Hi Chrimony,chrimony wrote:It's absolute.
I agree, the issue at hand is more along the lines of "does the moon rotate absolutely?" As I have shown (in hypotheticals) above that depending on perspective, there is or isn't rotation relative to the observer.
Specific to your link (wiki), the opening statement is "For the concept of absolute rotation to be scientifically meaningful, it must be measurable."
I think you are onto the issue at hand, however the specific methods noted by the wiki are the following...
1: Mach's principle : I don't think this is applicable, though interesting, we are fully acclimated. A specific measurement?
2: Rotating bucket : Has someone rotated a bucket of water on the moon?
3: Rotating sphere's : Has someone attached an object to the moon with a spring and measured the tension on this spring?
4: Figure of earth : This may work with fluids or gases, but solids? Also, is this even conclusive?
5: Sagnac Experiment : This entire bullet is questionable "Earth will rotate once every rotation of the Earth when using stars as a stationary reference point. Rotation was thus concluded to be absolute rather than relative." This seems relative not absolute. How far away do you have to be before you become an absolute reference point?
Do you have a measurable effect? Please elaborate if so.
Also, from wikipedia regarding libration..."Libration in longitude results from the eccentricity of the Moon's orbit around Earth"Easy. The Moon would not show libration in longitude, as viewed from the Earth, but it does. It's been mentioned several times already, and nobody who argues that the Moon does not rotate has given a satisfactory explanation for it.
How is this specific to the moon's axial rotation?
Also from wikipedia regarding libartion... "the Moon's rotation sometimes leads and sometimes lags its orbital position."
Couldn't this be confused with the effect of the earth rotating while viewing the moon?