Defensive Weather Control - Tornado FINAL - 6

1 Proprietary Trade Secret - June 2011 | Morningstar Applied Physics, LLC
Morningstar Defensive Weather Control Proposal- Tornado Issues

Executive Summary
Morningstar Applied Physics, LLC offers a serious proposal designed to solve and
mitigate global cataclysmic weather problems regarding tornadoes. These huge disastrous
weather events combine severe fluid dynamic conditions as well as electromagnetic effects. We
propose an unusual method that potentially retards or eliminates the intensity of tornados and
water spouts. Basically a tornado achieves stability via rotation in a vertical direction in a funnel
anchored with a thunderstorm from a highly charged electron cloud. The solution involves
counter-directional motion that involves fluid dynamic actions supplemented with
electromagnetic fields. The following investigation suggests:
- There are two proposed devices that involve electrodynamic effects. The first creates a
circular electric field that rotates in a tornados counter-rotation direction to entrain ions that
counter the tornados intensity. The second device is an electron ejector/launcher that
interacts against the tornado cloud or along its trajectory at a separate location that is used to
create a diversionary cloud. This clouds displacement may create a tornado lift-off where the
funnel axis goes from vertical to the horizontal orientation.
o The proposed devices will also use a mobile system as well as devices used on existing electric
transformers located on telephone poles within an urban electrical distribution infrastructure. The
amount of electricity for transformers is usually a magnitude greater than megawatts of electrical
power. For an additional electrical portable device, the vehicle could use a fusion reactor similar
to the Morningstar RTEX system.
- The third activity proposes to look at effects that distort a tornado using mini-tornadoes that
would decrease the tornados intensity by using counter rotation. One option will also
consider using wind-turbines normally combined with a megawatt alternator. If these wind
alternators are changed to motors, the 150-foot diameter propeller will create a vortex wake
in the horizontal direction. The turbine moves in azimuth and the subsequent propeller wake
can induce a sidewise vortex that sweeps across the tornado that could cause a funnel lift-off.
Morningstar proposes a two-year effort for a fixed fee plus cost contract suggested for
$650 K. This involves an analytical effort that focuses upon increasing entropy to diminish a
tornados circulation pattern using magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), the Poynting field, and fluid
dynamic mini-vortex circulations. Proposed wind tunnel experimental activity will investigate
large wind-turbine generators, and electro-magnetic notions. We feel these solutions are
attainable to solve these technical problems for mankinds benefit.
I. Introduction
The control of weather is a very difficult problem that covers huge amounts of energy
and momentum. We clearly understand this. Although this is not trivial by any stretch of the
imagination, we undoubtedly have a responsibility to find a solution to these weather issues.
Mankind has always been fascinated with the idea of controlling weather to fashion a more
favorable environment. We have made some serious progress in these investigations, even
recently with regard to positively affecting our eco-systems; however, it is not enough, and often
times our efforts have had unforeseen negative effects.
Basically mankind has declared war upon the Earth as evidenced by the destruction of
our biosphere. We have covered the accessible surface with garbage; our creations include
dangerous aerosolized and water-borne chemicals. The sky is polluted; our atmosphere is grossly
altered from only 30 years ago. We have poisoned Mother Earths regenerative womb by
destroying oxygen producing algae and forests. Weather patterns have altered dramatically by
comparison to recorded history. Mankind possesses only the most rudimentary understanding or
no understanding of how to read the owners manual for the planet. If we do not meet these
challenges regarding weather, mankind will not survive; it is not a case of if but when.
There are leading-indicator environmental trends that expose the hidden consequences of
our collective destiny. Our imperfect understanding is evidenced by our shameful attachment to a
limited conventional wisdom. Our arrogance limits our understanding and forward progress to
thrive. Some scientifically reported conditions are steeped in uncertainties, where these
anomalies defy our current understanding. If we attempt to understand weather control, we need
to determine what is real and what is covered by controversial views to remove uncertainty. This
requires investigation to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Let us look at typical examples. Dust from the Gobi desert sweeps eastward across the
region to include a center of pollution in Beijing, which is a city that is surrounded by a valley on
three sides. These mountains prevent circulation of free air convection, constraining the Beijing
environment with persistent air-pollution. Once these Gobi dust storms migrate eastward, the
particulate materials move toward Japan and eventually across the Pacific to expose pollution to
the American Western Coast specifically near San Francisco, and the Los Angeles region.
As seen from space, a dust storm in Egypt starts moving westward toward the southern
Sahara headed for the Gibraltar Strait. Once reached, the dust cloud goes over the Atlantic with
two consequences. If it rotates counter-clockwise, the dust storm dies. If it moves clockwise, the
dust gains precipitation motion from the Atlantic and moves toward the Caribbean and the
southern region of America. Here, these storms result in hurricanes.
Figure 1. A subsequent dust storm movement over the Sahara to the Atlantic results in hurricanes
in the Caribbean and southern U.S. region.
As a possible means to partially mitigate or totally remove the precursor for creating
hurricanes, a nation such as Libya or Algeria could cultivate salt-water agriculture using
irrigation from the Mediterranean. Typical crops could subsist such as certain types of lettuce or
tomato in the Sahara Desert; or possibly bio-algae/mass which could create more energy than
exists in the Middle Easts current oil supply. The motivation for these nations to include salt-
water agriculture would provide a realistic economic growth in a sector currently engaged.
Adding large green patches of salt-water agri- and aqua-culture would change the solar constant
in the Sahara and these plants would actually trap the dust storms generated from Egypt. This
would remove the dust storm movement to the Gibraltar Straits and eventually the hurricane that
goes to America would vanish. At face value, this could mitigate or eliminate shock, death, and
expense raised by such unexpected natural events. However, this is not necessarily a positive
influence. The lack of hurricane water moisture may cause the southern region of America to
become an arid dry region; the South could become a desert just like the Sahara. What we are
suggesting is that some amount of salt-water agriculture could remove the harsher hurricane
strengths that could cause severe problems to the southern American region.
The total energy of the Indian Ocean 2004 tsunami was equivalent to about five megatons
of TNT (20 petajoules)
1
. A sudden movement of tectonic plates under the ocean or movement of
large amounts of ground that falls into the sea or sea floor basically generates a tsunami.
Consequently a wave moves radially from the center of the causal events. The wave that
transports in the deep water is only about 2 to 4 feet in height followed by a trough depression
with the same height that moves across the ocean at high speeds on the order of hundreds of
miles per hour. This wave couple radiates outward from the seismic event-point reaching a very
long circumferential length such as what one observes as similar in speed and pattern with a very
strong nuclear water blast. When this water reaches a shallow coast, local water initially moves
outward, away from the coastal region. This water accumulates at ocean depths to generate a
giant coastal wave. The seismic tsunami energy raises the waves to heights that could be as large
as 20 to 50 feet tall that then race across the land. These waves may have more than one cycle of
waves with either lesser or higher severity depending upon the initial actions.
Figure 2. The failure due to the Japanese nuclear reactor is a consequence of the tsunami and the spread of
radioactivity that will transport across the Pacific. Obviously this nuclear equipment is trashed.
This is very different from say, a deep-sea rogue wave where there is coalescence from
the cycle of ocean wave heights that reach a resonance creating a larger wave. These rogue
waves rise to great heights in the deep-sea surroundings. Tsunamis in the deeper region would
cause very little harm in these same circumstances. The danger occurs when it reaches the
coastal region where a gain of even an inch or two in height in deep water can have a devastating
effect upon the coastline.
1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake
Hurricanes operate in a significantly larger region and employ different hydrodynamic
terms than tornados. Air rotational velocity is a direct function of the distance from the central
core. The climate of a hurricane is also very unusual in that a central quiescent core exists at the
eye in a relatively calm region. Water feeds the energy from the oceans surface that increases
the size of the strength of the rain clouds within the storm. The mechanism based upon ocean
surface temperature or wave severity may not have a clear couple with the strength of the overall
hurricane. Because of the extent of such a storm, we will not investigate this problem directly.
We mention hurricanes solely for the purpose of comparison to a tornado; however, some of the
proposed activities may prove useful regarding hurricane control
1
.
A. Tornado Phenomenon
The focus of the proposed efforts is to investigate and possibly mitigate weather events
that result in tornados. The rationale is that these effects may be resolvable. Because of the
gigantic sizes of these events, we will first have to conduct smaller scaled studies in controlled
environments. Before we can discuss how to deal with these issues, we first need to understand
the phenomenon associated to these related events.
There are many theories about tornado creation
2
. We accept the view proposed by
research with Dyatlov
3
, a former Chief Scientist at the Sobolev Institute of Mathematics in
Novosibirsk. Dyatlov believed that ball lighting was initially created from the sun. Due to space
weather, this ball lightning would reach the Earths atmosphere as a filament line. Dyatlov
believes that if the filament aligns horizontally, nothing happens. However, if the filament
orients vertically, it entrains air particles with rotation about the local filament. Subsequently the
filament includes ball lightning internal to a tornado. If other ball lightning exists, it rotates
within the tornado mouth. The entrapped air rotates where air speed is proportional to an
inversion over the radial distance to the central core. Obviously, the amount of the velocity speed
is greater at the core region as a singularity that creates a large amount of damage. An Earth
tectonic plate, with intersection regions near ferromagnetic minerals, which are close to the
surface and which induce electrical fields, attract a tornado guiding their direction, speed and
possibly magnitude.
1
There are other large disaster activities. Another major concern is that Near Earth Objects (NEOs) have a certain
dangerous class of meteors that reenter in the earths atmosphere approximately 20 times a year. This is unusual in
that destruction during reentry produces greater than several kilotons of TNT in equivalent energy released,
comparable to the Hiroshima bomb during WW II. These explosive reentries result with local climatic changes.
2
There are several types of tornado intensity measures. The Fujita scale is different from the Saffir-Simpson scale
for hurricane strength in one very important way. The Fujita Scale rates the intensity of a tornado by examining the
damage caused by the tornado based on the type of wind damage after it has passed over a man-made structure. The
original Fujita scale was developed by T. Theodore Fujita and used in 1973. The scale was enhanced in 2007, with
rankings running from EF (Enhanced Fujita) - 0 through 5. Fujita scale numbers are assigned to tornadoes only after
the fact, after the National Weather Service inspects the damage.
3
During the time period of 1999, Dennis Bushnell, the NASA Langley Chief Scientist, asked Murad to interact with
Dyatlov because of common interests. As members of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the Siberian Branch,
Professor Dyatlov sponsored efforts by Merkulov and Dmitryev. This effort at Novosibirsk used Merkulov to
examine alien technology, Dmitryev who is the known-Russian ball lightning expert with publications going as far
back as 1966, and Dyatlov believed that these anomalies were caused by the inhomogeneous physical vacuum, often
refer to the Zero Point Field. Results are in the references that presented a theoretical paradigm to understand
weather events, the interactions of the sun as well as geological plate edges for tornados and other effects.
There are other ideas that warrant investigation. Weather disturbances such as tornados
kill many Americans every year and destroy property. These storms also discharge energy when
large amounts of water - changing from vapor to liquid - release the heat of vaporization in the
process. Using aerosols in the atmosphere such as Barium, silver and lead iodide dispersants,
crystals that promote nucleation of raindrops, can facilitate this process. If the rate of
condensation in storm clouds is controlled with rain produced in droughts and the severity of
storms in bad weather, this may impact a tornado. However, there may be a much better and
more powerful way to control the all-importance of condensation rate: negative ion injection into
the air could influence a tornados dynamics.
A stable situation is assumed when a tornado undergoes dynamic motion. It can normally
be coupled with a thunderstorm that requires some electron density concentration. If we are to
control a tornado, an approach may be to directly impact the tornado motion with anti-rotational
air, changing momentum or inducing a change in the atmospheric electron species distribution,
forcing a tornado to lift-off and change the vertical direction or lessen the vorticity strength to
reduce the rotation rate. If achieved, then one could argue that a rudimentary semblance of
weather control exists.
A recent understanding of a very large tornado suggests that they may be intertwined
between several smaller tornados. This results in a more complex situation and implies that one
of these synthesized mini-tornados may provide a valuable vulnerability, which may enable a
dangerous Tornado. Research should look at these situations where two tornados interact with
each other where they interact with anti-rotation or parallel rotation to lessen vorticity intensity.
B. Waterspout Phenomenon
Basically there is a relationship between a waterspout and a tornado with some specific
differences. A waterspout is an intense columnar vortex that has a small-diameter column of
rapidly swirling air in contact with a water surface. Waterspouts are almost always produced by
swiftly growing cumulus clouds without lightning or thunder. While it is often weaker than most
of its land counterparts, stronger versions do occur. Waterspouts do not suck up water; the water
seen in the main funnel cloud is actually water droplets formed by condensation. They may
assume many shapes and often occur in a series, called a waterspout family, produced by the
same upward-moving air current. Waterspouts are closely related to other atmospheric
phenomena such as tornadoes, whirlwinds, and fire storms.
The superstition that firing a cannonball or other projectile into a spout can break it up
has no scientific foundation. Contrary to popular opinion, a waterspout does not supposedly
suck up water to great heights; though it may lift the water level a meter or so at its point of
contact with the surface. For many years, they were called tornadoes over water, a definition still
in wide use.
However, as tornado researchers have learned more about atmospheric vortices, it has
become clear that several mechanisms can give rise to a strong vortex pendant from a cloud. The
rotation occurs at low levels in the atmosphere, so the resulting vortex does not extend very far
up into the cloud. Indeed, the rotation is not often detectable by radar, another indication that
waterspouts are a phenomenon is largely confined to the region below cloud base.
A waterspout is an intense columnar vortex (usually appearing as a funnel-shaped cloud)
that occurs over a body of water and is connected to a cloud. Waterspouts have a five-part life
cycle: formation of a dark spot on the water surface, spiral pattern on the water surface,
formation of a spray ring, development of the visible condensation funnel, and ultimately decay.
The nature of a waterspout may provide vulnerability with regard to exploiting the
behavior of a tornado. The problems that we are discussing are incredibly difficult. However, if
there is no direction and support to look at these problems, then there will be no solutions.
II. Discussion
One thing that Dyatlov mentioned in discussions is that if one follows with the
conventional wisdom, then all is well-behaved in an orderly universe. However, what happens
with an anomaly? Dyatlov claims that:
If an unknown anomaly occurs we have a different situation. If the data
represents the anomaly that is real, it is our responsibility as honest engineers
and scientists, to resolve the new paradigm where the anomaly is resolved as well
as all of the existing information that exists within the conventional wisdom.
Clearly this is very difficult and you learn far more.
The problem is that there is always new information regarding theories on weather
phenomenon. Once a sound understanding is achieved, then we might be able to discuss
approaches that could control weather. Although it may be controversial, there are many
interesting observable fluid dynamic and coupled electrodynamic weather events. If these effects
influence natural events, how can mankind wisely use science and technology to alter any
deleterious effects? If you look at typical well-behaved fluid dynamic or hydrodynamic
situations, customarily you ignore compressible flow or vorticity. Usually these activities create
severe mathematical problems and the hydrodynamicist tends to work around such issues. The
idea is to focus on only linear topographical solutions in lieu of real-time nonlinear problems.
The solution is to use vorticity to reduce or destroy the rotational velocity intensity; this requires
a more in-depth approach to quantifying hydrodynamic conditions.
Vorticity is usually defined as the curl of the velocity field. This is a simplification where
a tornado would have similar mathematical definitions by vorticity
4
. Moreover, vorticity for a
lifting wing on an airplane can define lift as the pressure difference below and above the wing
surface that is replaced by a vortex that leaves the wing wake region. The Crocco-vorticity
theorem has a more direct relationship because it not only includes the curl of the velocity but
also takes into account continuity, momentum and energy conservation.
A. Crocco-Vorticity Theorem
Vorticity is defined as: . v V = , This can be used to change the momentum equation
with a magnetic field as follows:
.
p
B B curl
1
v
2
v
t
v
v ) v (
t
v
0
2

,
V
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
V +
c
c
= V +
c
c
4
In a computational fluid dynamic (CFD) scheme, Murad looks at a different understanding of vorticity that is not
only a velocity variable that not only includes continuity but also with momentum and energy. These papers are in
the references and discussed later for the interested reader.
The velocity is v in three-dimensions, t is time, p is pressure, is density and B is the
magnetic field. This problem for a magnetohydrodynamic situation uses an electric and/or
magnetic field that characterize fluid behavior. Later issues worthy of investigation may crop up
with regard to this. Basically the Crocco-Vorticity theorem in its simplest form is:
. v s T h
t
v
0
, + V = V +
c
c
This simply states that there is an interaction between entropy s, temperature T, velocity
v, vorticity , and enthalpy. This is by far more conclusive than what is seen by just dealing with
vorticity. These derivations could be extended with additional terms such as pressure, electric or
magnetic fields. This equation is a very strong capability but is not treated to examine relevant
problems
5
.
What we are suggesting is that vorticity may destroy tornados. The issue here is to alter a
vortex in such a manner that it destroys the physical problem. There are more variables that are
needed to provide analytical insights to this problem including fluid dynamics with respect to the
impact of vorticity and the strength of the electric/magnetic fields. Continuity, momentum, and
energy conservation equations for these conditions are:
( )
( )
( )
( ) ( ) . E J v q v h
t
p h
, e E B J I p v v
t
v
, . 0 v
t
0
0
+ V + V = V +
c
c
+ + V = + V +
c
c
= V +
c
c
t
Variables are similar as previously mentioned in other equations with additions for J,
electrical current, E is the electric field, B is the magnetic field, q is the heat transfer, h
0
is the
constant enthalpy, is the fluid shear stress, and I is the identity matrix.
Analysis by Li, Merkle, et al (2011) examines these equations with the derivation for
including the Poynting vector, S. This changes the conservation equations as follows:
( )
( )
( )
( ) ( ). T k v S v h
t
u p h
, p v v
t
c
S
v
, . 0 v
t
0
em
0
em
2
V + V + = + V +
c
+ c
V = V + V +
c
|
|
.
|
\
|
+ c
= V +
c
c
t
t t
The shear stress components are from fluid dynamics while the thermal energy transport
is for conduction heat transfer. The superscript is for electromagnetic terms:
5
For example, a Russian wind tunnel test was performed where a supersonic shock appeared over a body.
Downstream to this body, a mechanism generated a vortex. When the vortex interacted with the supersonic
flowfield, the shock portion of the body in contact with the vortex literally disappeared. Clearly the vortex destroyed
the shock pattern and this reduced the shock pressure and temperature. This suggests that vorticity through the last
term on the RHS will alter entropy that removes the shock.
. B B
c
E E
2
1
u
and , B B
c
E E
B B
c
E E 1
2
0
em
2 2
0
em
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
|
.
|
\
|
+
V |
.
|
\
|
+ V = V
t
In a separate activity, we developed the Murad-Brandenburg equation, a conservation
equation for the Poynting field. Briefly, if the Poynting vector is a cross-product between the
electric and magnetic field, each of these fields is a hyperbolic wave equation. If true, then it is
obvious that the Poynting vector should also be a wave equation. This methodology includes
magnetic currents and sources in addition to the electric field components to examine if there are
specific variables to clearly evaluate sensitivities. This is as follows:
( ) . S J E B J
t c
1
B E 4 S
t
S
c
1
0 m e 2 e m
2
2
2
2 0
V V +
(
+
c
c
+ V V =
(
V
c
c
t
In addition to these equations, there are several interesting terms as a function of the
Poynting vector:
| | | |
| | . S E B 4 S
and , J E J B 4 E B
t 2
1
S
0 m e
2
0
e m
2 2
0
V V V V = V
+ +
c
c
= V
t
t
Subscripts m and e imply magnetic and electric fields respectively. Note that if there
were no electric or magnetic currents (J), these two electric or magnetic fields would be totally
uncoupled from each other. This means that without currents, one field cannot produce the other;
an electric current can cause a magnetic field and a magnetic current can produce an electric
field. Hence, one could have a pure electric or a pure magnetic field. However, since these
currents usually exist, both electric and magnetic fields are coupled; we are able to create one
field from the other field by these currents. On this basis, we insist upon including the magnetic
current and source terms though the final derivation.
This is the desired result or the Murad-Brandenburg equation. Note symmetry of terms
between the electric and magnetic effects on the RHS. The large denominator in the LHS for a
time derivative may be inconsequential. Moreover, both currents and source terms play a role.
This demonstrates that cross-coupling between the electric and magnetic fields create Poynting
vector components. The derivation also reveals that one cannot have a Poynting vector
exclusively in situations where only electric or magnetic field exists as separate entities.
However, this is an incorrect perception because of the first two terms in the RHS. Using
Maxwells equations can produce terms that are purely due to the magnetic field and electric
field as separate entities. This surprisingly suggests that a Poynting vector can be produced
independent of any coupling of the fields. This could have unusual consequences where
additional unaccounted forces may exist that can result in unexpected phenomenon and warrants
further investigations. Furthermore, the results also depend upon alignment of both the fields and
opposing field currents as well as the magnitude of the electric and magnetic source terms
assuming that the curl terms are not zero. Finally, we may be incorrect to consider the term
Poynting vector but rather should treat this as a Poynting field.
This equation is quite interesting. It has led to a torsion field that may represent
gravitation by notions similar to Gertsenshtein and Forward. This may become part of this effort
because of the theory that Dyatlov suggests there is a gravitic effect within the tornado or vortex
funnel. For this proposed analytical activity, we intend to propose the conservation equation that
uses the Poynting field with the influence of the vorticity and entropy effects that are required to
reduce the impact of these weather related events.
B. Tornado Mitigation
As mentioned, a tornado has a particular direction in its funnel. We suggest using several
deployed devices, which will generate miniature tornados that operate in the opposite direction
of the main tornado funnel threat. This will include cross-like structures that would be deployed
on top of electrical transformers. When signal systems are alerted about a nearby tornado, they
will generate a large circular electrical field that will also generate ions in the opposite direction
of the tornado. If there is any semblance of an electromagnetic artifact such as ionized gases
and/or ball lightning in the tornado, the systems action would oppose the motion of the tornado
to decrease the tornados intensity.
An obvious solution is to use a large fluid dynamic vortex generator. A means could
include a wind turbine that uses a 150-foot diameter three-blade propeller with a generator. If
conceivable, such a generator may operate as an electric motor that would actually drive the
propeller. This creates a swath of a propeller vortex wake that extends in azimuth. To direct the
wind turbine, this vortex may interact at 90 degrees from the tornado vortex axis that may create
an ameliorating situation to weaken tornado intensity or cause a filament to lift-off.
We have performed rudimentary vortex research in the past. This involved a simple
device tested by Dr. John Brandenburg of Orbitec during a Morningstar activity to resolve
solutions to the BP disaster in the Caribbean. This idea uses a maelstrom-like vortex device to
transfer oil from the bottom of the ocean up to a corral at the surface that traps the oil to be
collected by an oil tanker without using any pipeline delivery. This is shown in Figure 3. The
animated idea of the feasible concept shows the vortex driver and corral location. This concept
works very fast to successfully induce a filament to support an oil channel without using
expensive pipelines.
Figure 3. The animated idea of the feasible concept shows the vortex driver and corral location. This concept works
very fast to successfully induce a filament that can support an oil channel without using expensive pipelines.
In this event, we are looking at Croccos vorticity theorem where a circulation event will
induce with a simple tornado. The vortex would be generated tangentially at five different vortex
generators aimed at 60 degrees that combine with each other to maximize on the size final vortex
to reach above the surface.
III. Proposed Experiments
The experiment is designed to perform two separate programs for the tornado and
waterspout projects. The common ground for both of the phenomenon is the influence of using
vorticity that will impact both events anchored toward a cloud. Obviously, we have to think
about the types of devices from a size perspective. This could be overwhelming. Instead we first
need to identify what physical solutions are successful, and then incrementally approach a
scalable and deployable engineering solution.
A. Analytical Investigation
As previously mentioned, we intend to look at the appearance of the Poynting vector with
the Crocco Vorticity Theorem. This will serve our experimental investigations by defining the
conditions that will create electrical and magnetic sources and currents that could influence these
weather conditions. Tasks will be looked at to define suitable hardware that would satisfy these
analytical situations. Moreover, a CFD closed-form Navier Stokes approach will be used to see if
favorable unusual events can be induced.
In several of these references, Murad looked at a specific formulation to establish closed-
form Navier-Stokes solutions. Basically this methodology for a CFD solution can establish
relatively faster computations than using typical finite difference solutions. During this
development, the question was raised about the meaning of a cross-product term for the potential
functions and integration factors. The term in its most simplistic form considers the continuity
equation based upon vorticity. However, with the momentum and energy equations can also
create similar vorticity-like expressions. Only velocity distributions are only considered for most
hydrodynamic solutions.
We are suggesting that the meaning of vorticity may have more significance when
momentum and energy are included. For example, electromagnetic fields have no effect upon
continuity; however, they do impact on the conservation equations that include momentum and
energy. In Murads formulation, vorticity for each of these equations can be separated out from
the actual Navier-Stokes formulation and examine E-M fields to decrease a tornado vortex. We
will examine this effect during this proposed effort
6
.
B. Tornado Experiment
A wind-tunnel test will generate a vortex to define a reference tornado. This will
ascertain its physical reality and similitude flow pattern with a typical or given tornado. A test
device will use a singular or primary vortex with four additional mechanisms that generate
6
The Fujita Scale is very subjective, and varies according to experience. Based upon the previous footnote for
measures of intensity, we will look at this information from the perspective of including more momentum and
energy considerations for a more realistic real-time standard than the current approaches.
secondary vortices. These secondary vortexes will magnify the primary vortex. They will be
placed at several locations with the source used to create the tornado simulator. This capability
will be judged to understand and determine the degree of success. Changes to the strength of the
primary and secondary vortices will be a parameter to assess the success of the operation. Since
we are looking potentially at a means to generate counter-rotation, information gathered suggests
that one may require a tornado with the same size as the original storm to effectively provide
mitigation. This is not our intention. Clearly we intend to examine these events, as they would
affect the phenomenology during the interaction with a secondary tornado. The objective,
however, is to either reduce the intensity or cause a lift-off that removes the tornado threat.
Finally, we need to define when situations occur where smaller tornadoes are intertwined and, if
so, how do we counter that effect? These are all realistic concerns.
With the reference tornado, we will investigate the effects from a second tornado that
either produces intertwined objects or if there is cancellation due to either parallel or counter
rotation motion. These will also look at the difference in the intensity of these two bodies.
Moreover, effects due to moisture will also be investigated.
Similar tests will look at the possibility of using a large wind-turbine propeller that is
deployed in various locations creating an artificial tornado wind simulator. The current will
generate an alternator into an electric motor that rotates at high speed creating a vortex that could
sweep across the tornado flowfield. These tests will attempt to reduce the intensity of the tornado
or possibly create a tornado filament lift-off. Moreover, we will investigate if a field of wind
turbines is suitable for this situation. It is feasible, that despite its use, the vortex of the propeller
may not be strong enough to impact a tornado.
As a secondary part of this activity, an electrical source that generates a circular polarized
field will be examined with both the tornado simulator as well as the flow regulator. The device
will use different circular polarization with or against the rotation of the fluid dynamics of both.
A future device will have electrical circuitry to establish the circular field mechanism to simulate
an electric transformer. Each device will be tied to a network that detects a circular motion of air
and then communicates specific instructions to the entire network. Once the directions are
determined, these mechanisms will automatically produce a circular field that is in the opposite
rotation direction to cancel any potential for a tornado. This will be preventative especially if
these airflows occur at lower intensity levels than what occurs with a higher strength tornado that
would require an air system.
Let us provide a little more detail regarding the idea of using a transformer. A majority of
tornados are coupled with either thunderstorms or lightning. Lightning may either approach a
cloud to the ground or vice versa based upon the electron concentration. The notion here is to
remove or alter the electron concentration where a change may cause a tornado filament to lift-
off and change its orientation. If this occurs, mitigation has succeeded. Are there specific regions
in America where tornadoes do not occur or they do exist but are relatively weak? This
evaluation would assume that sufficient statistical information already exists
For example, severe thunderstorms are often preceded by a period of high positive ion
concentration in the air, sensed by humans and animals as increased irritability. After a
thunderstorm has passed the air feels freshened, this is due to high negative ion density after a
rainstorm. Negative ion concentration rises near waterfalls, for example this helps to make
Niagara Falls a favorite tourist spot. A history in this region is available in Figures 4 and 5.
Here is the idea: water from Niagara Falls generates a large amount of condensation and
negative ions, pushing a perimeter of tornado activity away from the falls (fig. 5). Releasing of
large amounts of negative ions by static electricity generators, and perhaps water vapor, may
reduce the severity of thunderstorms, which support tornados, by promoting condensation. For
the severe storm, this will take some of the wind out of its sails. As evidence of the possibility
of this storm severity mitigation by negative ions, the region downwind of Niagara Falls, the
biggest negative ion generator in North America, seems to have less severe Tornados and lower
numbers than regions to the immediate south or further East.
Figure 4. Relatively Current Tornado frequency for 2010 in New York State
There is another concern in terms for modeling a tornado. Using circulation based upon
velocity is insufficient which is why we suggested using Croccos vorticity theorem. An
alternative approach identified by Murad, suggests that circulation should consider momentum as
well as energy considerations. Momentum implies that air inertial mass as well as viscous effects
should reduce tornado rotation. This does not happen, if anything a tornado sustains to continue
damage. Thus there must be another source that generates momentum and energy transport that
drives the tornado. For example, pressure differences between the surface and higher altitudes
could transport momentum through the funnel. Moreover, heat transfer due to differences in
ground temperature compared to cloud temperature can also drive buoyancy. These effects can
create a flow of electrons or even moisture that can produce upward motion to sustain the
tornado. If these are the transport mechanism, then the obvious effect is to reduce flow and affect
electron concentrations thereby altering the tornados intensity. A circular electrical field can
also produce a similar effect that alters ion flow within a tornado to induce rotational drag.
Part of our experimental effort is to short-circuit this transport and result in tornado
mitigation. Some of these efforts are mentioned previously.
C. Electron Generators
We are proposing to create such a device that would be more efficient than seen on
Figure 6. The notion would be similar to using particle beam devices to use traveling wave tubes
(TWT) with circular polarized electric fields. The design on a transformer should be the
candidate size of about one cubic feet of space. Teslas concept was not really validated before
the device was torn down. Our proposed effort is to develop a scheme that creates an electron
distortion that would induce effects that reduce tornado strength or to possibly flip (lift-off) a
tornados vertical orientation. Once flipped, the impact of the tornado disappears unless it
touches down once again.
Figure 5. Tornado frequency for 1952-2007 in New York State where the number indicates severity: 1 = weak; 5 =
strong. Note the weak tornados in the region of Niagara Falls.
Figure 6. Although an exaggeration in terms of this project, Tesla had an interesting item looking at the generation
that could induce an electron storm. We intend to do this significantly smaller.
For example in the recent disaster in Joplin, Missouri
6
, the damage removed 124
electrical poles. If we assume that a device on the transformer is used every 6 or so poles, there
would have been about 20 transformers. Actually in an urban area, there are as many as a
transformer every three poles and you could find two transformers on a single pole. So obviously
the more away from the suburbs, one should expect to see less transformers. However, at rural
regions, the amount of voltage on the wires usually is at higher values than in the suburbs.
6
Although this monster tornado devastated the town of Joplin, the city initially raised the death toll to at least 139
and state officials said 100 people were still missing. State officials said there were 142 sets of human remains at the
morgue handling those killed by the storm. In the end, the final total was 160 dead. This year's tornado death toll at
520 plus makes 2011 the deadliest year for tornadoes since 1950. Until now, the highest recorded death toll by the
National Weather Service was in a single year at 519 in 1953. The tornado an EF-5 packing 200 mph winds also
injured more than 900 people. Tallying and identifying the dead and the missing has proven a very complex, delicate
and sometimes confusing situation.
D. Electric Transformer Capabilities
Generally a transformer mounted on an electrical service pole is usually at the level of
overhead cables as well as ground levels. Pole mounted transformers are reasonably small in size
and mass so that it is easy to install them on single pole structures, and larger units on two-pole
structures. This makes the transformers inaccessible, reducing the risk of injury to animals and
people to minimize vandalism.
Pole mounted transformers are used in extensive rural areas. These transformers range
from 16 kVA to 100kVA and transform 11,000 to 33,000 volts down to a low voltage of 400
volts. Pole-mounted transformers are the common breadbox transformers used for converting
distribution voltage to the 120/240-volt power used by homes and low-volume commercial
installations. These transformers range from Units ranging in size from 1 MVA (megawatt) to
250 MVA, in voltage classes from 480 V to 230 kV. Single-phase pole mounted transformers are
usually rated from 167 kVA up to 500 kVA with high voltages. Low voltages of 600 Volts and
below are common. Single and three-phase transformers are common in the U.S.
Thus each transformer can provide significant amounts of electrical power on the order
of half a megawatt that could be used especially as energy to control a tornado. Moreover, it may
be wiser to use these resources that may eventually be destroyed by the tornado storm. Since
each may cost about $250 K per transformer, if an electrical device is used with these
transformers that could remove a tornado at each of these locations within a network, the costs of
a recommended device can be effective at, say $150 K. This is a sizeable sum; however,
considering the damage that occurs to the transformers if hit by a tornado, these costs would be
more than ample to provide a cost benefit.
E. Deployable Systems
Let us look at the situation of deploying a mobile unit. A possible approach is a device
we call the Ion Launcher in Figure 7. The idea is that this could be used to replace the electrode
array directly deployed on transformers that currently exist. The semi-tractor is used in
environments that are not part of such transformers that are available.
Figure 7. The Ion-Launcher is a Semi-Tractor version with an inflatable tower would be used to engage with a
thunderstorm that interacts with a tornado.
Electrode
array
Negative
Ion cloud
Extendable-Retractable Tower
Generator
H.V.
Transformer
Semi-
truck
The purpose of the ion injector or launcher is to create a large atmospheric region that
will impact the dynamics of the tornado. If a stable tornado exists where a vertical orientation is
determined, it is feasible that an electron concentration exists for this stability. The concentration
could involve a decrease or increase as a function of height or a large surplus at high altitudes.
If we accept the Dyatlovs ball lightning stretched filament being a tornado, then clearly
the tension would be a function of the ground and the high altitude region. The idea of the ejector
is to use electrical energy from a transformer or a similar device within a mobile generator to
find a secondary location or target to create an electron concentration. If this is located at the
original location and either decreases the intensity of the electron distribution, the tornado should
diminish. The other option is if the concentration is generated at a diversionary location, the
tornado filament will be attracted by this new location. This may create the tornados orientation
from the vertical to the horizontal location. With the tornado lift-off, it lacks its dangerousness
and the issue is successfully mitigated. This is similar to the comment previously made regarding
a waterspout where the supporting cloud suddenly moves or disappears. In fact this would be a
real-world test using waterspouts that appear in Australia. Moreover, radar systems can be used
to affect electron concentrations in a cloud. An AEGIS cruiser would be an ideal test experiment.
Figure 8. This shows the typical response that would be involved in a scenario to cover the thunderstorm mitigation
to minimize possibility of a tornado.
F. Analytical and Experimental Costs
Several specific problems exist. This includes a network that involves a flow circulation
detector that operates at specific velocities as well as defined direction. This mechanism will be
placed on top of transformers that are part of this network. Each of these devices will create a
powerful circular electric field. It will draw its capacity from all of the power available from
within the transformer. This is part of the electrical system as part of this device.
There will be integration of both activities for wind tunnel tests. This activity involves a
cost plus fixed fee (8%) contract. Morningstar will be the contractor and use a sub-contractor
with Orbitec at Madison, Wisconsin. The Principle Investigator is Paul Murad of Morningstar at
703-759-2028 (pm@morningstarap.com) with assistance from Dr. John Brandenburg at Orbitec.
Estimated costs are:
Wind tunnel tests $300 K
Machine Shop Fabrication $100 K
Computational Fluid Dynamics $50 K
Labor/Interim and final reports/transportation $200 K
TOTAL $650 K
Paul Murad, President/CEO/Chief Technologist
Mr. Murad has over 25 years of public service as a senior technology analyst for the Department
of Defense looking at foreign advanced and game-changing technology as well as defining future
U.S. satellite systems for the next twenty years. He started several technical conferences to
include the First High Frequency Gravity Wave Meeting in 2003 as well as five STAIF
Conference that covered new propulsion technology, energy devices and communications issues.
With18 years in the private sector service, he worked as a scientist within diverse technical
communities. In these situations, he was involved in advanced state of the art programs from the
Apollo, the NERVA Nuclear Rocket Engine, the Space Shuttle and numerous tactical and
strategic missile systems as well as the Navy High Energy Laser project. Other activities
involved working on the National Aerospace Plane project, supporting Navy projects on
advanced future jet turbine engines and identifying threats to support SDI. He also served as a
corporate executive in several aerospace corporations. Mr. Murad is the brains and brawn
boots-on-the-ground asset of Morningstar, his experience in the field of science combined with
his acumen as a leader bring an impeccable value to the corporation. He is currently the CEO of
the Morningstar Applied Physics, LLC.
Dr. John Brandenburg - Chief Physicist
Dr. Brandenburg received his PhD in 1981 on Magnetic Confinement of Plasmas for Controlled
Fusion, and is a plasma physicist working on the physics of chemical and plasma rocket engines
at Orbitec. He has worked extensively on plasma confinement in magnetic fields for fusion and
for space propulsion, as well as advanced theories of vortex hydrodynamics for application in
vortex rocket engines, both using chemical and plasma exhausts. He also has worked on a full
range of physics and engineering problems involving human colonization of space. He also
works on space plasma technologies and advanced space propulsion. He is performing research
on air plasmas. He worked on plasma propulsion at Florida Space Institute and pioneered the
MAX concept of combined electrostatic and microwave confinement of plasmas for fusion,
before coming to Orbitec. He was pioneer in creating electrodeless atmospheric pressure plasmas
in air using microwaves. Before this he was at The Aerospace Corporation, where one of his
duties was as principle investigator of the MET (Microwave Electro-Thermal) propulsion
project. He also performed an architecture study for a Human Mars Mission using solar electric
propulsion. He also performed research on Fusion using colliding magnetic vortex toroids called
the CMTX experiment. He also did work on Kaluza-Klein theory of Field Unification for
purposes of space propulsion. Before coming to Aerospace Corporation Dr. Brandenburg was a
researcher at Research Support Instruments (RSI) where he specialized in making controlled
laboratory plasmas for the CMTX fusion experiment and plasma uses ranging from air plasmas
for surface sterilization, and the MET microwave electric thruster. He also worked as an
independent consultant on Space Missile Defense, Directed Energy Weapons, and space rocket
plume phenomenology, and also at Mission Research Corporation and Sandia National
Laboratories on plasmas for controlled fusion and similar topics.
IV. Conclusion
Experimental devices are proposed for dealing with tornado and waterspout events; the
latter may provide insights to better understand characterizing a tornado to exploit these
capabilities. The proposed activity will involve several anti-tornado scenarios that operate with
multi-faceted hardware components that use electrical and hydrodynamic mechanisms to create
or mitigate tornado storms. The tasks will also extend technology maturation during this
investigation. These effects should cancel or decrease the intensity of the tornado that includes a
test experiment and analytical investigation. Morningstar looks forward to challenge this very
serious problem.
References
A. N. Dmitryev: Natural Self-Luminous Formations, Part One: Problems of Inhomogeneous Physical Vacuums,
William R. Nelson Institute for Public Affairs, 2001, James Madison University.
V. L. Dyatlov: Polarization Model of the Non-Uniform Physical Vacuum, William R. Nelson Institute for Public
Affairs, 2001, James Madison University.
R. L. Forward, Guidelines to Antigravity, American Journal of Physics, Vol. 31, pp166-170, (1963).
M. E. Gertsenshtein, Sov. Phys. JETP 14, 84 (1962).
D. Li, C. Merkle, W. M. Scott, D. Keefer, T. Moeller, and R. Rhodes: Hyperbolic Algorithm for Coupled
Plasma/Electromagnetic Fields Including Conduction and Displacement Currents, AIAA J Vol. 49, No. 5, May
2011, pp 909-920.
V. I. Merkulov: Electrogravidynamic Model of a UFO, a Tornado and a Tropic Hurricane, William R. Nelson
Institute for Public Affairs, 2001, James Madison University.
P. A. Murad, J. Brandenburg: The Murad-Brandenburg Equation: A Wave Partial Differential Expression for the
Conservation of the Poynting Vector/Field, to be published at AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting in 2012.
P. A. Murad: Exploring Gravity and Gravitational Wave Dynamics, Part II: Gravity Models, in Proceedings of
Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-2007), edited by M. S. El-Genk, AIP
Conference Proceedings 746, Melville, New York, 2006.
P. A. Murad: Closed-Form Navier-Stokes Solutions to Fluid Dynamic Equations Related to Magneto-
hydrodynamics, Paper No. AIAA-2006-4507 presented at the 42
nd
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion
Conference and Exhibit, 9-12 July 2006, Sacramento, California.
P. A. Murad: Closed-Form Solutions to the Transient/Steady-State Navier-Stokes Fluid Dynamic Equations,
STAIF-2006, Albuquerque, New Mexico, February 2006.
P. A. Murad, V. L. Dyatlov, A. N. Dmitriev: Comparing the Inhomogeneous Physical Vacuum and the Zero-Point
Field, Proceedings of the Science 2000 Congress, St. Petersburg, Russia, July 3-8, 2000.
P. A. Murad: "Hyper-Light Dynamics and the Effects of Relativity, Gravity, Electricity and Magnetism", IAF Paper
No. 99-S.6.02 presented at the 50
th
International Astronautical Congress in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Oct. 4-
8, 1999, Acta Astronautica, vol. 47, no. 2-9, July-November, 2000, pp. 575-588.
P. A. Murad: "Hyper-Light Dynamics, Relativity, Gravity, Electricity, and Magnetism", AIAA Paper No. 99-2696,
to be presented at the 35
th
AIAA/ASME/ SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference in Los Angeles, Calif. 20-23
June 1999.
P. A. Murad: "An Extended Navier-Stokes Algorithm and The Challenges of Relativistic Fluid Dynamics", AIAA
Paper No. 99-0562, presented at the 37
th
Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Jan 11-14, 1999, Reno, Nevada.
P. A. Murad: "A Framework for Developing Navier-Stokes Closed-Form Solutions", AIAA Paper No. 95-0479
presented at the 33
rd
Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, January 9-12, 1995.
P. A. Murad: "A Numerical and Stability Analysis of the Boundary Layer Equations", AIAA Paper No. 76-340,
presented at the AIAA 9
th
Fluid and Plasma Dynamics Conference, July 1976.

Defensive Weather Control - Tornado FINAL - 6

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Defensive Weather Control - Tornado FINAL - 6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 Proprietary Trade Secret - June 2011 | Morningstar Applied Physics, LLC

Morningstar Defensive Weather Control Proposal- Tornado Issues

You might also like