Planets Magnetic fields

[Theredbarron]

So I was wondering if all the planets have magnetic fields. Then I noticed that the planets with the magnetic field have an atmosphere. As the density of the atmosphere increases so does the magnetic field. What if the movement of the planet and atmosphere are what causes this? Static electricity shows that when matter separates there is an attraction of the electrons and if the matter is correct it will give up an electron. This would be a magnetic attraction between none magnetic material correct? So when something is moving it creates a lower density behind it like drafting. This lower density has less total electrical properties. In electricity the higher the voltage the stronger it is. The higher density the stronger it is. So could the density of the atmosphere combined with the airspeed and land speed differential cause the same magnetic attraction as static when the air separate's from the ground leaving a magnetic charge behind? Lightning always goes to ground or a lower charge attracting the electron to the earth like CO2 exiting a fire extinguisher leaving some electrons behind on the tube. 

Mercury is the smallest and spinning slow and it doesn't have the same magnetic properties as all the other planets. 

Nascar drafting, Semi drafting, Bicycle drafting, Airplane wing drafting, Rockets use pressure behind it to displace matter, this all seems a bit obvious that density moves stuff and density is based upon total electrical properties not if its a gas or solid.

We are constantly in contact with everything all the way outside our own solar system. The density is the common denominator between everything in existence. Not vacuum or pressure or gas or solid by themselves. They all have this same trait. 

Like a magnetic grid lock

[swansont]

58 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

What if the movement of the planet and atmosphere are what causes this?

If this were true the effect would be easily measurable during e.g. hurricanes and thunderstorms. It's not the atmosphere that causes this.

If anything, the effect is in the other direction. Having a magnetic field could make it easier to keep an atmosphere, all else being equal (which it isn't). A magnetic field diverts the solar wind, and atmospheric ions would spiral around the field lines, which might help keep them near the planet.

[Theredbarron]

8 minutes ago, swansont said:

If this were true the effect would be easily measurable during e.g. hurricanes and thunderstorms. It's not the atmosphere that causes this.

If anything, the effect is in the other direction. Having a magnetic field could make it easier to keep an atmosphere, all else being equal (which it isn't). A magnetic field diverts the solar wind, and atmospheric ions would spiral around the field lines, which might help keep them near the planet.

Thats assuming that the field was there first. I thought they did measure our magnetic field. Your talking about it right now.  Rotating faster could make it hold the air easier as well. Drafting more as speed goes up. Since we are going the same speed it stays the same. You cant honestly say that density is not a factor. Its applies to everything including the atmosphere resistance. When lightning strikes is when there a bigger differential of electron build up which is measurable and detectable. During all that. Yes it might keep things closer that only prove what I'm saying. The density of the matter around us has electrical properties. Everything has electrical properties. The changes in electrical properties causes a magnetic attraction. This looks like pressure differentials. Observations of this would do exactly what your describing. This is all happening at the same time. You cant have one without the other.

You can measure this on other planets that do the same thing and have lighting just like we do. The common denominator even in electrical charge choose whats stronger. The build up of electrons is more density and its attracted to the opposite which is less electrons or less density. Then the lightning strikes.

Density, Its what its made of.

What does pressures and temperatures effect?

Density of everything like the periodic table of elements.

We cant go into certain density environments because of our own density.

Like the bottom of the Ocean or Space. We physically have to protect ourselves from density even. 

An ampere or coulomb is the density of electrons in a given space

I'm coming up with this as I go.

Wind is measured at a point on the surface of earth. The surface is moving faster at the equator in a direction then half way up to the pole. If wind is the differential from land to air speed the its not the total air speed to the rest of the earths air. It does matter. 

So all information that is based upon wind is assumed information when trying to compare it to the entire planet. 

So it looks like the north pole has faster moving air in comparison to the equator.

Its only going in a direction at a speed just faster or slower depending on the direction then the land that its compared to. 

The Coriolis Effect is drafting

Our solar system does the same thing with density changes by solar wind.

Density moving in a direction.

Belief is the hardest thing to get over. So I dont believe anymore. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drafting_(aerodynamics)

The static exchanges are happening all the time between pretty much everything. 

In Motion

[studiot]

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

Mercury is the smallest and spinning slow and it doesn't have the same magnetic properties as all the other planets. 

True, but then the magnetic field of every planet is unique.

 

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

Then I noticed that the planets with the magnetic field have an atmosphere. As the density of the atmosphere increases so does the magnetic field.

 

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

 

Perhaps now is a good time to introduce you to the Scientific Method

Edited October 19, 2018 by studiot

[Theredbarron]

10 minutes ago, studiot said:

True, but then the magnetic field of every planet is unique.

Yes and so is gravity. The density or everything involved in a planet is a big factor. 

 

10 minutes ago, studiot said:

 

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

 

When I say atmosphere I mean gasses collected around the surface just like the moon. It has one. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field_of_the_Moon

Its not even a planet. 

Mercury has one

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury's_magnetic_field

 

 

 

Asteroid's have magnetism but its assumed it captured it from whatever event it came from. Thats possible and so is a static electrical charge being absorbed by a conductor when it speeds past gasses in space or colliding with something else. 

The scientific method already has already been performed on the effect of density, static electricity, electricity, ventures, drafting, pressure, vacuum, temperature, and chemical reactions. I'm just piecing it all together since it looks obvious to me that density effects everything including movement and attraction in all aspect of physics which is everything.

All testing based upon wind speed compared to the earth is incorrect due to not factoring in land speed in comparison to the earth. The scientific method missed that.

Edited October 19, 2018 by Theredbarron
bad website

[Ghideon]

 

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

So it looks like the north pole has faster moving air in comparison to the equator.

Its only going in a direction at a speed just faster or slower depending on the direction then the land that its compared to. 

Ok Air pressure and air movements affect magnetic fields according to your idea? Then you can use a compass to measure that? Do you get lost if you navigate with a compass on a windy day?

[studiot]

So here is your introduction to the Scientific Method.

You have thrown out (postulated) some unsubstantiated claims about a relationship between planetary atmospheres and any magnetic field that plant might have.

So what does a Scientist do?

He goes and finds out some facts and figures and looks at them to see if the agree with or disagree with his postulate (hypothesis).

So I will start this process off with a recent table of magnetic information (2003 Tufts University / Cambridge University) Note Mars and Venus are dealt with in the footnotes.

I will then leave you to obtain corresponding atmospheric data to link up with these figures.

 

 

Edited October 19, 2018 by studiot

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

Thats assuming that the field was there first. I thought they did measure our magnetic field.

They have. But if your idea is correct, then a tornado or hurricane should change the local field by some amount, since they represent a certain amount of atmosphere that's moving around.

You would also have to reconcile the known mostly-dipolar field with atmosphere moving in different directions at various locations on earth, and with field reversals that we have evidence of.

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

Your talking about it right now.  Rotating faster could make it hold the air easier as well. Drafting more as speed goes up. Since we are going the same speed it stays the same. You cant honestly say that density is not a factor.

Well, I didn't, so...

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

Its applies to everything including the atmosphere resistance. When lightning strikes is when there a bigger differential of electron build up which is measurable and detectable. During all that.

And how big is that effect? Here's a chance to do some science.

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

Yes it might keep things closer that only prove what I'm saying. The density of the matter around us has electrical properties. Everything has electrical properties. The changes in electrical properties causes a magnetic attraction. This looks like pressure differentials. Observations of this would do exactly what your describing. This is all happening at the same time. You cant have one without the other.

As with the above remark, these are things that can be quantified, to see if they are possible. 

That's the power of science — you can apply it to see if such ideas have merit. You don't have to just wave your hands, or helplessly ponder what-ifs.

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

You can measure this on other planets that do the same thing and have lighting just like we do. The common denominator even in electrical charge choose whats stronger. The build up of electrons is more density and its attracted to the opposite which is less electrons or less density. Then the lightning strikes.

Lightning will actually limit the amount of free charge you have, that could contribute to a magnetic field.

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

An ampere or coulomb is the density of electrons in a given space

The ampere is a measure of current flow. Coulomb is charge, not charge density.

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

I'm coming up with this as I go.

Wind is measured at a point on the surface of earth. The surface is moving faster at the equator in a direction then half way up to the pole. If wind is the differential from land to air speed the its not the total air speed to the rest of the earths air. It does matter.

Winds at different latitudes move in different directions. Any field from oppositely moving charges will tend to cancel, or at least reduce the net effect.

You also have to worry about whether winds could account for the direction of the earth's field.

 

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

 Asteroid's have magnetism but its assumed it captured it from whatever event it came from. Thats possible and so is a static electrical charge being absorbed by a conductor when it speeds past gasses in space or colliding with something else. 

You can magnify a piece of iron. Its field is not from air currents.

The fact that solids have many more atoms than gases is a huge effect here. Run the numbers.

[Endy0816]

The moon and others only have remnants of one.

Geodynamo is what gives us ours. We only have the magnetic poles to worry about.

 

[Moontanman]

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

Yes and so is gravity. The density or everything involved in a planet is a big factor. 

 

When I say atmosphere I mean gasses collected around the surface just like the moon. It has one. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field_of_the_Moon

Its not even a planet. 

Mercury has one

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury's_magnetic_field

I'm not sure i follow you, you seem to be saying a magnetic field is generated by an atmosphere but then you say that mercury and the moon have magnetic fields when their surfaces are for all practical purposes hard vacuums. Yet Mars and Venus, which do have atmospheres, have no global magnetic fields. Ganymede which has no atmosphere has a global magnetic field. Am I misunderstanding you? 

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

 

 

[Theredbarron]

3 hours ago, Ghideon said:

 

Ok Air pressure and air movements affect magnetic fields according to your idea? Then you can use a compass to measure that? Do you get lost if you navigate with a compass on a windy day?

Not if the total value of the earth magnetic field is stronger. The only time its not is when electricity can flow from the clouds to the ground or another cloud. This is base upon density which is the total electrical properties. 

 

3 hours ago, studiot said:

So here is your introduction to the Scientific Method.

You have thrown out (postulated) some unsubstantiated claims about a relationship between planetary atmospheres and any magnetic field that plant might have.

So what does a Scientist do?

He goes and finds out some facts and figures and looks at them to see if the agree with or disagree with his postulate (hypothesis).

So I will start this process off with a recent table of magnetic information (2003 Tufts University / Cambridge University) Note Mars and Venus are dealt with in the footnotes.

I will then leave you to obtain corresponding atmospheric data to link up with these figures.

 

 

This scientific method of yours came up with the answer of phenomenon. That is not a scientific answer. All of you believe because the numbers hold up. 

2 hours ago, Moontanman said:

I'm not sure i follow you, you seem to be saying a magnetic field is generated by an atmosphere but then you say that mercury and the moon have magnetic fields when their surfaces are for all practical purposes hard vacuums. Yet Mars and Venus, which do have atmospheres, have no global magnetic fields. Ganymede which has no atmosphere has a global magnetic field. Am I misunderstanding you? 

 

The movement of any matter of any density cause a differential of density. Density is total electrical properties. 

Atmosphere is matter at a density. What happens when you change vapor to a liquid? its density is changed. The vapors or gases are the easiest molecules or matter to manipulate in our existence. This is why its the first thing to get effected by this action. The separation of matter cause static electrical charges. This is the sign of the magnetic attraction between none magnetic matter. Even our solar system has an atmosphere. Its just not at the pressure that you are used to. Its density changes as the denser solar winds pass by. At the levels of density in space it definitely can have a major effect on planets and it blows right by us. Space doesn't care about what its like on earth. So all the comparing should be done from space. Take a pic of the planet in motion and see all of what is happening. Now zoom out to see all our solar system. Our planets are orbiting the sun just like satellites orbing our planet. Our solar system has  an edge that the voyage passed not to long ago that is conveniently at the end of solar winds. So when I say atmosphere I'm talking about the density that surrounds the planet or moons that is there. Are all hurricanes alike or just similar in whats happening? So no 2 fields are going to be alike as well. 

All those planets have more dense atmosphere on that list. I guess the insignificant details were ignored just because its not exactly alike the other planets for example mars. It still has one just not the same. It also has a different chemical makeup so all the factors are effected. To each its own

Edited October 19, 2018 by Theredbarron
words

[Moontanman]

11 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

Not if the total value of the earth magnetic field is stronger. The only time its not is when electricity can flow from the clouds to the ground or another cloud. This is base upon density which is the total electrical properties. 

 

This scientific method of yours came up with the answer of phenomenon. That is not a scientific answer. All of you believe because the numbers hold up. 

The movement of any matter of any density cause a differential of density. Density is total electrical properties. 

Atmosphere is matter at a density. What happens when you change vapor to a liquid? its density is changed. The vapors or gases are the easiest molecules or matter to manipulate in our existence. This is why its the first thing to get effected by this action. The separation of matter cause static electrical charges. This is the sign of the magnetic attraction between none magnetic matter. Even our solar system has an atmosphere. Its just not at the pressure that you are used to. Its density changes as the denser solar winds pass by. At the levels of density in space it definitely can have a major effect on planets and it blows right by us. Space doesn't care about what its like on earth. So all the comparing should be done from space. Take a pic of the planet in motion and see all of what is happening. Now zoom out to see all our solar system. Our planets are orbiting the sun just like satellites orbing our planet. Our solar system has  an edge that the voyage passed not to long ago that is conveniently at the end of solar winds. So when I say atmosphere I'm talking about the density that surrounds the planet or moons that is there. Are all hurricanes alike or just similar in whats happening? So no 2 fields are going to be alike as well. 

All those planets have more dense atmosphere on that list. I guess the insignificant details were ignored just because its not exactly alike the other planets for example mars. It still has one just not the same. It also has a different chemical makeup so all the factors are effected. To each its own

None of this in anything but nonsense... 

[Theredbarron]

3 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

None of this in anything but nonsense... 

Its pretty clear that you dont understand what I'm actually talking about. You should try and read all the stuff I put before you get stuck on atmosphere. 

[Moontanman]

Just now, Theredbarron said:

Its pretty clear that you dont understand what I'm actually talking about. You should try and read all the stuff I put before you get stuck on atmosphere. 

I doubt anyone does but you.. 

[Theredbarron]

You think its a phenomenon I think its actually physics. 

Just now, Moontanman said:

I doubt anyone does but you.. 

Thats fine with me. I'm not the one missing it all.

You cant say density has nothing to do with it when its everything even how a hurricane comes to be. 

If everything I say ruffles feathers then maybe you should take a look around and see whats happening right in front of you. Because phenomenon is not enough. Stopping there cant be the answer. 

Drafting is real

phenomenon is an unanswered question. 

[studiot]

22 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

4 hours ago, studiot said:

 

This scientific method of yours came up with the answer of phenomenon. That is not a scientific answer. All of you believe because the numbers hold up. 

 

Well I don't understand this comment, sorry.

[Theredbarron]

phe·nom·e·non

/fəˈnäməˌnän,fəˈnäməˌnən/

noun

noun: phenomenon; plural noun: phenomena

1. 1.

   a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question.

   "glaciers are unique and interesting natural phenomena"

   synonyms:

   occurrence, event, happening, fact, situation, circumstance, experience, case, incident, episode "a rare phenomenon"

   • a remarkable person, thing, or event.

     synonyms:

     marvel, sensation, wonder, prodigy, miracle, rarity, nonpareil; More informalhumdinger, phenom, stunner, doozy, ripsnorter "the band was a pop phenomenon"

2. 2.

   Philosophy

   the object of a person's perception; what the senses or the mind notice.

[Moontanman]

3 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

phe·nom·e·non

/fəˈnäməˌnän,fəˈnäməˌnən/

noun

noun: phenomenon; plural noun: phenomena

1. 1.

   a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question.

   "glaciers are unique and interesting natural phenomena"

   synonyms:

   occurrence, event, happening, fact, situation, circumstance, experience, case, incident, episode "a rare phenomenon"

   • a remarkable person, thing, or event.

     synonyms:

     marvel, sensation, wonder, prodigy, miracle, rarity, nonpareil; More informalhumdinger, phenom, stunner, doozy, ripsnorter "the band was a pop phenomenon"

2. 2.

   Philosophy

   the object of a person's perception; what the senses or the mind notice.

The source of planetary magnetic fields is well known, if you want to explain them some other way then the burden of proof lies with you not us... 

[beecee]

47 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

This scientific method of yours came up with the answer of phenomenon. That is not a scientific answer. All of you believe because the numbers hold up. 

 

23 minutes ago, studiot said:

Well I don't understand this comment, sorry.

It appears he is asking why you accept as valid what you say, just because you happen to use  the scientific method, and that the  figures support it.... I mean how illogical!!

Edited October 19, 2018 by beecee

[Theredbarron]

5 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

The source of planetary magnetic fields is well known, if you want to explain them some other way then the burden of proof lies with you not us... 

If its so well known then why haven't you pieced together that the magnetic fields are conveniently happening along side gravity? Magnets attract things. Why couldn't it be so that gravity is magnetic attraction just not what we use for electricity? I use atmosphere because its the most visible results from density changes. Then static electricity shows you what happens when matter moves away from each other. That would have to be a magnetic attraction to attract the electrons onto whatever it is attracted to. Not Just because its moving but the electrical properties are moving. 

[Moontanman]

1 minute ago, Theredbarron said:

If its so well known then why haven't you pieced together that the magnetic fields are conveniently happening along side gravity? Magnets attract things. Why couldn't it be so that gravity is magnetic attraction just not what we use for electricity? I use atmosphere because its the most visible results from density changes. Then static electricity shows you what happens when matter moves away from each other. That would have to be a magnetic attraction to attract the electrons onto whatever it is attracted to. Not Just because its moving but the electrical properties are moving. 

You're not close enough to being right for me to tell you why you're wrong... 

[beecee]

4 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

. Why couldn't it be so that gravity is magnetic attraction

Because not all astronomical bodies are magnetic? But all have gravity?

Edited October 19, 2018 by beecee

[Theredbarron]

 

 

25 minutes ago, studiot said:

 

Well I don't understand this comment, sorry.

I totally missed this. What I mean is that the methods is flawed for this understanding due to facts that were ignored. I meant that people believe in it due to the numbers always working. Im dont think the numbers are wrong. I think the initial understanding is where mistakes were made. 

3 minutes ago, beecee said:

Because not all astronomical bodies are magnetic? But all have gravity?

All matter has magnetic properties. It has protons and electrons. These have magnetic properties by them selves. If you wanted to attract these properties into moving then you would have to have the opposite of the magnetic values which are zeroed out due to the same amount of electrons and protons. The opposite would then be less protons and electrons giving it less total electrical values. This value is dependent upon density. 

The motion of these electrical properties causes density changes following it and in front of it if its moving in one direction. Drafting is creating a lower density area for other things to be attracted to. The cars of Nascar use it for there advantage. Airplanes use it to defy gravity. Same with helicopter and all other flying things. To defy gravity you have to create pressure differential which is changing the densities. Once you have enough of a differential it will then move whatever it is your trying to move in the direction of less density. 

[Moontanman]

15 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

 

 

I totally missed this. What I mean is that the methods is flawed for this understanding due to facts that were ignored. I meant that people believe in it due to the numbers always working. Im dont think the numbers are wrong. I think the initial understanding is where mistakes were made. 

All matter has magnetic properties. It has protons and electrons. These have magnetic properties by them selves. If you wanted to attract these properties into moving then you would have to have the opposite of the magnetic values which are zeroed out due to the same amount of electrons and protons. The opposite would then be less protons and electrons giving it less total electrical values. This value is dependent upon density. 

Gravity is based on mass, what do you mean by density? If magnetism is based on density wouldn't that show your ideas are wrong?  

[beecee]

12 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

All matter has magnetic properties. It has protons and electrons. These have magnetic properties by them selves. If you wanted to attract these properties into moving then you would have to have the opposite of the magnetic values which are zeroed out due to the same amount of electrons and protons. The opposite would then be less protons and electrons giving it less total electrical values. This value is dependent upon density. 

While all matter at the elementary level have magnetic fields, these for all intents and purposes are far to weak to measure, whereas gravity has a far greater effect as more mass/matter is evident.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/187333/do-all-the-things-have-a-magnetic-field

"In the sense that all matter is made up by elementary particles which have a spin, there are magnetic fields for all matter, but it is only if the molecules are organized that it can build up to a value to show large scale magnetization, as with ferromagnets. For the great majority of matter the directions of individual fields from the nuclei and electrons and atoms cancel each other and one has to go to smaller than nanometer distances to see any effects".