Hypothetical - Re: Pole Shift

[Gaillo]

Hypothetical for scientific types:

You walk outside at night and the star positions don't quite look right. Jupiter seems higher in the sky than you remember. Polaris seems lower.

HOW would you go about verifying/disproving that a pole shift had occurred?

Internet forums? Sextant and astronomy manuals? GPS receiver? Listen for the beying of packs of ravenous hounds from hell? Discuss... ;)

[Glass]

I was going to say that I would watch to see which side of the tree the moss is growing on but I don't think thats going to do it.

Ok so question. What kind of pole shift are you talking about. A magnetic pole shift or a physical north south switcheroo?

[Gaillo]

I was going to say that I would watch to see which side of the tree the moss is growing on but I don't think thats going to do it.

Ok so question. What kind of pole shift are you talking about. A magnetic pole shift or a physical north south switcheroo?

A geographical pole shift - where the 2 "stationary" points (corresponding to the ends of the axis of rotation) move to different geographical points on the Earth, due to the surface (crust) slipping with respect to the liquid interior.

[vacuum]

I'd have to think about it. My first thought is, travel to the nearest megalith and see if the stars line up properly with it. Which in itself is an interesting thing to think about....

[Glass]

I would flush the toilet and see which way the water was vortexing. Is vortexing even a word?

[Joe King]

A geographical pole shift - where the 2 "stationary" points (corresponding to the ends of the axis of rotation) move to different geographical points on the Earth, due to the surface (crust) slipping with respect to the liquid interior.You're not talking about a magnetic pole shift so much as a change in the axial tilt of 23.5 degrees, right?
If so, I'd say that if the axial tilt of the Earth were to change, every antenna that's pointed at a geosynchronous satellite would lose signal strength and would need to be readjusted to again point directly at the bird in the sky.

[ximmy]

something strange woke me up this morning... could it have been a pole shift?

[Celtic Rogue]

something strange woke me up this morning... could it have been a pole shift?
There is a joke there somewhere... but I wont go there! 8-)

[mick silver]

There is a joke there somewhere... but I wont go there! 8-)

i almost went there but i didnt also

[Santa]

something strange woke me up this morning... could it have been a pole shift?

It was just a friendly good morning poke. :)

[Santa]

If I wake up one morning and discover the sun is just setting, I'm gonna make a pilgrimage to Silver Art Bars cave and ask him what's going on.

[Son-of-Liberty]

If it was a geographical pole shift wouldn't there be massive earthquakes accompanying it?

[midnight rambler]

http://www.dumb.com/m_pictures/4dcd05c2d82ef434e419540fd99d5db6.jpg

is on the other side of town from

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTog93s5MiMp2RnVF8fDc5RTMHFipLse AY3tWZnp7dh63w86A-NgMpxjI50

[Awoke]

The easiest way is to get a camera set up on time lapse, or ultra slow speed filming, and set it up on a tri-pod with the North start set as the very center.

The pole axis that we are on now (If it hasn't shifted recently without us notincing) is in such a fashion that the North star will stay located in the center of the picture, while all the other stars will rotate around it as the world turns.

Look at the North star like the centre pin on a record player.

In the center of this picture is the North star. This is why it's used for navigation. It is located truely axial north, not magnetic north.

http://www.opencourse.info/astronomy/introduction/02.motion_stars_sun/northpole_malin.jpg

It would be easy to see if we were off axis, even for a blue collar.

EDIT: This only works if you're in the Northern Hemisphere. If you're in the southern, you need to use the Southern Cross Constilation, and it is not centered axially the same way as the North Star, so it would go in a circle as well, but close to the center, and in the opposite direction.

[Awoke]

I think it's important for people to understand how to find the North star because it is a constant. I foudn this huge star map on some Chinese website, and Circled the pertinent stars in the "Big dipper" and Cassiopeia constellations, and the North star itself.

The way I always remember it is like a game of "Wiffle ball" (Or ball & Cup). I picture Cassiopeia as a slingshot, and the Big dipper is a catcher cup. The North star is like the ball in motion, thrown by Cassiopeia towards the Big dipper.

Most survival books talk about using the distance of the bottom two stars in the Dipper cup, and multiplying that distance by 5 in a curved line to find the North star. (Shown in the green lines) I personally wanted to have another way to find it, because one night in the middle of winter I was in the bush at 2am and I couldn't see the big Dipper because it was below the treeline. I had no other way to determine which way north was.

http://gold-silver.us/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=1156&d=1317051108

At that time I was camping/hunting with a friend who knew the lay of the land, but I realized I needed multiple ways to know where to find it because I would have been screwed if I was lost and alone and needed to find North, so I figured out the cup and ball method. Next I will memorize some other constellations in the other directions around it as well.


EDIT to add this link to the original star map image before I edited it:
http://map.vbgood.com/star-map/northern-star-map2.htm

[keehah]

'Science' should first clarify are you concerned with Jupiter moving OR a pole shift on earth (and be specific about what type of pole shift).
Or is this really about Jove (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamen_Dialis)?

http://www.pressherald.com/life/outdoors/supernova-and-comet-join-meteors-in-celestial-show_2011-09-25.html

Jupiter will be the star of the night sky throughout the fall and into winter. The king of the planets will reach opposition on Oct. 28, when it will rise at sunset and not set until sunrise. It will be at its closest and brightest that night for the year. Other than last year, Jupiter will reach its closest opposition in nearly 50 years this month. It is now in southwestern Aries and is moving retrograde, or westward against the fixed background of stars.

[Awoke]

I tried to find a cleaner picture of the sky at night to show you without all those lines and symbols on the Chinese version I posted above, and I found this:

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/true-north-illustration-2.jpg

So that saves me from re-doing another one in windows paint.

But while I was looking, I found another really nice photo that I wanted to show you. I was originally going to use it as a test for any interested readers, to ask which way the photographer was facing when the photo was snapped, but the light from the setting sun is a dead give away.

However if the light wasn't there, based on the position of Cassiopeia in relation to the North star, you would know that the photographer was facing North/West/West when they snapped the pic.

http://walkingwithangels.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/nightsky.jpg

[Korbin Dallas]

My pole shift got in the way of me rolling out of bed this morning.

Actually, I noticed a slight change in Jupiter's locale a few weeks ago, I thought maybe it was due to the approaching equinox. They say the Jap earthquake did cause a slight shift in magnetic north.

[vacuum]

But while I was looking, I found another really nice photo that I wanted to show you. I was originally going to use it as a test for any interested readers, to ask which way the photographer was facing when the photo was snapped, but the light from the setting sun is a dead give away.

However if the light wasn't there, based on the position of Cassiopeia in relation to the North star, you would know that the photographer was facing North/West/West when they snapped the pic.
So is this the north star?

http://gold-silver.us/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=1161&stc=1&d=1317064481

[Awoke]

The more I look at this picture, the harder it is to tell if I am seeing it in perspective. It's so much easier to see in person outside than it is to tell from a photo, but I beileve that the star you circled is part of Cassiopeia as follows:


1162

But the more I stare at it and try to verify it, the more I start to think that I am seeing a constellation that is similar to Cassiopeia, but not it...

Haha, feeling stupid...

If I had you out at night, no problem...

[Joe King]

Why is there a "star" below the horizon in that pic?

[vacuum]

I was basing it off of cassiopeia being as shown here:

http://gold-silver.us/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=1163&stc=1&d=1317068243

[Awoke]

Yeah, shit, that's tough. If it was where you think it is, then Ursa Major would be center and low, but I think we would see a portion of it.
If it was where I originally thought it was, Ursa mjor would be to the high right, off screen, so shit: I don't know.

Biggest problem for me is that the one you highlighted, the top star looks too far away, and on an open angle indtead of a sharp one.
The one that I originally thought was it, is inverted and facing the other way, but the bottom star (Which is at the top because it's inverted with respect to yours) is too close.

Dammit, I'm going to have to delete my account if this humiliation continues! lol. Anyways, I will look tomorrow with a fresh set of eyes, if we're not all dead from some FF nuke attack courtesy of Obama. (In reference to the "Sept27Denverundergroundbunkerrumour")

[vacuum]

I agree, I think I'm wrong. Cassiopeia has 3 sections with pretty close lengths.

[vacuum]

Also, to answer the original question - to figure out if a pole shift occurred, you must have some solid reference of north on the ground, like the alignment of a couple big stones, or a mountain peak that you can align to. Then find the north star. If its not where it supposed to be, you know a pole shift occurred.

The other method would be careful tracking of the sun. Perhaps knowing how a shadow is supposed to look at a certain time of the year, and checking to see if it is still right.

In a pinch you could probably find buildings or airports that were aligned in the cardinal directions, and see if they're still aligned north.

Of course all the megaliths are conveniently the perfect tools to determine if a pole shift occured. They won't be destroyed during the shift itself or ensuing cataclysm, and they're aligned with the starts.

[Awoke]

Also, to answer the original question - to figure out if a pole shift occurred, you must have some solid reference of north on the ground, like the alignment of a couple big stones, or a mountain peak that you can align to. Then find the north star. If its not where it supposed to be, you know a pole shift occurred.


I don't get it. If we experienced a polar shift, we would be rotating on a different axis, so the North star would no longer be "The center of the record player", so why would you need a ground reference if you were taking long-exposure photos or film? You would see it when you looked at the exposure.

[platinumdude]

When your satellite tv receiver doesn't work because it's not pointed at the satellite correctly anymore and you are not the only one. When GPS systems fail to work, then it could possibly be a pole shift. It could also be solar flares, though.

[vacuum]

I don't get it. If we experienced a polar shift, we would be rotating on a different axis, so the North star would no longer be "The center of the record player", so why would you need a ground reference if you were taking long-exposure photos or film? You would see it when you looked at the exposure.
I guess I was assuming there wouldn't be any technology available.

But regardless, my idea of a pole shift is that the crust of the earth slips over the mantle. I don't think the axis of rotation with respect to the stars can change because of the conservation of angular momentum. We would just be translated on the surface. In other words, you may be in canada but you now occupy the place china currently occupies. So it would be as if you look up at the sky in china. The stars wouldn't change, but your reference on the earth's surface will tell you that the land you're on is now pointing in a different direction than it used to point.

[vacuum]

When your satellite tv receiver doesn't work because it's not pointed at the satellite correctly anymore and you are not the only one. When GPS systems fail to work, then it could possibly be a pole shift. It could also be solar flares, though.
Thats an excellent point. Satellite dishes only have a couple degrees of beam-width to connect to the satellite. So while your satellite not working doesn't necessarily mean a pole shift has occurred, you can say that if you're getting satellite, a pole shift has not occurred.

[Awoke]

I guess I was assuming there wouldn't be any technology available.

But regardless, my idea of a pole shift is that the crust of the earth slips over the mantle. I don't think the axis of rotation with respect to the stars can change because of the conservation of angular momentum. We would just be translated on the surface. In other words, you may be in canada but you now occupy the place china currently occupies. So it would be as if you look up at the sky in china. The stars wouldn't change, but your reference on the earth's surface will tell you that the land you're on is now pointing in a different direction than it used to point.

Interesting. In that case, it if wasn't catastrophic somehow, and somehow went unnoticed, the day would be shortened or lengthened accordingly, depending which way the mantle rotated.

[Sparky]

A geographical pole shift - where the 2 "stationary" points (corresponding to the ends of the axis of rotation) move to different geographical points on the Earth, due to the surface (crust) slipping with respect to the liquid interior.

This by itself would not cause a change in the geographic locations of the poles, since the crust slippage presumably would be along the same direction as the tangential vector. However, if you really do mean that there was a geographic change in the two poles around which the earth is rotating, the most obvious verification would be to wait until morning to see if the sun rises somewhere other than where it did the day before.

[Sparky]

Interesting. In that case, it if wasn't catastrophic somehow, and somehow went unnoticed, the day would be shortened or lengthened accordingly, depending which way the mantle rotated.

No, the day wouldn't be shortened at all in this case. You'd be at the same longitude, but just a different latitude. Your clocks would be off compared to where the sun angle is during the day. It would no longer be at its zenith at noon the next day.

Of course, this makes vacuum's assumption that angular momentum was conserved. If not, then the length of day/night would change at your location, but not the day length (which would still be 24 hours, unless the rotation speed also changed).

[Awoke]

What are you talking about?

Our day is 24 hours because that's how long it takes to make a full rotation.

If it's midnight here, it's noon hour in China (Loosely put). If the mantle slips and suddenly North america is on the other side of the world, we'd be facing the sun at high noon all of a sudden, and China would be suddenly sitting in the darkness of midnight.

[Sparky]

What are you talking about?

Our day is 24 hours because that's how long it takes to make a full rotation.

If it's midnight here, it's noon hour in China (Loosely put). If the mantle slips and suddenly North america is on the other side of the world, we'd be facing the sun at high noon all of a sudden, and China would be suddenly sitting in the darkness of midnight.

We're saying the same thing, with different semantics. I'm talking about clock time. If my clock says midnight, and this shift occurs, it will be bright sunshine outside my window, but my clock will still say midnight. That's how I'll know something happened.

Also, when you said the "day is shortened", I guess you meant that one day. I thought you were claiming that a day would no longer be 24 hours long.

[Awoke]

Oh yeah, OK. I understand what you're saying now. Yeah, I meant at the time of the occurance, the day would shorten or lengthen.

When I visualize a pole shift, for some reason I always assume that the world will change hemispherically, meaning the poles will not be north/south, but the world will suddenly tilt onto a new axis, spreading oceans, mountains and destruction across the entire face of the earth.

I can't imagine it not being catastophic.

[Gaillo]

Oh yeah, OK. I understand what you're saying now. Yeah, I meant at the time of the occurance, the day would shorten or lengthen.

When I visualize a pole shift, for some reason I always assume that the world will change hemispherically, meaning the poles will not be north/south, but the world will suddenly tilt onto a new axis, spreading oceans, mountains and destruction across the entire face of the earth.

I can't imagine it not being catastophic.


From my researches, that's almost EXACTLY what happens... in fact it appears that the shift has been approx. 30 Degrees each time. The previous 2 poles were located at what is presently the Hudson Bay, and Yukon areas, according to the non-mainstream researchers who consider pole-shift to be a valid theory.

Essentially, the interior of the earth continues to "spin" on the same axis it always has, but the crust "displaces" (slips) with respect to the interior - making every spot on the surface now exist at a different latitude/longitude with respect to the rotational axis (and consequently, the new poles) of the planet.

[vacuum]

Right Gaillo, a pole shift should always occur where what used to be the north pole moves towards the equator in one direction, and the south pole moves towards the equator in the other direction. The slippage in the direction of the Earth's rotation will be little if any.

The reason is because of the cause of the pole shift. A pole shift is caused by an opposing magnetic field from another celestial body. Imagine our magnetic field, in alignment with the Sun, is going strait up and down. Then another body comes between Earth and the Sun. It's magnetic field is left to right, which is 90º out of alignment with our magnetic field. This causes a torque on the Earth's crust, because the locked-in magnetic field within the solid crust is in opposition to the foreign magnetic field. The inside is liquid so it doesn't have a problem rotating the molecules.

However, you couldn't have a shift around our axis of rotation, because our field is symmetrical around that axis. Imagine you have 2 vertical bar magnets. You can spin one on its north-south axis and it won't move the other (especially round bar magnets). But if you then make one horizontal, the vertical one will want to also be horizontal.

[Gaillo]

vacuum,
Interesting. I've always given more credibility to the "ice buildup at the poles" leading to a mechanical imbalance (causing a mechanical "re-balancing" - a pole shift) as being more likely than the magnetic field theory... although I do see what you are talking about as a definite possibility.

[Sparky]

Of course, none of this has the impact of Guam capsizing from too many inhabitants.

http://i4.ytimg.com/vi/cesSRfXqS1Q/default.jpgClick to view
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cesSRfXqS1Q)

[vacuum]

vacuum,
Interesting. I've always given more credibility to the "ice buildup at the poles" leading to a mechanical imbalance (causing a mechanical "re-balancing" - a pole shift) as being more likely than the magnetic field theory... although I do see what you are talking about as a definite possibility.
That one is possible too, though a little more complicated to understand. Either one could be periodic.....either periodic from the ice buildup, or periodic from a body in elongated orbit with the sun.