superballs

this model is the best so far i had seen, because i wrote it. any questions now that ist has proven itself correct?

greetings, i would like to clear any an all topics related to climate change.

my ice age model has proved itself accurate, and can make accurate predictions. earthquakes storms, volcanic eruption etc.

please ask me what ever the case is, i would love to show you everything you wanted to know about climate shift.

prediction is only half of what we are seeing..

gravitation is a reaction to what? lezing effect, dilateion?

This post is a reply to three posts, the original post, post #2, and post #7.

 

 

False, and it doesn't answer your homework question.

 

You are talking about the calculated response of the Earth to two recent large earthquakes, the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and the 2010 Chile earthquake. The small external torques on the Earth can be ignored over the short time span of an earthquake. Those earthquakes changed the Earth's inertial tensor by a slight bit, and thus the Earth's angular velocity had to change by a corresponding tiny bit to conserve angular momentum. (Note: It is angular momentum, not angular velocity, that is conserved in the absence of external torques.)

 

These effects are tiny, tiny, ^_tiny. They were not observed because they were below our ability to measure them.

 

Even if they were observed, this has nothing to do with your homework question. This was a one-time shift in orientation, not a precession or a nutation. Your homework question is more than a couple months old, so I have no qualms answering it. The principle behavior of the Earth's rotation is that of torque induced precession. It's called the lunisolar precession. Because the Earth is not a perfect sphere, the inverse square gravity of the Moon and the Sun create external torques on the Earth. Because the Earth is rotating, these external torques manifest as a precession.

 

There are many, many terms (2,000+ terms!) in the modern description of the Earth's orientation and rotation. The largest of these is the lunisolar precession. This dominant term is huge compared to all of the other terms. So the first answer, and second, and 2,000+ answer is that it the Earth undergoes a torque induced precession.

 

 

 

That article talks about polar wander. Polar wander is the difference between the Earth's orientation as calculated by the SOFA (Standards of Fundamental Astronomy) model and the observed orientation. The article misses the mark of answering the OP's question. It doesn't talk about lunisolar precession, or the smaller nutations that the SOFA model describes quite well.

 

The SOFA rotation model is semi-analytic. There are some small effects that the model currently does not capture. They instead have to be captured after the fact, based on observation. The largest of these unmodeled effects is the Chandler wobble, which is a torque-free precession. It can't be modeled analytically (yet) because the Earth is not a rigid body. The Chandler wobble exhibits some weird behaviors because the Earth is instead an elastoplastic body.

 

 

 

 

This entire post was one line of nonsense followed by another. The lunisolar precession is not illusionary. It is quite real, and it is very well explained by physics. Newton was the first to give an explanation for why this well-known precession occurs.

 

 

I will very carfully explain this false assumtion you claim.

 

first you said false. and try to justify that answer by saying.

 

qoutte "The small external torques on the Earth can be ignored"

 

therfore you have exludid the only factor that is used to make that determination.