Physics crank

Received this email the other day (cut and pasted in full except for the signature):

The origin of the Earth's magnetic field

The magnetic-dynamo theory is widely accepted. This system is ingenious but incredible complex and therefore unlikely. There is a simple solution.

A magnetic field is a fundamental phenomenon and is described in physics by the Electromagnetic Theory (EM). The EM is formulated by a number of empirical and mathematical derived formulas. Although EM is very successful the physical correctness of EM depends on empirical verification.

Is it possible that a characteristic of the magnetic field is incorrectly described by EM?

As long as not all the assumed fundamental characteristics of the magnetic field are empirical verified there is a possibility that EM is not completely correct. One of the fundamentals of EM is that two parallel electric currents attract each other; this is empirically stated. The assumed mathematical vector characteristics of EM state that a parallel proton and electron beam, where the particles move in the same direction, must reject.

This is never empirically verified.

A simple physics experiment can verify this. Requests to perform this experiment were denied without argument. (If you want to know the non-arguments theoretical physicists use read the correspondence with Nobel laureate Prof. dr. 't Hooft). This test is very important because when EM is false, in this respect, the origin of the Earth's magnetic field becomes clear and many other mysteries will be solved.

Summarized explanation: Below the Earth's crust the heat ionizes matter. The Earth rotates; the free electrons rotate with the Earth and therefore induce a magnetic field around the Earth comparable with a solenoid. The positive ions induce also a magnetic field. According to EM the magnetic field of the positive ions is contrary to the induced magnetic field of the electrons; the fields cancel out.

When EM is false in this respect the induced magnetic fields of the free electrons and the positive ions ad up; they do not cancel out. Then the rotation of the Earth and the ionization explains the magnetic field of the Earth. The observed altering of the Earth's magnetic field at the crust is caused by a “wobbling” of the crust in relation to the rotating ionized core.

Persons who have access to a proton beam can verify whether EM is correct or not, because EM predicts that the direction of the induced magnetic field of a proton beam is contrary to the direction of the induced magnetic field of an electron beam. This can easily be verified with a compass.

I send you this email because I need help. There are fundamental omissions in Theoretical Physics and they have to be eliminated. One simple experiment and Science knows!

It was sent to my Steve@HudsonValleyGeologist.com email so I assume he happened upon my blog.

For all you physics cranks out there with crackpot "theories" overturning all of modern physics - I'm a fucking geologist!  Yes, I did take a year of calculus-based physics back in college as an undergraduate decades ago, and I like reading about modern physics, but the Earth's magnetic field could be generated by fairies for all I know about electromagnetic fields and the dynamo effect (at least the nitty, gritty equations).

Like physicists would listen to me if I started advocating for this loon (and yes, he's a loon, because he sent this stupid email to a GEOLOGIST blogger at a fucking community college!).

Anyway, I participated in a secret ceremony with naked virgins at midnight at the crossroads to never reveal the details of the great scientific conspiracy (or maybe I just fantasized that in physics class one morning long ago as a bored sophmore).  Either way, we won't do the damn experiment just to spite you.  Unless there's money in it.  For a nice fat research grant, I'm sure I could convince our physics professor to work something out with me.  I have a compass, but I need a fucking proton beam - where does one get one of those anyway?