Jump to content

Talk:Brunhes–Matuyama reversal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Date for this reversal?

[edit]

By what dating method was this reversal event determined to have occurred?Kenny56 04:08, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. I don't know the answer. It is a common horizon across a lot of sequences, so the asnwer is probably that it occurs in some that can be very well dated. William M. Connolley 20:34, 28 December 2005 (UTC).[reply]
Can you please clarify the question? Are you interested in the dating method used to obtain the 0.78 Myr age, or the method used to determine that the reversal occured in the first place?--Octupole 21:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm certainly interested in, "how was it first dated to 780 kyr"? By 1976 it was used (hayes imbrie shackleton) to date sediment cores; that implies it couldn't have been dated *from* sediment cores... William M. Connolley 22:10, 30 December 2005 (UTC).[reply]
The dating method used to obtain the 0.78 Myr age.Kenny56 05:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it was dated using the K-Ar and Ar-Ar methods.Octupole 03:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Effect

[edit]

It would be great to have some description of the effect this had on the planet. Hyacinth 09:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure it has one. I've spoken to ice core people who looked for it in the EPICA core, but only (I think) in terms of subtle effects. No-one seemed to be epecting anything major William M. Connolley 10:53, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When is the earth`s magnetic field going to reverse again and what will be its effects? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ? (talk • contribs)

No one knows William M. Connolley 17:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is to say, no one knows WHEN. Certain effects can be anticipated, see http://www.google.com/search?q=effects+of+geomagnetic+pole+reversal. 76.247.47.238 20:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fast?

[edit]

This [1] adds text from a report on a paper not yet published, which is dubious William M. Connolley (talk) 07:35, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I went to the Geophysical Research Letters page and I can't confirm that the paper is in press. The claim about rapid polar wander during reversals is indeed controversial, but some of its proponents are distinguished scientists, so it deserves a mention. However, the reversal in question is about 15 million years ago, so it's not directly relevant to the Brunhes-Matuyama reversal. It would be more appropriate to add an entry in the main article on geomagnetic reversals with citations for the earlier Steens Mountain work. RockMagnetist (talk) 14:40, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bogue, S. W., and J. M. G. Glen (2010), Very rapid geomagnetic field change recorded by the partial remagnetization of a lava flow, Geophys. Res. Lett., doi:10.1029/2010GL044286 (doi not created yet), in press. (accepted 20 August 2010) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:08, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Goodness Chris, how do you manage it :X ResMar 18:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm impressed too. There still remains the question - doesn't this really belong on a more general page on reversals? RockMagnetist (talk) 16:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Brunhes–Matuyama reversal. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:06, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There was no need for an archive - the original link worked. Not the fault of Cyberbot II, I think. RockMagnetist(talk) 18:28, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brunhes–Matuyama reversal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:08, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brunhes–Matuyama reversal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:22, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brunhes–Matuyama_reversal&oldid=1198856594"