Peter Warlow's Tippe-Top Theory

In my article on geomagnetic reversal, posted a few days ago, I did not mention the possibility that Earth may have flipped over so that we would have true north pointing true south. The reason for this was that I found such a possibility impossible. However, as pointed out to me by Freddie Thornton, there is a way to flip an object as large as Earth on its head without too much effort. If the mass distribution of our planet is similar to that of a Tippe-Top, a reversal could easily happen as a consequence of turbulence in the Birkeland current going through our solar system. This Tippe-Top theory was fist proposed by Peter Warlow, based on Immanuel Velikovsky book Worlds in Collision.

As it happens, Earth does have an uneven mass distribution, with most of the continents clustered north and most of the oceans to the south. This is most likely due to an asymmetric expansion of Earth's crust. Over the years, this expansion may have influenced the Earth's spin, making it at times quite suddenly flip on its axis.

Earth's expansion as seen from the south pole

Adding to the plausibility of this theory is the fact that ancient myths mention catastrophic events in which the Sun started to move in strange directions and the night sky became different. As pointed out to me by Greg Hummel, the ancient Egyptians tell of times when the sun rose in the west.

Clearly, such a reversal of our Planet's orientation would be associated with much flooding and great upheavals. The great flood mentioned in the Bible, and the lost city of Atlantis mentioned by Plato, may all be related to a pole reversal.

The latest known geomagnetic reversal happened 41000 years ago, which would set the date of the great upheavals very far back in human history. However, there may have been a more recent and short lived reversal as well. The exact time and number of geomagnetic reversals have yet to be fully mapped out.

Geomagnetic Reversal

A geomagnetic reversal is a change in a planet's magnetic field such that the positions of magnetic north and magnetic south are interchanged. This happened briefly on Earth some 41000 years ago, but apart from this the current magnetic arrangement has been intact for 780,000 years. Before that time, geomagnetic reversals have happened on average every 300,000 years, with no clear patter.

The irregularity and long time spans between pole reversals on Earth is in stark contrast to our Sun which sees a pole reversal every 11 years, synchronized neatly with the solar cycle. Interestingly, there is no visible change in the Sun's surface features corresponding to its pole shifts. Yet we know that changes in magnetic fields are always associated with changes in electric currents.

The electric currents associated with astronomic bodies are interstellar Birkeland currents, so it's reasonable to assume that pole reversals are due to reversals in these currents. With the Sun at the center of our local interstellar Birkeland current, it is the body most affected by it. The situation on Earth is more like a turbulence in the outskirts.

If this is how things hang together, we should be able to see a change related to the Sun. Its chromosphere and corona should display a reversal in their overall twist. Correspondingly, a geomagnetic reversal on Earth is likely to be associated with a change in weather patterns. The jet stream is likely to reverse. Ocean currents may also be affected. The Scandinavian Ice Sheet which is currently kept down due to the Gulf Stream and persistent mild air flows from the Atlantic may suddenly come back.

A possible reason for the stability of Earth's magnetic field relative to the Sun is that our jet stream is powered in part by the rotation of our planet, as suggested by Dr. Gerald Pollack. A reversal in the Birkeland current may not always be enough to turn the jet stream around. It may merely weaken the jet stream without reversing it. With the jet stream continuing in its current direction, the direction of Earth's magnetic field will remain as it is.

The magnetic field of our planet corresponds to the direction of the jet stream

However, should the local Birkeland current manage to reverse Earth's jet stream, a geomagnetic reversal would follow. But the strength of the magnetic field will not be as strong, and the jet stream will be weak. This is because the rotation of our planet will continue largely unaffected. Earth's own contribution to the jet stream will always be in the direction of its rotation, no matter which way the Birkeland current twists. The jet stream is therefore always at its strongest when the Birkeland current twists in the same direction as our our planet is rotating, and at its weakest when the two factors are in opposition to each other.

But the rotation speed of Earth is not completely independent of the Birkeland current. When the current twists in opposition to Earth's rotation, Earth slows down by a tiny bit. When the current is in tune with Earth's rotation, Earth speeds up. Since our local Birkeland current appears to correspond to the sunspot cycle, we should see changes in Earth's rotation speeds corresponding to this. This has been partially confirmed. Earth slows down and speeds up in its rotation in cycles of about 25 years, roughly twice the period of a solar cycle.

Interestingly, volcanic activity always sees an uptick during Earth's periodic slow downs. A pole reversal, which would be associated with a relatively strong slow down, is therefore likely to come with much volcanic activity.

A pole reversal would also come with a dramatically weaker jet stream, with much instability in our weather patters as a consequence, making it harder to grow crops. Not only will we see a need to move food production due to changes in the climate, the production will be hampered by instability. Considerable hardships can therefore be expected if a geomagnetic reversal was to happen.

The Thickness of Earth's Crust

If Earth has expanded to a diameter twice that of its original size, and this has happened with no addition of matter, as proposed by Peter Woodhead, we can calculate that the crust of our planet is no more than 287 km thick. The math for this can be found at the end of this post.

This does not square well with Jan Lamprecht's observation that the deepest earthquakes we come across have their epicenter about 700 km below ground, which suggest to us that Earth's crust is at least 700 km thick.

Earth's expansion must in part have been due to added matter. The mechanism for this, suggested in my book, is radioactive decay. When atoms decay, they multiply. Where there once was one atom, there are suddenly two. The volume of matter increase when it decays through radiation.

For the crust to be 700 km, rather than 287 km thick, the bulk of our planet's crust must have more than doubled from when it was created, assuming a doubling of its radius over this same time period.

Cross section of a hollow planet with internal electric pressure

Here's the calculation for Earth's crust, assuming no additional matter, as proposed by Peter Woodhead:

The formula for the volume of a sphere is V = 4/3 pi r^3

Let volume of Earth's current crust be V_crust
Let volume of Earth's current hollow be V_hollow
Let V_total = V_crust + V_hollow
Let volume of Earth's original crust be V_original
Let volume of Earth's original hollow be 0

Since Earth expanded with no added matter, we have V_crust = V_original

From above, we have V_crust = V_total - V_hollow

Substitute V_original = V_total - V_hollow

Solve for V_hollow we get V_hollow = V_total - V_original

4/3 pi r_hollow^3 = 4/3 pi r_total^3 - 4/3 pi r_original^3

Simplify by getting rid of constants: r_hollow^3 = r_total^3 - r_original^3

Let r_total be 2 and r_original be 1, to reflect the idea that r_original is half of r_total:

r_hollow^3 = 8 - 1

r_hollow = 7^(1/3)

r_hollow = 1.91
r_total = 2
r_original = 1

From this we get that the radius of the hollow is 95.5 % of the total current radius. Only 4.5% of the radius is the crust. Given that Earth's radius is 6371 km, we get that its crust is currently 287 km thick.

Seeing Double

In this video from the Electric Universe community, emphasis is put on the fact that much of what is observed in the universe comes in pairs, and that the two orb shape is far more common than should be expected from standard theory. The explanation for this, presented by Wallace Thornhill, is that gravity is not the main force in the universe. Rather, Birkeland currents are behind most of what is observed.

Birkeland currents twist as they move through space. The reason for this, suggested in an earlier post, is that there is an imbalance in the electric force. In order to restore balance within Birkeland currents, negative charge have to move farther than positive charge, and a twisting pattern is the most efficient way to achieve this.

What should be noted is that the two orb model of the photon is at the heart of this explanation.

The dielectric photon as a composition of three negative and three positive particle quanta

Considering that the two orb photon makes up the dielectric component of the aether, it appears that we have found the origin of the two orb shapes so frequently seen in nature. The shapes can be traced back to the photon.