Hi Dave,

You asked,

“I wonder how his device would be able to keep things like vacuum cleaners and 
other electric motors from bombing it out.”

I don’t think my friend owns a vacuum cleaner!  LoL J

 

But to answer your question more directly, the preamp and filtering was 
designed for *sub-Hz* response… so one could see the spectrum *below* 1Hz, 
although, I don’t remember that region as being very active.  The signal 
analyzer spec goes down to 30 milli-Hz (0.030Hz).  I do remember the very 
prominent peak at the Schumann resonance (think it was around 6.7-7.3Hz), and 
of course another very strong peak at 60Hz from the AC grid.  It’s been a long 
time, but I do remember most geomag activity occurred between 2Hz and 20Hz. 
Most man-made stuff manifests well above several 10s of Hz. When I was there he 
usually restricted the frequency domain from sub-Hz to 10Hz so as to exclude 
most man-made sources from the f-spectrum.

 

In addition, the signal analyzer had the ability to display BOTH time domain 
and frequency domain in separate display ‘windows’.  Artificial (i.e., from 
man-made sources) magnetic effects were easily distinguished from geomag by the 
behavior of the *time-domain* trace.  The t-domain traces from man-made sources 
were usually quite regular-looking, and geomag just the opposite; very 
irregular looking and usually a kind of ‘stepped’ behavior; definitely not 
smoothly analog-like vertical changes.  If a geomag ‘event’ was happening at 
the moment a car drove by, or if he turned on some electric motor, the t-domain 
trace for the geomag event would get clobbered by the man-made device’s effect 
on the local mag field. He also oriented the antenna a specific way, but can’t 
remember if it was parallel to or perpendicular to the local geomag field…

 

Prior to an EQ, there are large areas (tens of square miles or more) of rock 
which are under tremendous stress, and rock begins to rupture until eventually 
a very large segment ruptures and you have a major EQ.  The hypothesis is that 
the rupturing is akin to striking a bell, and its subsequent ringing; the rock 
rupture (strike) causes a ‘ringing’ in the local geomag-field of a few Hz; the 
ELF ringing of the geomag field propagates outward hundreds, and in the case of 
6+ magnitude EQs, even thousands of miles.

 

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 12:24 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Stress-induced negative coefficient of temperature?

 

That is a very interesting story Mark.  I wonder how his device would be able 
to keep things like vacuum cleaners and other electric motors from bombing it 
out.  Did he happen to mention anything about the frequency response of the 
device?  I can imagine that it has a very low cutoff frequency, maybe a couple 
of hertz.

 

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint < <mailto:[email protected]> 
[email protected]>
To: vortex-l < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]>
Sent: Mon, Jan 9, 2012 3:00 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Stress-induced negative coefficient of temperature?

A little off topic, but perhaps interesting for some rookies in the Collective…

For some first-hand experience with how rock fracturing affects it’s magnetic 
properties, and how that manifests in anomalous geomagnetic activity (for EQ 
prediction), see this post:

     <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg47319.html> 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg47319.html

 

-Mark

 

From: James Bowery [ <mailto:[email protected]?> mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 5:43 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:Stress-induced negative coefficient of temperature?

 

Something that occurs to me about the emergence of a negative coefficient of 
temperature at high loading of hydrogen in metallic lattices is that it may be 
related to the stress imposed by that loading.  If stress reaches a point where 
charge carriers to emerge, then increasing the temperature may enhance the 
emergence of those carriers.

 

The emergence of charge carriers with stress is theorized to occur in igneous 
rock:

 


 

Stress-Induced Changes in the Electrical Conductivity of Igneous Rocks and the 
Generation of Ground Currents


Author:Friedemann T. Freund, Akihiro Takeuchi, Bobby W. S. Lau, Rachel Post, 
John Keefner, Joshua Mellon, and Akthem Al-Manaseer


Abstract



    If we can ever hope to understand the non-seismic signals that the Earth 
sends out before major earthquakes, we need to understand the physics of rocks 
under increased levels of stress. In particular we need to understand the 
generation of electrical currents in the ground. We have begun to study how 
electrical conductivity of igneous rocks changes under stress and what types of 
charge carriers are involved. We show that quartz-rich granite and quartz-free 
anorthosite both generate electronic charge carriers when subjected to stress. 
The charge carriers are positive holes (p-holes), i.e., defect electrons on the 
oxygen anion sublattice. They spread out of the stressed rock volume, the 
“source volume”, into the surrounding unstressed rocks. Time-varying ground 
currents are required to generate pre-earthquake local magnetic field anomalies 
and low-frequency electromagnetic emissions. We posit that stress-induced 
activation of p-hole charge carriers and their outflow from the source volume 
is the basic process by which ground currents can be generated in the Earth’s 
crust. We propose that the arrival of p-holes at the Earth’s surface leads to 
changes in the ground potential that may induce ionospheric perturbations. We 
further propose that the build-up of high electric fields at the ground surface 
can ionize the air, hence cause ion emission and corona discharges. When 
p-holes recombine at the ground surface, they are expected to form 
vibrationally highly excited O-O bonds. The de-excitation of these O-O bonds 
will lead to stimulated mid-IR emission, which may explain the reported 
pre-earthquake “thermal anomalies” identified in satellite images.


Key word:Pre-earthquake phenomena, Electrical conductivity, Stress, Magnetic 
field, Ionization, EM emission, Thermal anomalies


  _____  

 

 <http://tao.cgu.org.tw/center/article_download_one.php?id=530xv153p437> 
Full_Text(pdf) 

 

 

 

Reply via email to