Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum Secret of the Bermuda Triangle?

I've just been watching an extremley interesting show on the discovery channel. It was talking about the Bermuda Triangle, focusing specifically on the dissaperances of Flight 19 and the freighter Marine Sulphur Queen . The show suggested that the cause of these dissapearences and dissaperances of other ships and planes lost there could be due to pockets of methane gas hidden underneath the ground below the sea. An underground earthquake, or some other disturbance, could release a large amount of this gas, which would travel up to the surface. This giant bubble would have the capibility of sinking a ship, because it would make the water density no longer capable of providing adequate buoyancy for ships to float. They even had a documentation of such an incident occuring to an australian naval vessel. The vessel was promptly split in two in a matter of seconds. But this doesn't only apply to seagoing vehicles. The methane from one of these bubbles would be released into the air above. Methane is much less dense then air, and as a result any aircraft flying into it would lose altitude. Now the altimeter of planes (the instrument that measures the altitude) functions on the density of air. Because methane is less dense, the altimeter assumes the plane is climbing. So a confused pilot could easily pitch the nose down to try to level out, and crash the plane. It makes a lot of sense, especially considering that there are large concentrations of methane below parts the Triangle.

My personal speculation is that the cause of disappearances in the so-called Bermuda Triangle is the gulliable public's inability to discern the difference between fact and fantasy.

I'd love to see the numbers on the incomes so far derived from the Bermuda Triangle, Nostradamus, Atlantis, and other wastes of synapses.

I would like to know if there really is such a phenomenon as "The Bermuda Triangle". Compared to other areas of similar size with similar traffic, are there really more mysterious disappearances in the ocean to the west of Bermuda? I don't know, but it is a very heavily trafficked stretch of ocean, with thousands upon thousands of safe, successful voyages by all kinds of craft every year.

Anyhow, the methane idea is interesting to toy with. I don't understand how methane would alter the density of water (it is not very soluble in water), although I can imagine the catastrophic effects of a huge gas bubble causing large waves and swamping a vessel. Also, methane bubbles are highly flammable - an airplane flying into one would be likely to ignite it either with the heat from its engines or simply by drawing methane (instead of air) into its engines to be mixed with jet fuel.

Yes thats a point I left out of my post, methane would explode when sucked into a jet engine. Futhermore, it will cause propeller engines to shut down, allthough I dont remember why. And no, acording to the coast guard the so called "Bermuda Triangle" is no more fatal then any other heavily traversed area of sea, and has not that many more dissapearances. I think its more of the nature of these dissapearances that has made it famous, as there are a number of stories of ships and planes "Vanishing", which can be explained by this theory. They tested it using a model ship in a water tank, and the ship was brought under in a matter of seconds. To any other nearby ships, and only if they could not see the ship clearly due to fog or a storm (As so many Triangle stories are set in), It would easily appear that the ship "Vanished." They would not find wreckage from the ship (Again in accordance with many a Triangle tale), as so might start beliving in the "Supernatural" properties of the area, when it is no more supernatural than someone passing gas.

Try applying synapses please.

If methane is the cause then methane releases would not only occur in large catastrophic releases when there are ships and planes in the area. The universe doesn't work that way.

There would be many small releases punctuated by a small number of large releases with medium ones too. The same phenomena seen with earthquakes, fires, wind, waves, and all other natural phenomena.

Any moron with a methane detection meter and a means of getting there could detect a higher concentration of methane in the area at all times in the same way tha anyone with a seismometer can tell you where earthquakes happen even when an 8.5 on the Richter scale isn't happening.

This isn't just wild speculation you are engaging in. It is a waste of time. A waste of synapses. And a clear and present demonstration of an inability to engage in critical thinking.

Please start using your brain for something other than filling for the hollow space between your ears.

The Bermuda Triangle is a huge and ill-defined area. Catastrophic methane hydrate decompression could ocur given a massive underwater landslide or volcanic heating. The former is easily detectable in the seismic record. The latter would not magically switch on and off. The magma dome would be persistently detectable in any of a large number of ways.

A ship floats by displacing its weight in water before it sinks low enough to swamp. Foam, being of much lower density, will not float ships. That's OK. That is how WWII ash cans killed submarines. Pop under the hull to foam the water and crack its keel, or have it hit the bottom and stick, or drop it below crush depth.

Taking out airplanes won't work. Igniting the atmosphere will be visible in space from weather satellites. The deflagration or explosion will be visible as a barograph pulse around the world. Flaming out a plane's engines gives the copilot or navigator lots of glide time to radio an SOS.

You'd need an awful lot of methane released at sea level to make a difference in engine combustion at 10,000 feet. We're talking many cubic miles of gas. Not effing likely.

I never said that it was the cause of every accident that even happened in the Triangle, only that it might be able ot explain a few things. Why don't you try actually reading my posts instead of skimming it and then yelling at me like i'm some kind of moron.

QUOTE]Originally posted by DA Morgan:
Any moron with a methane detection meter and a means of getting there could detect a higher concentration of methane in the area at all times in the same way tha anyone with a seismometer can tell you where earthquakes happen even when an 8.5 on the Richter scale isn't happening.[/QUOTE]

Thats nice, but what does that have to do with anything? So you can detect methane with a methane detector. So you can detect earthquakes with a siesmometer. Big surprise! What's the point? Planes don't carry methane detectors as standard equipment.

Yes, and do not people die from fires, erthquakes, wind (Tornadoes & Hurricanes), and waves? Why is it so hard for you to wrap your mind around the concept that a person might just be in the wrong place at the wrong time? This is no differant than those other phenomina. Why don't you take your oown advice and do some thinking of your own?

I would apreciate it if you would calm the hell down... theres no need to get so worked up over something off of a television show, posted on a forum. If you saw the show, would you yell at the TV? I would hope not. This is not my theory, I only posted it here so get the hell off my back about it.

Ok... apperantly I didn't explain this well enough, and I apologize for it. I'm not talking about now days. I'm talknig about Flight 19, 5 WW2 era Avenger bomber planes that went missing. These planes were flying right over the water, not at 10,000 feet.

I realize there are a few flaws in this, but there's no need to bite my head off. I'm simply stating an interesting Idea from a TV show, it may not be perfect, but thats not my fault.

So let's build a bomb-proof wind tunnel, put a bomber inside with remote monitoring equipment on board and slowly raise the methane concentration with the engines running. It would only take a few billion dollars and I'm sure President Bush will go for it if you can somehow work the "word" 'nucular' into the test literature or press releases. It might be a nifty way to recycle some more scrap iron from WW II as well.

I think the point is that this methane theory is easily testable and therefore does not need to remain a theory. The probable reason the tv show did not report a higher-than-normal concentration of methane in the area is that it isn't there. So the theory is a load.

ahh I see, thank you for explaining it to me.

Amanranth, they did that on the show, and the engine sputtered and died out. I'm not sure why.

The Bermuda Triangle would seem a saver place to traverse than posting an idea in a star chamber. I saw the programme some time ago and it seems a plausable idea to explain how a ship might sink.

Maybe the methane concentration was too high to support combustion. I just looked on google and found that the concentration with air has to be between 5 and 15 percent to be explosive.

So if a bubble of Methane headed for the surface, expanding as it goes, it could be pretty big when it reaches the surface pressure and temperature. If it were big enough to engulf a small plane, it could conceivably cause an interruption of engine power sufficient to cause a plane to crash, rather rapidly, being as I doubt that the bouyancy of methane is quite the same as air. Combined with instruments reading a steep dive, it could work. Keep up the good work, Ric, don't let Dan's growls put you out. His Bach is much worse than his byte.

Yeah, I should take my own advice and not get so worked up... sorry for going off like that.