Re: Geostationary or rotational dynamics

On Mar 1, 3:44 am, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In article
<2be215a0-e86e-4dd8-8b87-cb4c96669...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,





 oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 29, 5:58 pm, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In article
<f019983e-16ec-4c6a-bb97-766ebdec1...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

 oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 29, 6:35 am, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In article
<ef92719e-3e1e-4f48-b22b-1d47b0c86...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

 oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 28, 9:28 am, Timberwoof
<timberwoof.s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In article
<27fb3978-d116-4c54-aa1d-8901b176e...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
The rub is that you cannot speak of planetary shape
without discussing differential rotation let alone the
implications
as
the underlying mechanism for crustal motion

As I said, you're free to show your measurements of how much
differential rotation there is and how much you think it's
affecting
surface crustal motion.

Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." <ETH>Chris L.- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am being honest when I implore you to stick with what you know and
don't bother with planetary shape and differential rotation.Probably
a
good dynamicist would recognise that equatorial speed and
differential
rotation in not enough by itself to conclude affects on the shape of
a
rotating celestial objects but variations in Equatorial speed or
differential rotation or shape is enough to combine all as a set of
generalised dynamical rules.

But you're not a good dynamicist. You haven't the foggiest notion of
how
to calculate the effects of the Earth's rotation on its soggy insides.

You,as representative of a geostationary view, design the internal
structure,composition and viscosity of the Earth to support
convection
cells whereas the alternative rotational mechanism requires a
different set of criteria,It would be an enjoyable challenge based on
the generalised dynamics,planetary shape owing to the composition and
viscosity of the moltern interior,evolution of surface features and
so
on.

Well, then. Let's see it.

That is why many would be reluctant to promote 'convection cells'
nowadays insofar as the internal mechanism dictates so much.You want
to remain with your limited view then that is fine but as I said to
Brad,why would I care to hear of a geostationary Earth point of view.

I'm not  trying to tell you about a geostationary point of view. I'm
asking you to illustrate, with some reasonable scientific analysis,
your
differential rotation model.

I don't believe that Earth's rotation has a significant effect on
crustal motion, but I could be convinced otherwise with good data and
theory. But you've never presented any, so why should I change my mind?

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." <ETH>Chris L.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

Good luck now, have fun with the geostationary  convection cells and
the 'soggy' inside that goes with it and that is my final response to
you and all others who need convincing or geological
breastfeeding.When an adult shows up to discuss the matter  then I
will  demonstate how to use stellar rotational dynamics to correlate
with spherical deviation and then apply it to this planet.

You silly sod. I don't believe you, therefore you will not try to
convince me.

I do not know if many or any  can follow the basic outlines which link
stellar dynamics to spherical deviation as a general principle ,from
there to the Earth's spherical deviation and from then into the
internal mechanism which links shape with crustal motion

Because you've never presented it.

but you seem
happy with your thermally generated convection cells so I am not going
to contend with people who enjoy these things and nobody should expect
me to.

Well, you're right. Nobody should expect you to come up with any  
evidence, theory, or prediction for your hypothesis. Excepting of
course, anyone whom you expect to convince that things are so.

Take care now and do your best with what you believe in,just like Brad
who at least  made an attempt to promote convection,something I would
not care to be convinced of.If the situation was only a fraction
right,this matter would have generated some discussion over the years
it has been on the table but obviously there is some great attraction
to keeping the motions of the Earth out of geological affects or
rather,the dull reasoning of people who have no feeling for
astronomy,geology and it appears,very little else.In any case,I rarely
complain of external circumstances and when people are ready to
discuss something they already know then something productive can
happen.

Remember now,the internal mechanism  for crustal motion dictates the
internal composition and that is why this is important and must be
addressed.

Okay, then. It is important. Address it. Show us! Present your data!
Present your theory!

And above all, quit whining about how no one will believe something that
you refuse to explain!

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ÐChris L.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My good man,I spent the last few months showing how the Equatorial
ring of Uranus changes with respect to the Sun ,turning a full 360
degrees over the course of an annual orbit  demonstrating a new
orbital component and when applied to the Earth explains variations in
daylight/darkness North and South of the Equator and so on -

http://asymptotia.com/wp-images/2007/08/uranus_rings.jpg

If you cannot grasp a motion that you can see,there is hardly a chance
you will grasp the motions going on beneath your feet.

You're the one who can't grasp it! The axis of the rings does not change
as Uranus orbits the sun, but the Earth's position relative to the plane
of the rings does change. What we're seeing here is the Earth bobbing up
and down relative to the plane of the rings.




I assure you that the change in the orientation of the rings with
respect to the Sun is intrinsic to the planet itself and therefore
constitutes a new motioneven if it does not look dramatic in graphics
-

http://www.astro.psu.edu/users/niel/astro1/slideshows/class39/023-uranus-seasons.jpg

It certainly looks spectacular when observed through sequential
imaging -

http://asymptotia.com/wp-images/2007/08/uranus_rings.jpg


This effect has more to do with retrograde motion than with the earth's
rotation allegedly affecting the movement of the continents.


The lessons learned from the observed motion of the Equatorial rings
of Uranus are then applied to the Earth and a whole new set of
criteria comes into play for climate,hemeispherical weather patterns
(seasons),daylight/darkness variations,natural noon cycles and many
other areas.

Although you make the mistake of imagining the change in Equatorial
rings is because of an orbital perspective between Earth and Uranus,,I
will put it down to unfamiliarity.You can use the graphics to affirm
that the change is actually a component of the planet rather than
perspective that way and then work from there.Always keep the axial
and orbital motions/orientations seperate and you will not go wrong
and for goodness sake,enjoy something that is both new and exciting.





Stick with what you know whether it is a variable tilting Earth to the
orbital plane , geostationary convection cells  or whatever you want
as you are not being offensive by what you believe.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Geological doctorates
    ... >> Earth mechanism for crustal motion as long as the shape of the planet ... >> fractured crust contain the enormous mantle in convection cells models ... >> on the mantle and allowing the differential rotation bands to act on ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Geostationary or rotational dynamics
    ... differential rotation there is and how much you think it's ... surface crustal motion. ... The axis of the rings does not change ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Geostationary or rotational dynamics
    ... motion is to argue against differential rotation as the mechanism for ... distinction  transfers to crustal/evolution and motion via the ... Earth is preferable to a rotating one and in futures they are ... convection and differential rotation on Earth. ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Specifics of the mechanism for the Earths shape.
    ... Your stationary Earth/convection cells models for crustal motion are ... The observational guide of the differential rotation on the Sun can be ... rates,in terms of how the mantle rotating at 1000 miles per hour at the ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Being creative with natural phenomena
    ... speciifically differential rotation makes a guest appearance in the ... for crustal motion is like when it is easier to look elsewhere and see ... kill themselves explaining that stars and planets are different.The ... about the tool of the telescope when matched against the reasoning man ...
    (sci.geo.geology)