Connect with us

Planet Earth

Lovelock’s hypothesis: what if the earth is a living organism?

Our planet is unique. Just as each of us is different from the stone statues of Roman gods, the Earth is different from Mars, Venus and other known planets. Let us tell the story of one of, perhaps, the most amazing and controversial hypotheses of our time – the Gaia hypothesis, which invites us to look at the Earth as a living organism.

The Earth is our “smart home” 

James Ephraim Lovelock celebrated his centenary last summer. Scientist, inventor, engineer, independent thinker, a person known not so much for his inventions as for the amazing assumption that the Earth is a self-regulating superorganism that, for most of its history, over the past three billion years, has maintained favorable conditions for life on the surface … 

Named for Gaia – the goddess of ancient Greek mythology, personifying the Earth – the hypothesis, unlike traditional sciences, suggests that the global ecosystem of the planet behaves like a biological organism, and not like an inanimate object governed by geological processes. 

In contrast to traditional earth sciences, Lovelock proposes to consider the planet not as a set of separate systems – the atmosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere and biosphere – but as a single system, where each of its components, developing and changing, influences the development of other components. Moreover, this system is self-regulating and, like living organisms, has mechanisms of inverse relationship. Unlike other known planets, by using inverse relationships between the living and inanimate worlds, the Earth maintains its climate and environmental parameters in order to remain a favorable home for living beings. 

From the very moment of its appearance, this idea was rightly criticized and was not accepted by the scientific community, which does not prevent it, however, from exciting the imagination and collecting many supporters around the world. Despite the centenary, Lovelock now, like most of his long life, remaining under fire of criticism, continues to defend the theory, modifies and complicates it, continues to work and engage in scientific activities. 

Is there life on Mars 

But before turning his attention to life on Earth, James Lovelock was busy looking for life on Mars. In 1961, just four years after the USSR launched the first artificial satellite of our planet into space, Lovelock was invited to work at NASA. 

As part of the Viking program, the agency planned to send two probes to Mars to study the planet and, in particular, search for traces of the vital activity of microorganisms in its soil. It was the instruments for detecting life, which were supposed to be installed on board the probes, that the scientist developed, working in Pasadena, at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a research center that creates and maintains spacecraft for NASA. By the way, he literally worked side by side – in the same office – with the famous astrophysicist and popularizer of science Karl Sagan. 

Gale Crater / © wikipedia
Gale Crater / © wikipedia

His job was not purely engineering. Biologists, physicists and chemists worked next to him. This allowed him to dive headlong into experiments to find ways to detect life and look at the problem from all sides. 

As a result, Lovelock asked himself: “If I myself were on Mars, how could I understand that there is life on Earth?” And he answered: “By her atmosphere, which defies any natural expectations.” Free oxygen makes up 20 percent of the planet’s atmosphere, while the laws of chemistry say that oxygen is a highly reactive gas – and all of it must be bound in various minerals and rocks. 

Lovelock concluded that life — microbes, plants, and animals, constantly metabolizing matter into energy, converting sunlight into nutrients, releasing and absorbing gas — is what makes the Earth’s atmosphere what it is. In contrast, the Martian atmosphere is virtually dead and in low-energy equilibrium with almost no chemical reactions.

In January 1965, Lovelock was invited to a crucial meeting on the search for life on Mars. In preparation for an important event, the scientist read a short book by Erwin Schrödinger “What is Life”. That same Schrödinger – a theoretical physicist, one of the founders of quantum mechanics and the author of the well-known thought experiment. With this work, the physicist made a contribution to biology. The last two chapters of the book contain Schrödinger’s reflections on the nature of life. 

Schrödinger proceeded from the fact that a living organism in the process of existence continuously increases its entropy – or, in other words, produces positive entropy. He introduces the concept of negative entropy, which living organisms must receive from the outside world in order to compensate for the growth of positive entropy, leading to thermodynamic equilibrium, and therefore to death. In a simple sense, entropy is chaos, self-destruction and self-destruction. Negative entropy is what the body eats. According to Schrödinger, this is one of the main differences between life and inanimate nature. A living system must export entropy to keep its own entropy low. 

This book inspired Lovelock to ask: “Wouldn’t it be easier to search for life on Mars, looking for low entropy as a planetary property, than to burrow into regolith in search of Martian organisms?” In this case, a simple atmospheric analysis using a gas chromatograph is sufficient to find low entropy. Therefore, the scientist recommended NASA save money and cancel the Viking mission. 

To the stars 

James Lovelock was born on July 26, 1919 in Letchworth, a small town in Hertfordshire in the south-east of England. This city, built in 1903 60 kilometers from London and is part of its green belt, was the first settlement in the UK, established in accordance with the urban concept of the “garden city”. At the beginning of the last century, it was the idea that captured many countries about the megalopolises of the future, which would combine the best properties of a city and a village. James was born into a working-class family, his parents had no education, but they did everything for their son to receive it. 

James Lovelock / © wikipedia
James Lovelock / © wikipedia

In 1941, Lovelock graduated from the University of Manchester – one of the leading British universities from among the famous “Universities of red brick”. There he studied with Professor Alexander Todd, an eminent English organic chemist, Nobel Prize laureate for research on nucleotides and nucleic acids. 

In 1948, Lovelock received his M.D. from the London Institute of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. During this period of his life, the young scientist is engaged in medical research and invents the devices necessary for these experiments. 
Lovelock was distinguished by a very humane attitude towards laboratory animals – to the point that he was ready to conduct experiments on himself. In one of his studies, Lovelock and other scientists were looking for the cause of damage to living cells and tissues from frostbite. The experimental animals – the hamsters on which the experiment was carried out – were to be frozen, and then warmed and brought back to life. 

But if the freezing process was comparatively painless for animals, then defrosting suggested that the rodents needed to put red-hot tablespoons on their chests to warm their hearts and force blood to circulate through the body. It was an extremely painful procedure. But unlike Lovelock, his fellow biologists did not feel sorry for laboratory rodents. 

Then the scientist invented a device that had almost everything that you can expect from an ordinary microwave oven – in fact, this was it. You could put a frozen hamster there, set a timer, and after a set time he woke up. One day, out of curiosity, Lovelock warmed up his lunch in the same way. However, he did not think to get a patent for his invention in time. 

In 1957, Lovelock invents the electron capture detector, an unusually sensitive device that revolutionized the measurement of ultra-low concentrations of gases in the atmosphere and, in particular, in the detection of chemical compounds that pose a threat to the environment.  

Electronic capture detector / © wikipedia
Electronic capture detector / © wikipedia

In the late 1950s, the device was used to demonstrate that the planet’s atmosphere was full of residues from the pesticide DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane). This extremely effective and easy-to-obtain pesticide has been widely used since World War II. For the discovery of its unique properties, the Swiss chemist Paul Müller was awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1948. This award was awarded not only for the saved crops, but also for the millions of human lives saved: DDT was used during the war to combat malaria and typhus among civilians and military personnel. 

It was only by the end of the 50s that the presence of a dangerous pesticide was discovered almost everywhere on Earth – from penguin liver in Antarctica to breast milk of nursing mothers in the United States. 

The detector provided accurate data for the 1962 book “Silent Spring” by the American ecologist Rachel Carson, which launched the international campaign to ban the use of DDT. The book argued that DDT and other pesticides caused cancer and that their use in agriculture posed a threat to wildlife, especially birds. The publication was a landmark event in the environmental movement and caused a wide public outcry, which eventually led to the ban of agricultural use of DDT in the United States in 1972 and then around the world. 

Later, after starting work at NASA, Lovelock traveled to Antarctica and with the help of his detector discovered the ubiquitous presence of chlorofluorocarbons – artificial gases that are now known to deplete the stratospheric ozone layer. Both of these discoveries were extremely important for the planet’s environmental movement. 

So when the US Aeronautics and Space Administration planned their lunar and planetary missions by the early 1960s and began looking for someone who could create sensitive equipment that could be sent into space, they turned to Lovelock. Having been fascinated by science fiction since childhood, he accepted the offer with enthusiasm and, of course, could not refuse. 

Planets living and dead 

Working at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory provided Lovelock with an excellent opportunity to receive the first evidence of the nature of Mars and Venus transmitted by space probes. And these were, undoubtedly, completely dead planets, strikingly different from our flourishing and living world. 

The earth has an atmosphere that is thermodynamically unstable. Gases such as oxygen, methane and carbon dioxide are produced in large quantities but coexist in stable dynamic equilibrium. 

Earth's atmosphere / © wikipedia
Earth’s atmosphere / © wikipedia

The strange and unstable atmosphere we breathe requires the presence of something on the surface of the Earth that can continuously synthesize vast quantities of such gases, as well as simultaneously remove them from the atmosphere. At the same time, the planet’s climate is quite sensitive to the abundance of polyatomic gases such as methane and carbon dioxide. 

Lovelock gradually develops an idea of ​​the regulatory role of such cycles of substances in nature – by analogy with metabolic processes in the body of an animal. And earthly life is involved in these processes, which, according to Lovelock’s theory, not only participates in them, but also learned to maintain the necessary conditions of existence for itself, having entered into some form of mutually beneficial cooperation with the planet. 

And if at first all this was pure speculation, then in 1971 Lovelock had the opportunity to discuss this topic with the outstanding biologist Lynn Margulis, the creator of the modern version of the theory of symbiogenesis and the first wife of Carl Sagan. 

Margulis co-authored the Gaia hypothesis. She suggested that microorganisms should play a connecting role in the field of interaction between life and the planet. As Lovelock noted in one of his interviews, “It would be fair to say that she put flesh in the bones of my physiological concept of a living planet.” 
Due to the novelty of the concept and its inconsistency with traditional sciences, Lovelock needed a short and memorable name. It was then, in 1969, a friend and neighbor of the scientist, physicist and writer, Nobel laureate, and author of the novel Lord of the Flies, William Golding, proposed to call this idea Gaia – in honor of the ancient Greek goddess of the Earth. 

How it works 

According to Lovelock’s concept, the evolution of life, that is, the totality of all biological organisms on the planet, is so closely related to the evolution of their physical environment on a global scale that together they form a single self-developing system with self-regulatory properties similar to the physiological properties of a living organism. 

Life doesn’t just adapt to the planet: it changes it for its own purposes. Evolution is a pair dance in which everything living and inanimate is spinning. From this dance the essence of Gaia emerges. 

Lovelock introduces the concept of geophysiology, which implies a systems approach to earth sciences. Geophysiology is presented as a synthetic earth science that studies the properties and development of an integral system, the closely related components of which are biota, atmosphere, oceans and crust. 

Its tasks include the search and study of self-regulation mechanisms at the planetary level. Geophysiology aims to establish links between cyclical processes at the cellular-molecular level with similar processes at other related levels, such as the organism, ecosystems and the planet as a whole. 

In 1971, it was suggested that living organisms are capable of producing substances that have regulatory significance for the climate. It was confirmed when, in 1973, the emission of dimethyl sulfide from dying planktonic organisms was discovered. 

Dimethyl sulfide droplets, entering the atmosphere, serve as nuclei of condensation of water vapor, causing the formation of clouds. The density and area of ​​cloud cover significantly affect the albedo of our planet – its ability to reflect solar radiation. 

At the same time, falling to the ground along with the rain, these sulfur compounds promote plant growth, which, in turn, accelerate the leaching of rocks. The biogens generated by leaching are washed into rivers and eventually end up in the oceans, promoting the growth of planktonic algae.

The cycle of travel of dimethyl sulfide is closed. In support of this, it was found in 1990 that cloud cover over the oceans correlates with the distribution of plankton. 

According to Lovelock, today, when the atmosphere is overheated as a result of human activity, the biogenic mechanism of regulation of the cloud cover becomes extremely important. 

Another regulatory element of Gaia is carbon dioxide, which geophysiology considers as a key metabolic gas. The climate, plant growth and production of free atmospheric oxygen depend on its concentration. The more carbon is stored, the more oxygen is released into the atmosphere. 
By controlling the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, biota thereby regulates the average temperature of the planet. In 1981, it was suggested that such self-regulation occurs through biogenic intensification of the weathering process of rocks. 

Lovelock compares the difficulty in understanding the processes occurring on the planet with the difficulty in understanding the economy. The 18th-century economist Adam Smith is best known for introducing the concept of the “invisible hand” into scholarship, which makes unbridled commercial self-interest somehow work for the common good. 

It is the same with the planet, says Lovelock: when it “matured”, it began to maintain conditions suitable for the existence of life, and the “invisible hand” was able to direct the disparate interests of organisms to the common cause of maintaining these conditions. 

Darwin vs. Lovelock 

Published in 1979, Gaia: A New Perspective on Life on Earth became a bestseller. It was well received by environmentalists but not by scientists, most of whom rejected the ideas it contained. 

Renowned critic of creationism and intelligent design, University of Oxford professor and author of The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins, condemned Gaia’s theory as a “deeply flawed” heresy against the basic tenet of Darwinian natural selection: “the fittest survives.” Still, because Gaia’s theory states that animals, plants and microorganisms not only compete, but also cooperate to maintain the environment. 

When Gaia’s theory was first discussed, Darwinian biologists were among her fiercest opponents. They argued that the cooperation necessary for the self-regulation of the Earth can never be combined with the competition necessary for natural selection. 

In addition to the very essence, the name, taken from mythology, also caused dissatisfaction. All this looked like a new religion, where the Earth itself became the subject of deification. The talented polemicist Richard Dawkins challenged Lovelock’s theory with the same vigor he later used in relation to the concept of God’s existence. 

Lovelock went on to refute their criticism with evidence of self-regulation gathered from his research and mathematical models that illustrated how planetary climate self-regulation occurs. Gaia’s theory is a top-down, physiological view of the Earth system. She views Earth as a dynamically reacting planet and explains why it is so different from Mars or Venus. 
The criticism was mainly based on the misconception that the new hypothesis was anti-Darwinian.

“Natural selection favors enhancers,” Lovelock said. His theory only details Darwin’s theory, implying that nature favors organisms that leave the environment in better shape for offspring to survive. 

Those species of living things that negatively affect the environment, make it less suitable for posterity and will eventually be expelled from the planet – as well as weaker, evolutionarily unadapted species, Lovelock argued. 

Copernicus waiting for his Newton 

Summing up, it must be said that the scientific concept of the Earth as an integral living system, a living superorganism has been developed by naturalistic scientists and thinkers since the 18th century. This topic was touched upon by the father of modern geology and geochronology James Hutton, natural scientist who gave the world the term “biology” Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, naturalist and traveler, one of the founders of geography as an independent science Alexander von Humboldt. 

In the 20th century, the idea was developed in a scientifically grounded concept of the biosphere of the outstanding Russian and Soviet scientist and thinker Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky. In its scientific and theoretical part, the concept of Gaia is similar to the “Biosphere”. However, in the 70s of the last century, Lovelock was not yet familiar with the works of Vernadsky. At that time, there were no successful translations of his work into English: as Lovelock put it, English-speaking scientists are traditionally “deaf” to work in other languages. 

Lovelock, like his longtime ally Lynn Margulis, no longer insists that Gaia is a superorganism. Today he recognizes that, in many ways, his term “organism” is just a useful metaphor. 

However, Charles Darwin’s concept of “struggle for survival” can be considered a metaphor with the same reason. At the same time, this did not prevent Darwinian theory from conquering the world. Metaphors like these can stimulate scientific thought, moving us further and further along the path of knowledge. 

Today, the Gaia Hypothesis has become an impetus for the development of a modern version of the systemic organismic science of the Earth – geophysiology. Perhaps, over time, it will become that synthetic biosphere science, the creation of which Vernadsky once dreamed of. Now it is on the way to becoming and transforming into a traditional generally recognized field of knowledge.

It is no coincidence that the eminent British evolutionary biologist William Hamilton – mentor of one of the most desperate critics of the theory, Richard Dawkins, and the author of the phrase “the selfish gene” used by the latter in the title of his book – called James Lovelock “Copernicus awaiting his Newton.” 


Planet Earth

How to create a “heaven on earth” for all mankind?

We ask ourselves this question and tried to answer it. Of course, by “paradise” we do not mean “paradise booths” somewhere in the mythical nooks of the past, but a very real place – our home called planet Earth.

Moreover, this is our only home at the moment, since the prospects for the colonization of other planets of the solar system for us are still rather dreams, and very far from being realized.

Two main problems for humanity

Do you know what we like about people? The fact that even being in difficult living conditions, they do not limit their interests only to how to earn a living for themselves – no, they are interested in more global issues: political, social, philosophical or scientific in nature. But what worries them the most?

In our opinion, most people on our planet are preoccupied with two main problems:

1) Security (in every sense of the word, including economic)

2) Happiness (in the broadest sense of the word)

While these problems may seem very different at first glance, they actually boil down to caring for your own well-being.

In this context, it is quite easy to understand why humans do not live in paradise on Earth.

There are many problems that are prevalent all over the world today, such as wars and crime (with all the associated problems), as well as various health problems, both physical and mental.

It seems obvious that no one wants to live in a world where they are constantly under the threat of violent crimes, wars or other disasters, and it is also clear that many people want to find love and happiness not only, and not so much for themselves, but rather for those who are very dear to them.

Hence, the most obvious way to create a paradise on earth would be to increase safety for all people and increase the possibilities for human relationships.

When it comes to security, there are a number of obvious things that can be done. For example, many people are concerned about pollution and environmental degradation, as well as related issues such as global warming and overpopulation.

There is an obvious solution to this in the form of cleaner energy sources (such as solar energy) and more efficient modes of transportation (including space travel). This would help reduce fears about climate change at least partially.

Another issue that is widely discussed is the possibility of a nuclear war between large countries. This could potentially lead to the extinction of all of humanity, if it happened at the moment, given the advances in technology and weapons compared to previous generations.

In addition to these issues, there are a number of other issues that seem to be at least somewhat predominant, such as privacy, economic insecurity and social inequality.

What we can do?

If we digress from philosophical reasoning and look at the real situation that has developed in the world over the past ten years, we can see that the world has ceased to live by the rules.

If earlier, there were official and unofficial rules of “behavior of states in international relations”, now these “gentlemen’s agreements” are completely ignored.

One possible solution to this could be the creation of a “world government” that would control all aspects of human life (including economy and technology). However, this will almost certainly have some negative consequences.

World government: pros and cons

Pros : One government of all human civilization, by definition, will save us from wars, economic inequality, social inequality and the likelihood of global destruction in the event of a nuclear war. In fact, on planet Earth, there will be one huge country in which the entire population of the planet will live.

Cons : There is a risk that people will come to power who will turn the good goal of “heaven on earth” into the possibility of establishing a dictatorship in which all the disadvantages of the previous type of government will remain, when “everyone was for himself”, but already without the opportunity to defend their interests as it was when there was a system of scattered but sovereign states.

How, then, to create a paradise on earth for everyone?

1) Develop future technologies that will help us save the planet and stop global climate change.

2) To develop medicine in the direction of increasing the life expectancy of a person, which will entail an increase in the quality of life, and an increase in “happiness” for each individual citizen.

3) To achieve maximum protection of people from any threats . The safety of citizens in all spheres of life should become a priority for the state.

4) Revive the system of “international rules”, which must be observed by all countries, without exception.

5) Limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons in order to increase the overall level of the sense of security of all mankind, and save it even from hypothetically possible mutual destruction in the event of a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons.

Continue Reading

Planet Earth

Ways to have fun celebrating Halloween in the pandemic

Roughly 74% of American millennials and young parents think Halloween is more important this year than ever. They gather in online groups where they exchange tips and suggestions on the safest way to have fun on All Saints’ Day in a pandemic.

7 ways to have fun celebrating Halloween in a pandemic

The Los Angeles Times selected seven of the most successful ideas, and shared them with readers.

This year, when most of the candy lovers are staying at home, decorating their home is more important than ever. The more tinsel, the better. You can hang out flashlights, buy a fog machine, or make a stuffed animal out of old clothes. Carve some pumpkins and have an online contest among family members, asking them to vote for the best neighborhood crafts.

Of course, the bravest children will come under your door shouting “wallet or life”, but it is impossible to communicate directly with little ghouls who are always short on candy. It is better to arrange sweets in bags in advance and put them outside the door. You can wave your hand at them from the balcony or out the window if you want to see how happy they will be with the treat.

The candies can be hung from strings on a fence or from trees. Children will quickly figure out how to rip them off.

If your child really wants to go outside, and the level of infection in the region does not allow this, you can distract him by looking for sweets at home. Turn off the lights, take flashlights, and run with him in search of candy. For teenagers, you can do a whole quest with tips and tasks.

Plastic eggs, which many use for Easter gifts, can be pasted over with glowing scary faces and muzzles. Then fill them with candy and hide them inside or outside the house. You can decorate them with stickers glowing in the dark, then it will be more interesting to look for surprises in the dark.

It’s not recommended to have ghosts in the house, of course, but you can watch movies about them on Halloween. An impromptu cinema can be arranged both in the house and in the yard. Then the neighbors can join the session. To keep your distance, you should buy hula hoops. Then everyone will be accommodated on the same lawn in front of the house, but the risk of infection will be avoided.

The most important thing is to get a good mood on Halloween. Therefore, without further ado, you can put vacuum-packed sweets under the door of your neighbor, call and run away with all your blades. This will amuse you and your neighbors, who will spend half the night wondering whether to eat the offering or throw a potentially infectious bag in the trash.

Continue Reading

Planet Earth

The activation of volcanoes in Iceland and Russia concern scientists: “This is an anomaly”

Almost all volcanic eruptions of the past, leading to a cooling of the climate, coincide in time with low solar activity. 

Alarmingly, the Sun is currently passing through its deepest solar minimum in 100+ years and looking into the future, NASA found that the next cycle (25) could be “the weakest in the last 200 years” – a return to minimum conditions Dalton. 

The Dalton Minimum (1790-1830) was a period of historically low solar activity that also included the famine-inducing eruption of Mt. Tambor, in 1815.

The eruption of Tambora was one of the most powerful on Earth in the last 2000 years, and it exacerbated the cooling of the Earth, already occurring due to low solar activity. This unfortunate combination led to one of the harshest climates of the modern era – 1816 is also known as the “year without summer”.


Of today’s waking volcanoes, those in Iceland are perhaps the most worrying. It is this highly volcanic region that is likely to be home to the next “big” (repeat of the 536 AD eruption that destroyed the Roman Republic), which will plunge the Earth into a new volcanic winter.

The high frequency of volcanic eruptions allows scientists to detect patterns (precursors). And if these patterns are repeated every time a volcano erupts, then scientists can be more confident in their predictions.

Grimsvötn is Iceland’s most frequently erupting volcano, with approximately 65 known eruptions over the past 800 years. Icelandic scientists are closely following Grimsvotn after its 2011 eruption 

Recently, researchers have seen various signals indicating that the volcano is preparing to erupt again, and have raised the threat level.

The volcano swells as new magma moves into the channel system below it. The increase in thermal activity has led to the melting of more ice, and earthquakes have also become more frequent in recent years.

The time intervals between the eruptions of Grimsvotn are different, writes Dave McGarvey, a volcanologist at Lancaster University. For example, before the larger eruption of 2011, there were smaller eruptions in 2004, 1998, and 1983. Intermittently from four to 15 years. It is important to note that given the next eruption, Grimsvotn appears to have a pattern of infrequent large eruptions that occur every 150-200 years (e.g. 2011, 1873, 1619), with smaller and more frequent eruptions occurring approximately every ten years in between. 

If the previous model of Grimsvotn, consisting of occasional large eruptions with more numerous smaller eruptions occurring in between, continues in the future, then the next eruption should be small (considering that there was a large eruption in 2011). 

Nevertheless, the word “must” is important here, McGarvey stresses, – Iceland’s volcanoes are complex natural systems, and their patterns do not always correspond exactly to reality.

Katla is another Icelandic volcano on the verge of erupting, according to the Icelandic Meteorological Bureau (IMO). Since January of this year, researchers have recorded an upturn in and around Katla, and in recent months have recorded an increase in sulfur dioxide levels close to the site of two previous eruptions.

The previous major eruption of Katla occurred in 1918. This year is within the Hundred Years Low, the previous multi-decade period of low solar activity.

Icelandic authorities are well aware of the dangers posed by the next Katla eruption, and a delegation of volcanologists meets regularly with the Icelandic parliament to discuss how to respond in the event of an eruption.


Scientists are also concerned about the unusual behavior of Klyuchevskaya Sopka Volcano (also known as Klyuchevskaya Volcano) located on the Kamchatka Peninsula in Russia.

As a rule, a year passes between the eruptions of Klyuchevskoy volcano, but recently this period of calm has been reduced to two months – on October 5, 2020, night cameras recorded the outpouring of lava from the crater of the volcano’s summit.

According to Yuri Demyanchuk, head of the Klyuchevskoy volcanic station IViS, all of this indicates an impending new larger eruption. 

Klyuchevsky’s uncharacteristic behavior can lead to paroxysmal explosions (unpredictable, dangerous explosions).

“The last activation was in 2013, before that – in 1994. But so far we have not observed such an intensity of tremor to speak of an impending paroxysmal activity, ”the expert explains. – “This is an anomaly.”

Seismic and volcanic activity is associated with changes in the Sun.

Volcanic eruptions are one of the key factors pushing the Earth towards the next stage of global cooling. Volcanic ash (particulate matter) ejected more than 10 km away – and therefore into the stratosphere – obscures sunlight and lowers Earth’s temperature. Smaller particles of an eruption can linger in the upper atmosphere for years or even decades.

The recent outburst of volcanoes around the world is believed to be related to low solar activity, coronal holes, a waning magnetosphere, and an influx of cosmic rays penetrating silica-rich magma.

Continue Reading