Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 420 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#11947 - 10/16/06 10:02 AM magnetic flux connection to cancer?
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
ive had a theory, with little if any evidence of it, that ive had on my mind for some time. Unfortunately, i havent the slightest idea how to test it.

perhaps someone here can give me some idea.

there is strong evidence that the earths magnetic field switches every so many thousand years. there is also evidence that its starting to change now. unfortuntely, there has been no real study, that i can find linking it to anything going on today.

The program on tv warned that one of the problems with the change is that during the time the field is gone, the radiation from the sun can reach the surface of the earth, and this radiation can cause cancer. im wondering since there is evidence that cancer is on the increase, if the van allen belt (which normally deflects the radiation away from us) has been sufficently weaken in some areas to allow an increase in the radiation to seep through, causing the increase in cancer.

the thing that brought this idea to mind is that there is an area in the south pacific where the magnitic field has already reverse, and two parts of that area that is acting like poles, albet not nearly as strong as the real one.

imagine if there is a flux pole near a major city. It would disrupt the van allen belt allowing the radiation to reach the surface when that area is pointed towards the sun, causing cancer to increase in that area.

can someone point to evidence that would refute this or give me some idea of how it might be possible to test it?
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
.
#11948 - 10/16/06 10:15 AM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
I think that is all basically right, but the presumed increase in cancer would be pretty small anyway (~1 in 10,000). Though I wonder if, in areas where a "pole" is formed, the rates might be much higher (1 in 1000). I'm just guessing with these numbers here, but i do recall hearing a pretty small number talked about in relation to this problem.
~Sam
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#11949 - 10/16/06 04:41 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Find something else to worry about dehammer. The change, to date, isn't even close to producing the radiation dose you get from your TV.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#11950 - 10/16/06 07:38 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
how do you know that. has there been studies that show that "poles" are not formed. Im sure that world wide that would be true, but what if you were setting under a pole.

lets say that sam is right there and its a 10 fold increase.

its not much of an increase world wide, but, as an example, say that the pole only exposed an area of 100 square miles.

if its a little populated area, there would not be enough of an increase to be noticed. on the other hand if its a high traffic area, the people would likely be moving about and would then be all over the world when the cancer was caused. again, no one would notice. To the average person, there would be nothing to be concerned with, but to those who got the cancer, it could be devastating.

as the fluxing gets worse so would the cancer.

do you want to keep risking your children and grandchildren. The thing is these could possible be predictable as they would most have a build up period. people would know to stay out of the sun if they were in those areas.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#11951 - 10/16/06 08:24 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Probably not predictable, but certainly detectable. Most of the earth is very sparcely populated (I think). If a city did get "targeted," there'd be plenty of time to move out of the way. I think we should just make little personal field generators to deflect the incoming radiation. Or maybe tinfoil hats? Seriously though, a city could probably build a field generator to cover the whole area.
~Sam
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#11952 - 10/17/06 12:56 AM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
Te Urukehu Offline
Member

Registered: 09/08/06
Posts: 51
Loc: Aotearoa
Dehammer:

While not addressing your query directly ? an analogous situation is already occurring in the Southern Hemisphere. The Ozone Hole that overlays the Antarctic region -

http://www.theozonehole.com/climate.htm

has direct correspondence to the increased rates of melanoma and non melanoma skin cancers in Australia and New Zealand under the influence of ultraviolet radiation:

http://www.ciesin.org/docs/001-535e/001-535e.html

New Zealand and Australia have the highest reported incident rates of melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer rates in the world.

www.nzma.org.nz/news/media-releases/melanoma.pdf

Certainly, any substantive change in the condition of the planet caused by anthropogenic or geo-spatial factors must be a cause for concern for humanity. However, it ultimately remains an evolutionary sprint ? to evolve the knowledge we hold of the Earth and its mantle of life before the Earth and its mantle of life succumb to the effects of our ignorance.
_________________________
Darkness is but the sum total of Creation inclusive of the Light.

Top
#11953 - 10/17/06 03:57 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
dehammer asks:
"how do you know that."

I read.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#11954 - 10/18/06 06:20 AM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
dehammer asks:
"how do you know that."

I read.
how do you read studies that have never been published since they have never been done?
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#11955 - 10/18/06 05:15 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
dehammer asks:
"how do you read studies that have never been published since they have never been done?"

Studies you ASSUME have never been done and published you mean don't you?
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#11956 - 10/18/06 06:43 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
"The change, to date, isn't even close to producing the radiation dose you get from your TV." -DA
dehammer, I think DA is right (re: to date) here; and I think you're speaking about "what if," in the future. I'm sure that as the field collapses and multiple poles form at various latitudes over the planet, we'll detect them and adjust. Maybe we'll all have to carry a compass around so we can tell we're in danger as it starts wildly spinning. It does seem to me though, that as the field currently (no pun) continues decreasing, that we are all at increasing risk of radiation damage. Maybe a little personal field generator might be a good idea even today. 'xcuse me while I run out to patent this and make a million.

"At best, a pause for thought; at worst, a little tongue in cheek." -Samwik
Thanks,
~Sam
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#11957 - 10/18/06 09:48 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
samwick ... you are correct. The operative phrase is "to date" ... and you may be correct as well that dehammer read what he wanted rather than what I wrote.

I find it interesting that the same person who is so convinced global warming is just a natural variation that will self-correct ... when it comes to a pole reversal of which we know substantially less ... is ready to jump of a cliff with respect to something that may not happen for tens-of-thousands or millions of years.

The worst thing a spin doctor can do ... is believe his own spin.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#11958 - 10/18/06 10:43 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Hi DA; all I said was you two were talking about two different angles.

Anyway, re: "...something that may not happen for tens-of-thousands or millions of years."
I think it's pretty well established that we are already entering a pole reversal. They seem to switch kinda like glaciations too; y'know, sputtering a few times and then finally switching over, as if there is some "tipping point." Also interesting is that again, like glaciations, the sputters and switchs occur on the scale of several years to several decades according to geomagnetic data. Seems as if many cycles in nature are like that. Anyway, the 'sputtering' (multiple, shifting, and wandering poles) hasn't started yet, but if we've started a reversal, sputtering could begin on the order of anytime in the next few centuries.

Also, sorry, but I'm new and it's not clear if you meant me or dehammer re: "...the same person who is so convinced global warming is just a natural variation...."

"Life is God's way of turning light into heat."
~~Samwik
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#11959 - 10/18/06 11:27 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
samwik wrote:
"I think it's pretty well established that we are already entering a pole reversal."

Not at all. It is pretty well established that things are happening that we interpret as leading to a pole reversal.

But given that we've never actually experienced one we are even less able to make predictions than we are about earthquakes.

I can say with 99.99999+% certainty the San Andreas fault is heading toward an earthquake. But maybe in 5 seconds and maybe in 5 years.

We don't know enough about pole reversals to know whether it will happen in 5 years or 500,000 years.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#11960 - 10/18/06 11:38 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Yep, I guess it's not well established. I'll look around on the web.
Also re:"...the same person who is so convinced global warming is just a natural variation...."
Was that me or him?
Good going,
~Sam
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#11961 - 10/19/06 12:36 AM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
samwick ... you are correct. The operative phrase is "to date" ... and you may be correct as well that dehammer read what he wanted rather than what I wrote.

I find it interesting that the same person who is so convinced global warming is just a natural variation that will self-correct ... when it comes to a pole reversal of which we know substantially less ... is ready to jump of a cliff with respect to something that may not happen for tens-of-thousands or millions of years.

The worst thing a spin doctor can do ... is believe his own spin.
first off, im not ready to jump off the clift about it, just wondering if there should be a study to determine if there is any change in the flux patterns. so far as i can tell, no one has ever check to see if there is a change above land. The only change that has ever been detected is the one that is over the ocean and that is because the british navy keeps records of compass readings. that does not happen over land.

secondly, it happens ever 10000 years so in that 10 million year period it will happen 1000 times.


Third, its already happening over the south pacific, which means it could be happening elsewhere.

being curious about weither or not something is happening is not the same thing as being ready to commit suicide about it. Trust me, if i were to kill myself, this would not even be a glimmer of a possiblity of why.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#11962 - 10/19/06 12:42 AM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Quote:
Originally posted by samwik:
...Anyway, the 'sputtering' (multiple, shifting, and wandering poles) hasn't started yet, but if we've started a reversal...
actually, the british navy discovered a pattern of reversed polarity in the magnetic field in the south pacific. (saw this on a news program on tv, so no link) they theorised that there was a paired temporary poles in the area, but the reversal ended before they found them. according to the story, two of the sailors on the ship that found the reversed magnetic field were dianosed with cancer within a year of returning.

Quote:
Also, sorry, but I'm new and it's not clear if you meant me or dehammer re: "...the same person who is so convinced global warming is just a natural variation...."

"Life is God's way of turning light into heat."
~~Samwik
obviously hes refering to me.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#11963 - 10/19/06 01:03 AM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
samwik wrote:
"I think it's pretty well established that we are already entering a pole reversal."

Not at all. It is pretty well established that things are happening that we interpret as leading to a pole reversal.

But given that we've never actually experienced one we are even less able to make predictions than we are about earthquakes.

I can say with 99.99999+% certainty the San Andreas fault is heading toward an earthquake. But maybe in 5 seconds and maybe in 5 years.

We don't know enough about pole reversals to know whether it will happen in 5 years or 500,000 years.
rock formation containing iron that was in lava during reversals give a lot of data about how it happens. It also shows that it happens ever 10000 years give or take a few hundred. They can say for certainty that the last one was 10000 years ago, give or take a few centuries.

the best data shows that it appearantly takes about 300 to 500 years for a complete reversal. During this time the van allen belt fluxuates a lot, disappears completely, then reappears in the opposite polarity, and fluxuates some more. there is some evidence that most of the mutations in life occur during these reversals.

no one has suggested that it will completely change over in the next year, infact its almost proven to be an impossiblity for that to happen. Unfortuantely, that would be the safest thing for life if it did.

What is know is that there will be a long period of unstablity (century or more), gradually getting worse, then a short period where there is little or no magnetic field stabilty, then it would begin to stablize gradually over a century or so. then there would be a long slow build up to a level that we have not seen in many centuries. then for about 8000 years it would be stable. geological information indicates that the magnetic field has been decreasing for several centuries. The decrease is not enough over a decade to really be noticed, even a lifetime would not be easy to measure, but it is there.

in conclusion what im saying is that the fluxing is already happening, its known to be about to occur. the actual reversal will not happen in any of our lifetimes, even if your holding a newborn on your lap. at the same time the fluxing can and does cause temporary localize reversals in the field. to my undereducated understanding, this means that there are poles there were the reversed magnetic field meets the normal ones. these poles would have little or no protection directly below them, or at least a reduction in it, from solar radiation. this solar radiation is known to cause some types of cancer.

so the question is how would anyone know if there was a reversal areas over land. in some areas it would be detected by air craft having compass heading going crazy, but the aircraft only fly in corridors. I dont know how big the space between corridors are, but i would think that there are places where the reversals could be happening without being detected by them.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#11964 - 10/19/06 01:05 AM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
dehammer asks:
"how do you read studies that have never been published since they have never been done?"

Studies you ASSUME have never been done and published you mean don't you?
no, i mean ones that i have not been able to find online or at a library. If you are better at finding them, please show me the links.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#11965 - 10/19/06 03:25 AM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Well, I haven't looked for any links yet, but dehammer, you've pretty much listed all the stuff I was expecting (or hoping) to find. I'm not very experienced with searching, but seem to have had good luck so far. Anyway, I don't know anything about the detection part of it. But your long description of how reversals start, etc. is just what I was trying to say with the sputtering phrase and analogy to glaciations. Maybe flickering would've been better.

I'm hoping that we have some satellite(s) up there that's watching the magnetic field. That should be easy to check.

Thanks!
~~Sam
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#11966 - 10/19/06 06:10 PM Re: magnetic flux connection to cancer?
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
dehammer wrote:
"no, i mean ones that i have not been able to find online or at a library."

1. Give me the search criteria you are using
2. What you are trying to find
3. What library are you looking in?
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.