Is it true that on average, people who grow up in a geographical location of the earth where the magnetic field strength is stronger than other geographical locations, develop more to their genetic potential and experience less degenerative medical problems and less cases of cancer compared to people who grow up in geographical locations where the earth's magnetic field is weaker (less)? Is it true that during ancient times, intelligent beings used the placing of stones in various locations of some countries such as Scotland, England, Ireland, Egypt, America, or South America, to mark various locations where the Earth's magnetic field lines were the strongest in their particular location and / or, in different locations? This is a question pertaining to the physics of molecular biology and Earth's magnetic lay lines. In general (on average), is there a stronger magnetic field of the earth in geographical locations that are below sea level, compared to Earth's geographical locations above sea level?


closed as off-topic by John Rennie, user36790, ACuriousMind, Kyle Kanos, JamalS Nov 13 '15 at 13:08

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "We deal with mainstream physics here. Questions about the general correctness of unpublished personal theories are off topic, although specific questions evaluating new theories in the context of established science are usually allowed. For more information, see Is non mainstream physics appropriate for this site?." – John Rennie, Community
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You have confused us with the Skeptics SE $\endgroup$ – John Rennie Nov 13 '15 at 6:02
  • $\begingroup$ Hi, and welcome to Physics Stack Exchange. You need to take a look at the guidelines for posting. For instance, only ask one question at a time, and don't post the same question twice. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Griscom Nov 13 '15 at 6:04
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about the human biological response to varying natural magnetic fields, not physics. $\endgroup$ – ACuriousMind Nov 13 '15 at 10:41
  • $\begingroup$ With respect to the last question, the magnetic field of earth is pretty dynamic, so any claim of that is subject to time-evolution of the field. $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Nov 13 '15 at 13:01

You ask a lot of questions, I'll try to answer just one. As the Earth's magnetic field protects us from ionizing radiation, theoretically, there can be negative correlation between the Earth's magnetic field and cancer incidence.

EDIT: see, e.g., Health Physics; v. 34(3) p. 237-247; ISSN 0017-9078; 1978 (https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:9386146). Abstract: Both isometric cancer death rates and depth contours of the last ice age glacier in North America were shown to correspond with isometric horizontal geomagnetic intensity lines. When geomagnetic flux was held constant, an altitude effect was demonstrated. Similar associations between cancer incidence and horizontal geomagnetic flux was demonstrated on a world-wide basis. Non-uniform heating of the stratosphere by a combination of cosmic and solar radiation as influenced by geomagnetic flux was postulated as a mechanism for many of the weather conditions on Earth, including location of the last North American ice age glacier.


Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.