"Spinning Earth" theorists, nutters or onto something?
Discussion
Iklwa said:
I thought of something else, balance. Not our balance, but the balance of this giant ball spinning round and round.
So you have millions of tons of water on one side, land weighing less on the other, perhaps a heavy mountain range perched in another, yet when you spin the ball at over a thousand kilometres per hour, it somehow doesn't start getting a massive wobble on, even though it spins around an axis?
So using the wheel example again, you take a wheel with different weight spread around it, spin it at high speed, and you'd expect it to wobble and eventually tear itself off the axle, yet we spin perfectly smoothly despite there being no actual weight balance at all?
Yeah right.
It rotates ONCE in 24 hours. Regardless of the speed, it turns one time a day.So you have millions of tons of water on one side, land weighing less on the other, perhaps a heavy mountain range perched in another, yet when you spin the ball at over a thousand kilometres per hour, it somehow doesn't start getting a massive wobble on, even though it spins around an axis?
So using the wheel example again, you take a wheel with different weight spread around it, spin it at high speed, and you'd expect it to wobble and eventually tear itself off the axle, yet we spin perfectly smoothly despite there being no actual weight balance at all?
Yeah right.
But don't forget that it also travels through space at a phenomenal speed, to orbit the sun on a 186,000,000 mile diameter circle once a year. How fast is that??? In reality a single point probably travel faster sideways than it does round and round, but I simply cannot be bothered to do the 15 seconds of maths involved..
King Herald said:
Iklwa said:
I thought of something else, balance. Not our balance, but the balance of this giant ball spinning round and round.
So you have millions of tons of water on one side, land weighing less on the other, perhaps a heavy mountain range perched in another, yet when you spin the ball at over a thousand kilometres per hour, it somehow doesn't start getting a massive wobble on, even though it spins around an axis?
So using the wheel example again, you take a wheel with different weight spread around it, spin it at high speed, and you'd expect it to wobble and eventually tear itself off the axle, yet we spin perfectly smoothly despite there being no actual weight balance at all?
Yeah right.
It rotates ONCE in 24 hours. Regardless of the speed, it turns one time a day.So you have millions of tons of water on one side, land weighing less on the other, perhaps a heavy mountain range perched in another, yet when you spin the ball at over a thousand kilometres per hour, it somehow doesn't start getting a massive wobble on, even though it spins around an axis?
So using the wheel example again, you take a wheel with different weight spread around it, spin it at high speed, and you'd expect it to wobble and eventually tear itself off the axle, yet we spin perfectly smoothly despite there being no actual weight balance at all?
Yeah right.
But don't forget that it also travels through space at a phenomenal speed, to orbit the sun on a 186,000,000 mile diameter circle once a year. How fast is that??? In reality a single point probably travel faster sideways than it does round and round, but I simply cannot be bothered to do the 15 seconds of maths involved..
Well you're a nice bunch! We're all stupid, relatively speaking. There's nothing wrong with asking stupid questions, it's the stupid answers, accompanied by mockery that should be ridiculed.
The Earth's sidereal rotation is unbalanced, in relation to its orbital axis, the moon stabilises this imbalance and allows complex life to exist, not just the intertidal molluscs that the moon is helping out.
http://www.space.com/12464-earth-moon-unique-solar...
Having a large moon possibly adds to the requirements of finding extraterrestrial life, on top of a planet being approximately Earth sized and orbiting a star in the 'Goldilocks zone'.
The Earth's sidereal rotation is unbalanced, in relation to its orbital axis, the moon stabilises this imbalance and allows complex life to exist, not just the intertidal molluscs that the moon is helping out.
http://www.space.com/12464-earth-moon-unique-solar...
Having a large moon possibly adds to the requirements of finding extraterrestrial life, on top of a planet being approximately Earth sized and orbiting a star in the 'Goldilocks zone'.
SilverSixer said:
Which way up is the world hanging in space? I mean, if an alien spacecraft approaches the Earth upside down, its occupants will think the South Pole is the top and Australians aren't upside down.
Civilisation began in the Northern hemisphere. That is all. So now we have a Northern hemisphere Systemic bias.MiseryStreak said:
Well you're a nice bunch! We're all stupid, relatively speaking. There's nothing wrong with asking stupid questions, it's the stupid answers, accompanied by mockery that should be ridiculed.
The Earth's sidereal rotation is unbalanced, in relation to its orbital axis, the moon stabilises this imbalance and allows complex life to exist, not just the intertidal molluscs that the moon is helping out.
http://www.space.com/12464-earth-moon-unique-solar...
Having a large moon possibly adds to the requirements of finding extraterrestrial life, on top of a planet being approximately Earth sized and orbiting a star in the 'Goldilocks zone'.
That's what I said The Earth's sidereal rotation is unbalanced, in relation to its orbital axis, the moon stabilises this imbalance and allows complex life to exist, not just the intertidal molluscs that the moon is helping out.
http://www.space.com/12464-earth-moon-unique-solar...
Having a large moon possibly adds to the requirements of finding extraterrestrial life, on top of a planet being approximately Earth sized and orbiting a star in the 'Goldilocks zone'.
SilverSixer said:
Which way up is the world hanging in space? I mean, if an alien spacecraft approaches the Earth upside down, its occupants will think the South Pole is the top and Australians aren't upside down.
There is no "up" in space, even on earth its only relative. "Up" is simply the opposite direction to gravity. If you mean that we use north as the orientation in books and on TV, this has no bearing on how someone would approach the earth.
98elise said:
SilverSixer said:
Which way up is the world hanging in space? I mean, if an alien spacecraft approaches the Earth upside down, its occupants will think the South Pole is the top and Australians aren't upside down.
There is no "up" in space, even on earth its only relative. "Up" is simply the opposite direction to gravity. If you mean that we use north as the orientation in books and on TV, this has no bearing on how someone would approach the earth.
SilverSixer said:
98elise said:
SilverSixer said:
Which way up is the world hanging in space? I mean, if an alien spacecraft approaches the Earth upside down, its occupants will think the South Pole is the top and Australians aren't upside down.
There is no "up" in space, even on earth its only relative. "Up" is simply the opposite direction to gravity. If you mean that we use north as the orientation in books and on TV, this has no bearing on how someone would approach the earth.
MiseryStreak said:
Civilisation began in the Northern hemisphere. That is all. So now we have a Northern hemisphere Systemic bias.
It's a shame you wasted it.Re the rotating balance issue - the earth doesn't spin on an axle, but rotates about its centre of gravity (the COG of the earth-moon system to be precise), so wheel analogies don't apply. Think of an oval football spinning about its short axis : uneven mass, but smooth rotation.
ps I still think the OP is taking the piss, but cleverly.
Daniel1 said:
98elise said:
Iklwa said:
I thought of something else, balance. Not our balance, but the balance of this giant ball spinning round and round.
So you have millions of tons of water on one side, land weighing less on the other, perhaps a heavy mountain range perched in another, yet when you spin the ball at over a thousand kilometres per hour, it somehow doesn't start getting a massive wobble on, even though it spins around an axis?
So using the wheel example again, you take a wheel with different weight spread around it, spin it at high speed, and you'd expect it to wobble and eventually tear itself off the axle, yet we spin perfectly smoothly despite there being no actual weight balance at all?
Yeah right.
In relative terms the earths surface is a smooth as a bowling ball. So you have millions of tons of water on one side, land weighing less on the other, perhaps a heavy mountain range perched in another, yet when you spin the ball at over a thousand kilometres per hour, it somehow doesn't start getting a massive wobble on, even though it spins around an axis?
So using the wheel example again, you take a wheel with different weight spread around it, spin it at high speed, and you'd expect it to wobble and eventually tear itself off the axle, yet we spin perfectly smoothly despite there being no actual weight balance at all?
Yeah right.
And most have chunks taken out of them via the pin setting and ball return machinery.
A billiard ball would be a better example.
MrCarPark said:
It was entertaining for the first couple of minutes, but I got bored and quit before he explained how the earth could expand. Is it hollow inside, and does that effect the rotation? aw51 121565 said:
- but only if we weren't already on the spinning earth and moving at the same speed as the bit(s) of the surface of the earth which we are in contact with (assuming that we are sat or stood still and not walking about or in/on a moving vehicle etc 
)... In fact why don't parachutists who jump out of a plane in England land in Hawaii ? And why don't they fall over when they land?
Pesty said:
Wait a minute why done planes fall over when they land..
In fact why don't parachutists who jump out of a plane in England land in Hawaii ? And why don't they fall over when they land?
The most dangerous parts of flight are takeoff and landing, when you have to compensate for the spin.In fact why don't parachutists who jump out of a plane in England land in Hawaii ? And why don't they fall over when they land?
Some planes, and most parachutists, do fall over when they land.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff