E.M ON AMAZON KINDLE

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1799165647

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07PG44BMG

Dear  Readers,

You are welcome here to share my view, my way in scientific research.

-Where a mass is, there is a gravity field around.

-Where an electric charge is, there is an electric field around.

-Where a magnet is, there is a magnetic field around.                                                                                

Nonetheless, on the reverse wise of the above statement:

‘’Where a magnetic field is available, there is a magnet in it’’ creates a long debate; especially about Earth Magnetism. The debate does not just take a decade, it is prolonging in centuries.

I am not writing about an analogue to this: ‘’Where a mass is, there is a gravity field around’’; but basically I argue about Earth Magnetism that the field of Earth Magnetism is made out of the moves of many electric charges, then the Earth core or anything else is magnetized, reciprocally the apparent Earth Magnetic field is seen.

I trust and I am backed by a rule that ‘’Where an electric charge moves, there is a magnetic field to be induced’’, because that’s how the Earth Magnetism is built. The material in a magnetic field can be magnetized, as Faraday’s Law of Magnetic Induction did point out in history.

The way I go along is the way I share my view with you.

Although the problems and solutions in this book are quite theoretical but every assumption and solution depends on real data from many different researchers in the world. The work costs me decades.

Where are those electric charges? That is a question, and I got to find out the electric charges on the Earth, in atmosphere and in the space near our Earth.

This book ‘’The basic problems for Earth Magnetism’’ contains problems and solution to each of them.

The major theory used in this book is Biot-Savart and Ampere-Maxwell. The data used in this book are findings of NOAA, NASA and from many other data sources in the world.

The book is broken down into two major parts; the first is for problems of charges on Earth. The charge on Earth is realized long ago such as charged cloud and its opposite patch on Earth surface. I am not the first who figures out the charges, but a person who connects the area of world’s charged (thunder) cloud with air-earth current in every 24hr of our Earth rotation, even if no direct equation is given out for Earth Magnetism.

As matter of facts, the Earth is rotating around its own axis. Therefore every charge on it can induce magnetism to Earth.

Several people keep questioning me about the move of electric charge, I don’t respond directly to their question but hint that whether the speed 462 m/s of everything at Earth’s equator makes sense to them?!

The second part is for external charge such as one on Van Allen Belt and the other is on Moon. The charge on any of those above is obviously assumed, but depending on a reality that there is almost no absolutely neutral object found, which is neither negative nor positive. The principal: ‘’The more sun light strikes on an object surface, the more electrons it loses’’ did lead Albert Einstein to his invention of solar cell. The mentioned invention leads to assumption that the Moon has two opposite semi -spheres, the shined one is positive charged while the dark one is definitely negative. That is not it; the Moon is even not neutral or balanced in electric charge but is also lacking electrons. Lunar total charge may be positive sometime and keeps changing due to the change of solar radiation. My assumption does encounter a lot, certainly, critics. A predominant question is also a hint that if an object lacks of electron, its ambiance will provide electron; if the object is rich of electrons, the protons from its ambiance will come to balance it. This question actually is still in the invention of Albert Einstein.

The last major question in my debate with other people is ‘’Why do the magnetic poles stay away from Earth’s true poles?’’, although I mentioned in the preamble that I never work with rotors or anything inside the Earth. But I do propose a non-professional answer that each plate is a huge magnet in general Earth Magnetic field; the poles in apparent Earth Magnetic field are shaped by the total of every individual magnetic field of all continents and plates. Definitely, many people are not satisfied with such a non-professional answer and go forward with another question that the North magnetic pole is drifting toward Russia, and the drifting is the beginning of flipping which will happen in 1000 year time, can charge move help to stop it? Although this book is not written about the magnetic pole flipping, and I don’t believe in the conclusion that the magnetic pole drifting; but anyway I point out that the African continent is moving northward as fast as 8 inches/year. Look at our Earth again; we may realize that Americas continent is Earth’s back bone while Africa and Euro-Asia are moving northward, whereby Africa is much faster than Euro-Asia.

Certainly many people are not satisfied with my answer; they have no choice but wait to read the research result from world scientists who study that subject.

For the 1^st publishing on Amazon Kindle, I would like to give ‘’I-Biot-Sawart’’ expression for anyone who attempts to calculate how much an electric charge on Earth surface can contribute to Earth Magnetism.

In order to apply I-Biot-Sawart expression, we need to have value of electric charge (q) and a table of distance to Earth rotation axis (the ‘’r’’).

With I-Biot-Sawart (Interpolated Biot-Sawart), we can state that: if I am given with a charge and its position on our global coordinates, I can calculate right away how much that charge contributes to Earth Magnetism.

This publishing is bearing in it a great thank to the Late Professor Nguyen Dinh Noan, and PhD Vu Bang for encourage and great help during I study this subject.

Thank for your kind attention.

Ho Chi Minh City March 9, 2019 

NV Cuong

EARTH HISTORY RE-CONSIDERATION

(Geologist Edward Young, Theia, Moon, collision, impact)

The Earth core is assumed to be a ‘’globe’’ with another smaller ‘’globe’’ in it; so far they are named as ‘’outer core’’ and ‘’inner core’’. This essay is to discuss about re-consideration to the core(s) on basis of updated information about gravity from NASA and some other space researching bodies.

I-NASA GRAVITY MAP:

How was the Earth established?

Figure 1-Gravity map with data observed by GRACE (Credited to NASA, updated on May 14^th 2017)

The above Figure ‘’1’’ is re-built by the real NASA data, which are harvested by some satellites in observing the Earth gravity. The following is a quote from a title of NASA news:

‘’The joint –NASA-German Aerospace Centre Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission has released its first science product, the most accurate map yet of Earth’s gravity field. GRACE is the newest tool for scientists working to unlock secrets of ocean circulation and its effect on climate.

Created from 111 days of selected GRACE data to help calibrate and validate the mission’s instruments, this preliminary model improves knowledge of the gravity field so much it is being released to oceanographers now, months in advance of the scheduled start of routine GRACE science operations. The data are expected to significantly improve our ability to understand ocean circulation, which strongly influences weather and climate.’’

Although the Earth has been established in almost 4.5 billion years ago, since then there are lot of changes on the Earth; nowadays it looks as a perfect sphere. But actually (by NASA gravity map in figure 1) the evidence is still like alive despite the change in billions of years. The present Earth is made out of 2 major parts: 

Figure 2-Junction of 2 parts.

Junction is un-covered.

Despite there are bundles of hypothesis about the Earth and Moon establishment, every of them claims recognition; this evidence is to confirm the giant impact  hypothesis of Geologist Edward Young. The collision between another planet and our primitive Earth left evidence behind, that is junction, let’s go further with it.  

In order to understand the ‘’why’’, the following net force or vector addition rule is employed:

Figure 3 - On-junction gravity is less than on-main-body one.

+Junction: The dark blue trace is nearly about Earth’s longitude and getting through India, China and Russia over Artic…and Atlantic is assumed to be the junction between the two mentioned parts. The Gravity at Arctic and the channel between Argentine and Antarctic continent are normal, this is another issue in the subject that requires more research.

+ On-junction gravity is less than on-main-body: The gravity observed at junction or border between the two parts (each gravity centre is belonging to a different part) is less than normal because:

Two vectors make the largest total when the angle between them is 0⁰, this is known to the world.

II-EARTH IS A PLANET OF TWEEN GRAVITY CENTRES:

What we should debate is the tween gravity-centre structure of our present Earth.

The tween gravity centre planet is made out of a combination of one and the other, the annexation is assumed to be made by collision; if it was not known to us before, it is debated today. The following is a quote from Wikipedia dictionary:

By the Moon's origin  ‘’The Moon is an astronomical body that orbits planet Earth and is Earth's only permanent natural satellite. It is the fifth-largest natural satellite in the Solar System, and the largest among planetary satellites relative to the size of the planet that it orbits (its primary). The Moon is after Jupiter's satellite LO, the second-densest satellite in the Solar System among those whose densities are known.

The Moon is thought to have formed about 4.51 billion years ago, not long after Earth. The most widely accepted explanation is that the Moon is formed from the debris left over after a giant impact between Earth and a Mars-sized body called Theia.’’

The above explanation is accepted and certainly my argument is about it.

a)-More demonstration needed:

In addition to the assumed demonstration on Wikipedia for Theia the following ‘’equation’’ can explain a bit more on term of structure and power in the process:

Figure 4-My Earth Collision Equation

‘’a’’ is a planet (Theia) or a huge comet in solar system.

‘’b’’ is our primitive Earth (in the shape of recent found comet Rosetta, (ESA Image)).

‘’E’’ is denoted for the Earth with the latest gravity data (NASA Image), mind that the Earth does not look like that without water in the oceans.

‘’M’’ is the Moon, debris after collision.

b-Non-aligned or head-on collision:

Almost collision that happened when one collider’s gravity centre locating on the same moving line with the other is assumed as head-on collision; the followings are examples:

+Two bricks on rail.

+Two wagons on a rail.

+Two globes of pure material (un-pure material globe may have gravity centre off from its geometric centre).

+Two pure cylinders standing straight upward, one moves toward the other than hit.

Otherwise, the collisions that gravity centre of one collider is not on the same moving line with the other, are assumed as non-aligned. Consequence of non-aligned collision always includes a moment or a change in spinning wise and speed.

Figure 5-Non-aligned collision

-The ‘’equation’’ in (Figure 4) is to depict a process when a planet ‘’a’’ merges with planet ‘’b’’, the products are present Earth and the Moon. The Earth after collision is not just in a new shape, but also with new structure as following illustration:

Figure 6-New structure of our Earth

The individual gravity centre of each part might be proposed as following:

Figure 7-New structure with new gravity centres

As assumption repeated more than twice, the collision between Earth and Theia is head-on type, but actually there is rare head-on collision but non-aligned one in natural reality. The reason is quite simple that there is no perfect pure globe or cylinder found in nature, or the way one moves along is always out of the way where the other moves along. On the other hand, the shape of each is never a perfect square or perfect global in nature…therefore, the head-on collision is hardly found, so every collision leads to both deformation and spinning change, which is not debated in this title.

Although we have neither image of primitive Earth nor the Theia, but have title to suppose that each of them is a certain globe, so those two globes after collision might become a combination as above illustration, where the part left by Theia on our Earth is yellow or yellow half. The original core of Theia and its gravity centre are eliminated after collision then a new gravity centre of yellow half is established.

-Evidence:

+Diamond is never produced in normal condition but very high pressure and temperature. Notwithstanding, the diamonds are found near Earth surface or even in open mines of Africa, those evidences are indicating that Africa rock and soil used to be at very deep layer and belonging to Theia planet. This argument may lead to an assumption that there is still some diamond on Moon surface, this is quite in a normal logic, but nobody can suggest where on the Moon is rich of diamonds.

At present there are several hypothesises explaining that the diamond of Africa is floated up from deep layer by impact of collision or what so ever since billions years ago, while metal is always on one way to Earth’s core without return, the diamond should be assumed to be on the move of the same wise as metal.

+The lunar rocks  and soil from Moon are stored at NASA; although experiment in lab with them is facing some difficult, I believe that they will be successful in proving that the relation between Moon and Earth is substantial in the wise that rock and soil are common somewhere. The sample rock, anyhow need to be collected from larger area on the Moon as well as Earth surface.

Conclusion

-The gravity map issued by NASA reveals a‘’junction’’ which can be like a disk that created by the collision between our Earth and another planet, that used to be named as Theia (Wikipedia for Moon).

-The gravity centre of each is still viewed as independent to the other; the junction disk is assumed as very hard to be beaten through; at least there is no evidence of breaking through.

-The Earth’s core is in the junction of the historic collision and approximately in the middle of Earth’s rotation axis. The junction is a product of ‘’metallurgy’’ during colliding, it must be at good heat conduction or heat transferring. For heat conduction, the evidence is that the temperature at either the Northern or Southern Pole never been chilled to -90⁰C while it might be -150⁰ C in space near the Earth; this fact is realized as the Poles are warmed up by the heat from Earth core.

Therefore, the Earth core is assumed as cooler than all sides around.

Hanoi 29^th June 2018

Nguyen Van Cuong