOAA [ 2] geomagnetic data as was the South Pole [ 3] position. Using the latitude and longitude values, the distance between each year’s positions was calculated as well as the distance from the rotational pole using first order true spherical distance calculations. From these values the rate of change for the pole was calculated on a yearly basis for both the absolute distance moved and the distance moved relative to the North Rotational Pole (NRP).
Referring to Figure 2, (below) from 1591 until 1974 the NMDP was moving at an average of around 6.9 Km per year with a low of 0.34 Km/yr and a high of 16.4 Km/yr. And from 1975 until 1996 the North Magnetic Pole was moving at an average of around 12 Km/yr with a low of 11.8 Km/ yr and a high of 17 Km/yr. The position of the NMDP (Black Dots) as it moved is shown in Figure 1. (above)
Then inexplicably, in 1996 the rate of travel doubled from its 1995 value to 44.1 Km/yr. In addition its average has been 3 times the 1975- 1995 average.This rate of motion coincides with the change in geological activity with a correlation of 93.45%. This indicates an extremely close correlation and a strong probability of causal interaction [ 4].The high degree of correlation between the NMDP speed and the geological activity can be seen in Figure 3. By looking at Figure 3 it would seem that the geological activity began to rise in 1994 and then the poles speed increasing a year later in 1995, but a fit for a one year offset is only 91.27% correlation, 2.2% less than a one to one correlation.
This would indicate that we cannot tell which causes which, at least not without further analysis or more finely separated data, i.e. on a monthly basis or even finer [ 5]. But there is an indicator in the data that says it is more likely that the geological activity is driving the poles motion and not the other way around.
When you look at the graphs in Figure 4 and 5 you will notice that at low geological activity the speed acts in a quantum way. In other words the Pole speed is grouped into 4 distinct speeds at 12 Km/yr, 16.25 Km/yr, 17.5 Km/yr and 22.2 Km/yr. The Geological activity at 12, 16.25 and 17.5 Km/yr varies from 175 to 325 Km/yr, and at 22.2 Km/yr it varies from 175 to over 600.
The actual data shows the NMDP speed was 22.2 Km/yr ± 0.1 Km/yr in the years 1991 to 1995, inclusive. The geological activity was around 200 for the first 2 years then jumped to 361 and then to around 600 then 627 before the speed broke away in 1996 to 44.1 Km/yr. All of this type of activity would indicate some kind of a strong inertial or ‘frictional’ holding mechanism which prevented the magnetic pole from changing position until there was sufficient geothermal activity to overcome the holding mechanism and allow a speed change.
The paper continues: "From a dynamo theory of the magnetic poles  we assume that the poles are set up following something similar to the Glatzmaier-Roberts model, which simulates convection and magnetic field generation......"
[from there going off in a direction that more recent theories expounded upon by Valentina Zharkova and Rolf Witzsche, Pierre Robitaille, David LaPoint and other Electric Universe theorists would improve upon]
In any case, it seems that the stepping up in geological activity shows that at some point, critical dynamics of NMDP speed reaches a quantum "tipping" point.
I find that these observations also correlate with the long term global avg. temperature curve. Although the chart for that is a much longer time scale it's easy to see the last 400 yrs have not deviated in the long term trajectory going back over 5,000 years.
So this is where cause and effect becomes quite hazy. Cosmic rays/muons may play a role in seismicity or they may not.
They don't fit the general trend for temperature over thousands of years but do seem to be well correlated with temperature peaks and troughs within the larger trend....giving the chart a Dead Cat Bounce profile.
The overall downward trend seems to be more a function of magnetosphere strength - not solar activity as shown by sunspot cycle amplitude. The tops and bottoms within the downtrend are apparently solar activity induced but the overall temp. trend correlates with the geomagnetic trend. If sunspot cycle amplitude (and thus solar magnetic activity) were responsible for the long term temperature trend, the global average temperature for this most recent grand solar maximum would have equaled or at least closely approximated that of the Medieval Warm Period.
From what I have looked into so far, when you consider the above, the Rolf Witzsche proposition that the plasma stream responsible for "energizing" the Milky Way galaxy is at a critical stage in its resonance that there may very well not be enough overall galactic energetic forcing to maintain the Sun in an active state and may be likely to shut down...going into what some characterize as a "low-glow" mode. This step down to "low-glow" would be a quantum step down....a reciprocal fractal to the pole shift velocity quantum steps.
So far, the above-mentioned solar cycle 25 "features" have only been seen on the north hemisphere of the Sun. Awaiting something to show up on the south side.
Most relevant Rolf Witszche video for solar "shut-down" The whole video is "required viewing" but plasma stream influence is detailed starting at one hour and 4 minutes in. [It's the one I put in the thread header back in April]
So....between Rolf and the long term forecast from Zharkova's work which shows the solar cycle amplitudes still in existence for thousands of years forward, there's definitely a BIG difference. Even at the top there's differences within the GSM aware community.