That’s the geographic North Pole. There’s also the magnetic North Pole and then the geomagnetic North Pole.

This concerns Flat Earth theory though and not much to do with astrology. That’s because if there is a North pole, then compasses should be able to navigate by the South pole as well. And GPS should ideally not have to use any magnetic sources except as cross verification.

There’s all kinds of holes and weirdness going on. Because science should be absolute, especially with how much airplanes and navigation relies upon the magnetic compass system and direction. If it is not correct, then lives are at risk.

Yet they don’t actually understand why it keeps moving or when it speeds up or slows down. And talk about polarity shift between North and South pole just sounds like another scientific cop out or Armageddon theory. If that had came from me, people here would freak out and try to make fun of it. When it comes from their scientific priesthoods, then it suddenly is taken as Gospel.

Currently, many people say science is right whether you believe in it or not (or whether it is accurate or not, it is true because scientists believe it to be true). Anthropomorphic global warming is a result of this type of scientific orthodoxy based upon “consensus rules” rather than the scientific methodology of experiments testing theories using data.

Apparently the geo magnetic model and the geo science model can’t even predict magnetic changes, even though it has been changing since magnetism has been measured on Earth (in this civilization) one hundred years ago.

I find that somewhat… rather lacking in the scientific “accuracy” department. Like I said about the cross section of the Earth’s core and mantle, they don’t know much about the crust, let alone the rest of the Earth. They just have pet theories that sound good, but do not have sufficient data. Yes, I know about sonar and other things traveling through the Earth. It is entirely insufficient given how many variables are uncontrolled.

Also, no engineering firm has reproduced a scaled down model of a magnetic Earth core using molten iron and the other metals. The only magnetic “liquid” we have is closer to a liquid battery made out of sodium.

Yes, there were dramatic exaggerations; yes, some of the main characters were either ‘repainted’ or, in at least one case, just invented for the sake of the story; and yes, there was exaggeration of certain effects of radiation and certain aspects of the physics. But it didn’t get everything wrong. And on the whole, it did stimulate me to inform myself much more than I had done about nuclear energy. I’ve been binge-watching various documentaries, other more hard-science clips and articles.

I still feel nervous about radiation – would never see myself ever visiting Pripyat, for example, even though intellectually, the math tells me it’s quite doable. But on the other hand, I’ve never particularly hated or feared nuclear power generally. I don’t, for example, get the heebie-jeebies looking at a cooling tower or something. (Kind of ironic that only a few days after watching all this stuff, I got more X-rays done in one day than I’d had in my entire life combined up to that point.)

Thus, I have this irritating conflict within myself between my overly emotional outlook on nuclear energy and what my head tells me about it. I do chemistry, after all, so it’s not as if science is foreign territory. Did the show help to resolve that? For me, not yet sure. One thing that is clear is that, when it’s done right, nuclear power is an amazing invention; and when done wrong, it’s still amazing, just in a very different direction.

I’m grateful for the contributions of those of you who can talk about nuclear power from professional experience.

NMRI, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging, came about when several researchers including Dr Raymond Damadian discovered that the NMR relaxation times of cancerous cells was different than normal cells, and Dr. Paul Lauterbur discovered that the use of a high power gradient device would allow scanning in 2D & 3D space. (If you have ever had an MRI exam, that loud knocking and buzzing sound is caused by the gradient.)

Most of this research was conducted in the late 60′ and 70’s. The “N” in NMRI was dropped because of it’s negative connotations at that time.

A lot of additional research has been conducted since those early days in higher strength magnets and gradients, and in specialized protocols and techniques. MRI systems have come a long way since those days and the research is still ongoing.

Roy – Who retired on May 31st after over 30 years in the field of MRI.

Don’t bother trying to explain polarity reversals or the other observed phenomenon (geophysics) of the magnetic poles to Yammer. He believes in astrology after all.

“NUCLEAR GRAPHITE DEVELOPMENT, OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS,
AND RESOLUTION OF THESE PROBLEMS AT THE HANFORD
PRODUCTION REACTORS”

https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/28/008/28008806.pdf?r=1&r=1

A canny reader will notice that charcoal briquettes (Kingsford or whatever brand of choice) are not mentioned in the iaea.org document. Although they do mention the use of a helium and carbon dioxide “gas blanket” over the graphite moderator (reactor core). Be careful there is math and graphs and data and stuff in the document.

Gee, I wonder if there were different engineering and nuclear physics design assumptions used in the Soviet reactors? Inconceivable.

For those that have an inkling of how this system works, the fact that the NORTH POLE location has changed should be… interesting.