Re: PLATE MAPS OF THE PAST
From: Carsten Troelsgaard (carsten.troelsgaard_at_mail.dk)
Date: 07/03/04
- Next message: Carsten Troelsgaard: "Re: Just How Blind is the Human Race?"
- Previous message: Carsten Troelsgaard: "Re: THE THREE BEARS OF PLATE TECTONICS"
- In reply to: George: "Re: PLATE MAPS OF THE PAST"
- Next in thread: Carsten Troelsgaard: "Re: PLATE MAPS OF THE PAST"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 15:34:51 +0200
" George" <george@george.net> skrev i en meddelelse
news:V9hFc.353$bj2.135@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
snip
> > I still don't even get how the moon get involved.
>
> The simply answer is that it isn't.
>
> >Twisting the earth as Don suggests would take a force acting one way in
in the
> >southern hemisphere and
> > the other way in the northern. Taking the transforms, or the coherent
> > faultzone pieced together as developed in such a scenario as a 'proof'
of
> > this 'torsion' and a foundation for an expanding earth is as far fetched
as
> > it gets.
>
> Yes it is far-fetched. He apparently thinks that the coriolis effect is
somehow
> involved. If the ordinary Newtonian laws of motion of bodies are to be
used in
> a rotating frame of reference, an inertial force--acting to the right of
the
> direction of body motion for counterclockwise rotation of the reference
frame or
> to the left for clockwise rotation--must be included in the equations of
motion.
> The effect of the Coriolis force is an "apparent" deflection of the path
of an
> object that moves within a rotating coordinate system. The object does not
> "actually" deviate from its path, but it appears to do so because of the
motion
> of the coordinate system.
>
> The Coriolis effect is most apparent in the path of an object moving
> longitudinally. On the Earth an object that moves along a north-south
path, or
> longitudinal line, will undergo apparent deflection to the right in the
Northern
> Hemisphere and to the left in the Southern Hemisphere. are two reasons
for this
> phenomenon: first, the Earth rotates eastward; and second, the tangential
> velocity of a point on the Earth is a function of latitude (the velocity
is
> essentially zero at the poles and it attains a maximum value at the
Equator).
> Thus, if a cannon were fired northward from a point on the Equator, the
> projectile would land to the east of its due north path. This variation
would
> occur because the projectile was moving eastward faster at the Equator
than was
> its target farther north. Similarly, if the weapon were fired toward the
Equator
> from the North Pole, the projectile would again land to the right of its
true
> path. In this case, the target area would have moved eastward before the
shell
> reached it because of its greater eastward velocity. An exactly similar
> displacement occurs if the projectile is fired in any direction.
>
> The Coriolis deflection is therefore related to the motion of the object,
the
> motion of the Earth, and the latitude. For this reason, the magnitude of
the
> effect is given by 2 sin , in which is the velocity of the object, is the
> angular velocity of the Earth, and is the latitude.
>
> The Coriolis effect has great significance in astrophysics and stellar
dynamics,
> in which it is a controlling factor in the directions of rotation of
sunspots.
> It is also significant in the earth sciences, especially meteorology,
physical
> geology, and oceanography, in that the Earth is a rotating frame of
reference,
> and motions over the surface of the Earth are subject to acceleration from
the
> force indicated. Thus, the Coriolis force figures prominently in studies
of the
> dynamics of the atmosphere, in which it affects prevailing winds and the
> rotation of storms, and in the hydrosphere, in which it affects the
rotation of
> the oceanic currents.
>
> Now, in order for the coriolis effect to have done to the crust of the
earth
> what he suggests, it seems to me that the entire crust of the earth would
have
> had to have had its origin at both the north and the south poles to get
the
> apparent result he shows on his web site, which is plainly not the case.
> Finally, if the coriolis effect was involved in the structural dynamics of
the
> crust, gravity, and/or the rotation of the earth would necessarily have to
be
> much stronger/faster than they currently are, or have ever been in the
past in
> order to overcome the inherent strength of the solid earth. That is also
> plainly not the case.
You didn't have to, George, but thanks for sharing this information anyway.
- Next message: Carsten Troelsgaard: "Re: Just How Blind is the Human Race?"
- Previous message: Carsten Troelsgaard: "Re: THE THREE BEARS OF PLATE TECTONICS"
- In reply to: George: "Re: PLATE MAPS OF THE PAST"
- Next in thread: Carsten Troelsgaard: "Re: PLATE MAPS OF THE PAST"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
