Does the shape  of Antarctica    (  being  round shaped )

And its position that the center of that circular shape is approximately on the pole Does have anything to do with the  rotational  forces of the planet ? 

 

Thanx ..........

2 hours ago, Saber said:

Does the shape  of Antarctica    (  being  round shaped )

And its position that the center of that circular shape is approximately on the pole Does have anything to do with the  rotational  forces of the planet ? 

 

Thanx ..........

I don’t believe so. In the geological past, Antarctica or parts of it were at equatorial latitudes : https://discoveringantarctica.org.uk/oceans-atmosphere-landscape/ice-land-and-sea/tectonic-history-into-the-deep-freeze/

3 hours ago, Saber said:

Does the shape  of Antarctica    (  being  round shaped )

And its position that the center of that circular shape is approximately on the pole Does have anything to do with the  rotational  forces of the planet ? 

 

Thanx ..........

 

This is a case of the inappropriate conclusions being drawn from inaccurate (insufficient) data.

 

Antarctica is neither circular in shape nor is it centered on the pole.

Compare the maps from 1962 and 2022.

The left hand peninsula  - Graham Land  - is in approximately the same orientation as the long island in the 2022 on the 1962 map 

Map 1 Stanford's Whitehall Atlas 1962

Map 2 from Higgins Wild Maps 2022

 

Dont disappoint me man  no other continent  is circular like this.......* the small circle is the south geo pole

 

If all the  ice melted  although ........the land  underneath would rebound a lot too.............wouldnt it ?

Edited May 21, 20232 yr by Saber

I think that if not for the continent underneath, the ice cover would be even more symmetrical.

7 hours ago, Saber said:

Dont disappoint me man  no other continent  is circular like this.......* the small circle is the south geo pole

 

If all the  ice melted  although ........the land  underneath would rebound a lot too.............wouldnt it ?

From the responses it is clear that it is the ice that is in an approximately circular pattern, centred on the pole, which is hardly a surprise. The rock of the underlying continent is not. So nothing to do with rotation, just the amount of warmth from the sun, which obviously is at a minimum at the pole.

12 hours ago, Genady said:

I think that if not for the continent underneath, the ice cover would be even more symmetrical.

I doubt if there would be an ice cover without the continent. It's the altitude that maintains the ice, as in Greenland. Without that, it woud probably be like the Arctic, with seasonal variation in partial floating sea-ice cover. 

Good point.  And probably less ice than the Arctic, since a larger percent of the southern hemisphere is ocean which is absorbing heat.  Also, the southern hemisphere gets 7 percent more solar radiation than northern, since the south pole is tilted towards the sun in summer there at the same point as perihelion of earth's orbit.  So, more water absorbing more radiation producing a more complete melt and more heat-absorbing surface.  (this is a simple model, so I realize there can be other factors like ocean currents and average cloud cover and so on)