Earth - atmosphere

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Wed Aug 20, 2014 10:38 am

CharlesChandler wrote:
viscount aero wrote:...there is no such thing as an accretion disk.
Well, there are a few rare cases where they have been observed, such as around quasars.
Ok but realize that is like saying that the observation of Saturn's rings is evidence of an accretion disk.

Isn't it a bit interesting that we have 2 large and local examples of disks around celestial bodies: 1. Saturn's rings 2. The Sun's asteroid belt ---and yet there is absolutely, completely, and irrefutably zero evidence that these massive structures give rise to accretion?

In fact scientists will quickly agree with me and say "yes, of course, Saturn's rings and the asteroid belt around our Sun are not accretion disks." Yet when they see such structures much farther away, often at cosmological distances, they must be absolutely demonstrative of "accretion disks" :!: And that isn't even yet getting into discussing why the core accretion model cannot ever actually function as it is purported to (which I will not here because you already know why). Don't you find that a bit hilarious and laughably unscientific?

CharlesChandler wrote: But I'll definitely agree that as a general model, they just don't work. The force necessary to compress a spherical dusty plasma into a pancake simply isn't there. If it was, the increase in hydrostatic pressure due to the compression would cause the "disc" to expand, like rolling dough on a bread board. So the accretion disc model didn't come with any model glue.
Yes. Your example is more akin to fluid dynamics, particularly uncompressability of water. But it could work across a spectrum of materials. That and a host of other physical impossibilities must be accepted for the core accretion theory to actually work: First off, "hot gas" doesn't accrete. It expands and dissipates. This is why steam engines are so effective. Yet that alone is completely thrown out the window in astronomy and cosmology. They insist everything in space acts as a hot gas. Ok. Then why don't they accept what physical high school science teaches about hot gases? Gases expand under pressure, not "accrete." This is only one reason why core accretion is false. Others include lack of causal agents for the mechanical accretion to even begin. That culprit is never accounted for or ever seen anywhere. This could go on.
viscount aero wrote:...if what you described above happened then all the planets would tend to be retrograde and what we actually see is prograde. So why mention this? Our solar system is prograde.
CharlesChandler wrote:Right -- the Newtonian expectation is retrograde axial rotations -- the reason for bringing it up is that it is proof that prograde rotations can only be caused by non-Newtonian forces.
I'm still not following why you insist that retrograde is the absolute preferred state and it must be reversed by another force :?:
viscount aero wrote:
CharlesChandler wrote:So I think that there has to be an external force, which induced the orbital rotation in the original collapsing dusty plasma from which all of this formed in the first place, and which generated the prograde axial rotations. So it was basically a spherical dusty plasma that collapsed, but the Lorentz force induced a small amount of angular momentum (compared to the huge amount of radial momentum in the collapse).
That assumes giant leaps of logic in my opinion and tends to deny Occam his obligatory seat in front.
CharlesChandler wrote: I'm not assuming the existence of the spiral arm magnetic field -- we know that it's there. And I'm not assuming that a charged sphere will pick up a rotation if moving through a magnetic field -- that's simple induction. And I'm not assuming that planetary atmospheres (if present) are positively charged, while the solid bodies are negatively charged. The only thing that I'm hypothesizing is that the forces are powerful enough to do the job. Occam wouldn't complain.
But you are assuming this highly broad galactic "force" is locally reversing a planetary system's "original" direction of rotation. I don't really find that believable. It's too many steps and too reaching. If anything the reversal happens locally due to the Sun's influence on each planet, on a case by case basis.
viscount aero wrote:You seem all apesh1t for the Lorentz force.
CharlesChandler wrote::D Still, something induced the rotation, and you ain't gettin' there with Newtonian mechanics, which can preserve angular momentum, but can't create it. But you're right -- I could do more diagrams. On another thread, celeste & I got into a decent discussion about orbits, and we're working on a more substantial presentation of the facts & theories. But for the time being, by "radial implosion", I just mean that a spherical dusty plasma collapsed toward the centroid, and as such, shouldn't have had much in the way of angular momentum. If rotations were purely by chance, half of them would be in one direction, and the other half in the other. The fact that they're almost exclusively prograde is, for me, proof of an external force.
For sake of our discussion I will accept, for now, the idea of a spherical dusty plasmoid as being a real thing that seeds solar systems.

Let us both accept that the Sun and its cadre of planets are moving entities through the galaxy. Orbits, too, are not actually circular and flat as we are taught in school. Orbtis are helix-like and are spiraled paths. The Sun is like a bullet on a perpetual journey with its planets "trailing" along with it, corkscrewing their way around the Sun. Again, orbits are helix-like and spiraled. They are not flat.

As such, the spiraling helix movement itself creates planetary spin as the planets interact with the Sun's "fields"--be they electromotive or gravitational--or both. It is a similar concept as rifling: A gun's barrel is grooved with paralleling spiraling channels within the barrel to give the projectile a spin axis. This insures accuracy and stability as the bullet travels. Consider this to be roughly analogous to planets around the Sun: The Sun acts as a "rifling" causal agent that begets any subsequent captured worlds to assume a rotational profile, ie, a prograde spin in our case. What is happening with Venus is probably due to the idea that the Sun has begun to overcome and overwhelm Venus' original retrograde rotation. We are seeing the end of that retrograde (original) disposition of Venus.

This is very significant because it foretells, perhaps, Venus to be, again, probably a recent addition to our solar system. Before arrival, it was spinning probably much faster in retrograde rotation, millions of years ago, but has now exhausted its angular momentum as the Sun has begun to finally overwhelm it. At a point it will be "tidally locked" for a long time and then probably reverse axial spin to prograde. The time frame for this of course is impossible to know.


viscount aero wrote:I think Venus was not part of this solar system. It may be a visitor or recent addition. My only qualm here is that its orbit is highly circular and stable...
CharlesChandler wrote:Right -- a captured planet would have a highly elliptical orbit, and only by chance would it happen to orbit on the same plane as the other planets. So there had to be a collision, and it had to be just right, for Venus to be captured, and to fall into a circular orbit. Or there are other forces that coerce orbits into the same plane, and toward perfect concentricity. Maybe it's the Lorentz force!!! :D
I won't rule out the Lorentz Force because that may also explain what I have posited above: The 'electromotive" force that constrains and "rifles" the planetary "bullets" into spiral orbits and axial spin may be in fact the Lorentz Force---at least in large part :) :idea:

To add as counterpoint: perhaps, too, a highly eccentric or very elliptical orbit may actually not always be indicative of a newly captured object. That ought to be considered very seriously. Some objects may be very old and yet retain eccentricity. So again, we must beware of "misdirects" and red herrings. Realize that "stabilized and circular orbits are older and more stable" may not actually be a viable benchmark, criterion, or a reality. For example, circular orbits can decay. So how is that a stability? It isn't. It need not be older either. Some man-made satellites in highly circular orbits, for example, decay and drop into the Earth's atmosphere.
viscount aero wrote:...and that it conforms the solar system to Titus/Bode's law--another mystery :shock:
CharlesChandler wrote:Bode's law is a whole nuther topic. ;)
Yes another topic, a vast one.

User avatar
CharlesChandler
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by CharlesChandler » Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:20 am

viscount aero wrote:I'm still not following why you insist that retrograde is the absolute preferred state and it must be reversed by another force :?:
Here's an animation (that somebody else did) of the expected angular velocities at different radii, where the inner stuff is moving faster than the outer stuff:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... w-anim.gif

There are 4 layers shown. So let's suppose that you're trotting along in orbit around the system center, trying to keep up with the other stuff, somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd layers, and let's suppose that you become the nucleus of condensation, such that everything starts sticking to you, and you're forming the core of a planet. You'd find that anything that accreted on your left shoulder would be moving faster than stuff attaching itself to your right shoulder. As such, the continued accretion process should get you spinning to the right (CW in plan view), even while you orbit in CCW mode. Thus your axial rotation should always be the reverse of your orbital rotation (i.e., retrograde).

So I conclude that prograde axial rotations are not a prediction of the accretion disc model, and something else had to have been responsible.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Wed Aug 20, 2014 1:11 pm

CharlesChandler wrote:
viscount aero wrote:I'm still not following why you insist that retrograde is the absolute preferred state and it must be reversed by another force :?:
Here's an animation (that somebody else did) of the expected angular velocities at different radii, where the inner stuff is moving faster than the outer stuff:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... w-anim.gif

There are 4 layers shown. So let's suppose that you're trotting along in orbit around the system center, trying to keep up with the other stuff, somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd layers, and let's suppose that you become the nucleus of condensation, such that everything starts sticking to you, and you're forming the core of a planet. You'd find that anything that accreted on your left shoulder would be moving faster than stuff attaching itself to your right shoulder. As such, the continued accretion process should get you spinning to the right (CW in plan view), even while you orbit in CCW mode. Thus your axial rotation should always be the reverse of your orbital rotation (i.e., retrograde).

So I conclude that prograde axial rotations are not a prediction of the accretion disc model, and something else had to have been responsible.
Ok yes. I thought kinda sorta that was what you meant. Great animation sample. Easy to see. I am now 100% clear on what you are saying. It is a simple action/reaction that creates retrograde "original" motion about a planetary axis to any orbital direction. It is the same principle as gears turning opposite to each other when meshed, a backspin. We see this phenomenon as eddies in Jupiter's atmosphere, for example.

The mechanism that brings both the orbit and axial spin into "prograde" is unknown as it is counterintuitive. I think it has to do with what you suggested, Lorentz force, plus the helix/spiral rifling motion of the planetary orbits. I am now twisting my brain over creating a model for the mechanism of this. It may end up being several possible models.

To reiterate, bear in mind that virtually no one discusses the actual nature of orbits--that they are spirals. Nobody ever discusses the ramifications of that.

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Signal cloning as prograde templates

Unread post by viscount aero » Wed Aug 20, 2014 1:33 pm

Charles, I just had an idea :idea: It may incorporate the Lorentz force, perhaps. I will call it "signal cloning." That being, the orbits and prograde rotations are cloned signals in sympathetic electrical resonance with the parent star (Sun). Realize that per spiraling helix oribts these are actually sine waves. These sine waves are electrically induced and overridden/established by the Sun as the primary node of the signal. Orbits, then, are ancillary and/or cloned facsimiles of the Sun's dominating electrical wave envelope. The Sun induces a literal dance of the particles around it.

Once a planet is born of and/or enters the Sun's plasma envelope, the body encounters the influence of the Sun's signal profile that is physically expressed in its rotation--the Sun being a rotating generator or motor. You could also consider it to be a voltage regulator and virtual cathode. This electrical device, the Sun, can be measured on an oscilloscope in all likelihood. This may also tie into why planets tend to "quantize" into a Titus Bode relationship. They are self-arranging as they are "signal cloned" into sympathetic positions very much like notes in a musical scale. It may also have to do with harmonics. Things will tend to vibrate and assume the waveform of adjacent dominant signals, ripples.

I know this is vague-ish and cursory but that is the nature of new ideas :) Perhaps you can help elaborate. You're highly known to be smart like that :geek:

User avatar
CharlesChandler
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Contact:

Re: Signal cloning as prograde templates

Unread post by CharlesChandler » Wed Aug 20, 2014 2:31 pm

viscount aero wrote:I know this is vague-ish and cursory but that is the nature of new ideas :) Perhaps you can help elaborate.
Yes, I'm a top-down thinker also -- take in the broadest range of data, and consider the broadest range of possible solutions, and then start weeding out the things that just aren't going to work. Takes time, but produces great results. Believe it or not, the time that we have put into this exceeds the effort most scientists put into most journal articles. After all, they're on a schedule -- we're not. So we can open up possibilities that they cannot. Every once in a while in the history of science, if the mainstream has gotten off track, efforts such as this can actually count for something -- sometimes something big. So yes, start with vague epiphanies, and then slowly increase the specificity, to see if the ideas can get fully matched up with the data.

The whole orbits thing is starting to look like a gold mine. I didn't know what all was involved until the discussion with celeste. The paper that I started on these topics is: Axial and Orbital Rotations. I'll put some thought into your resonance idea, and see what it sounds like from this end, and get back to you. I come back with better responses after a couple of days -- off-hand comments on new ideas aren't worth much. ;)
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Signal cloning as prograde templates

Unread post by viscount aero » Wed Aug 20, 2014 2:56 pm

CharlesChandler wrote:
viscount aero wrote:I know this is vague-ish and cursory but that is the nature of new ideas :) Perhaps you can help elaborate.
Yes, I'm a top-down thinker also -- take in the broadest range of data, and consider the broadest range of possible solutions, and then start weeding out the things that just aren't going to work. Takes time, but produces great results. Believe it or not, the time that we have put into this exceeds the effort most scientists put into most journal articles. After all, they're on a schedule -- we're not. So we can open up possibilities that they cannot. Every once in a while in the history of science, if the mainstream has gotten off track, efforts such as this can actually count for something -- sometimes something big. So yes, start with vague epiphanies, and then slowly increase the specificity, to see if the ideas can get fully matched up with the data.

The whole orbits thing is starting to look like a gold mine. I didn't know what all was involved until the discussion with celeste. The paper that I started on these topics is: Axial and Orbital Rotations. I'll put some thought into your resonance idea, and see what it sounds like from this end, and get back to you. I come back with better responses after a couple of days -- off-hand comments on new ideas aren't worth much. ;)
Charles, I agree with you. Discussion can be very valuable when each party agrees to listen to the other and ask questions. I had a breakthrough in the signal cloning/resonance concept while waiting for your next post. I will provide a diagram and post it up later. It may help to further the concept. It demonstrates how a retrograde spin can become prograde once the planet dips into specific areas (troughs and crests) of the sine wave created by the parent star. The incident angle of the approaching planet determines the nature of how long and when the prograde transition takes place. All retrograde planets' axial spin are indicative of newer members in this model.

I do think that orbits and prograde/retrograde profiles are a goldmine as you suggest. For one, prograde axial spin can immediately disqualify core accretion theory, too, as eddies/vortices tend to function and behave like gears (mentioned previously using the Jovian atmosphere and its structures to illustrate this point).

You are right, as I reiterate, that retrograde motion will tend to be the normal "original" action/reaction profile if core accretion were viable. But this is not what we see.

4realScience
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:20 pm

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by 4realScience » Fri Aug 22, 2014 4:43 pm

Hey guys,

Just read up on all your posts. Very interesting subject.

So far no one has mentioned that the solar 'wind' must, at equilibrium, change all planets to grade, as opposed to retro grade motion. This is a simple idea if you think of it this way: plasma particles are expelled by the sun perpendicular to its surface at high speed. We see this from the Stereo satellite images often cited to show CMEs.

Look at a single particle of a CME. Although it is going off perpendicular (vertical) to its reference frame, the sun surface, it also carries the same momentum it had before it left the sun which means it also has horizontal momentum. So seen from, say, above the sun's north pole from a stationary viewpoint the particle would spiral out from the sun where its spiral velocity would be the same as the point on the sun's surface it left.

Watching from this same viewpoint we would see that the particle, when it hits anything in the solar disc, will impart a SPIN increment to that object. And over time these events will cause every object in the solar disc to spin the same way the sun does.

So retrograde rotations of planets are unstable and kind of show us a clock if we could work it out. I think this applies to atmospheres, too and in advance of the planetary spin. Another clock effect.

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Fri Aug 22, 2014 5:09 pm

4realScience wrote:Hey guys,

Just read up on all your posts. Very interesting subject.

So far no one has mentioned that the solar 'wind' must, at equilibrium, change all planets to grade, as opposed to retro grade motion. This is a simple idea if you think of it this way: plasma particles are expelled by the sun perpendicular to its surface at high speed. We see this from the Stereo satellite images often cited to show CMEs.

Look at a single particle of a CME. Although it is going off perpendicular (vertical) to its reference frame, the sun surface, it also carries the same momentum it had before it left the sun which means it also has horizontal momentum. So seen from, say, above the sun's north pole from a stationary viewpoint the particle would spiral out from the sun where its spiral velocity would be the same as the point on the sun's surface it left.

Watching from this same viewpoint we would see that the particle, when it hits anything in the solar disc, will impart a SPIN increment to that object. And over time these events will cause every object in the solar disc to spin the same way the sun does.

So retrograde rotations of planets are unstable and kind of show us a clock if we could work it out. I think this applies to atmospheres, too and in advance of the planetary spin. Another clock effect.
I was thinking along those lines somewhat. Your idea is similar to the collapsing dusty plasma idea that tends to impart retrograde motion, not prograde. Unless I'm not following you correctly, the spin will tend to retrograde. The mechanism for prograde is unknown.

4realScience
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:20 pm

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by 4realScience » Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:12 pm

OK Viscount, you are right and I am wrong about that. See, I had to re-look up the rotation direction of the Sun verses the planets and was surprised to see it is the same as the planets: counter clockwise when viewed from the north (Polaris) pole. I had remembered it was opposite.

But the analyses of the solar 'wind' incremental momentum still attracts and baffles me, so far.

User avatar
CharlesChandler
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by CharlesChandler » Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:22 pm

FYI, celeste started up a thread (on the motion of bodies in an orbit) to discuss orbits, so perhaps we should take that part of this discussion over there, and let this thread get back to the OP.

viscount: I'm still mulling over your electrical resonance idea. The thing that interests me about it is that it would seem to have the capability of explaining the quantization in Bode's law, and I'm at a loss for how that can be explained except in terms of some sort of wavelength that resonates in quantized form. I just don't know how to approach corroborating it. Brant (a.k.a. "upriver") talks about the Sun as an antenna capable of receiving long wavelength energy that is undetectable to our instrumentation, because our antennae are too short. Maybe there's another harmonic frequency in there somewhere, with Mercury at the 4x null point, and other planets likewise on null points?
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Fri Aug 22, 2014 7:12 pm

CharlesChandler wrote:FYI, celeste started up a thread (on the motion of bodies in an orbit) to discuss orbits, so perhaps we should take that part of this discussion over there, and let this thread get back to the OP.

viscount: I'm still mulling over your electrical resonance idea. The thing that interests me about it is that it would seem to have the capability of explaining the quantization in Bode's law, and I'm at a loss for how that can be explained except in terms of some sort of wavelength that resonates in quantized form. I just don't know how to approach corroborating it. Brant (a.k.a. "upriver") talks about the Sun as an antenna capable of receiving long wavelength energy that is undetectable to our instrumentation, because our antennae are too short. Maybe there's another harmonic frequency in there somewhere, with Mercury at the 4x null point, and other planets likewise on null points?
Charles, I may just post a quick sketch to further the dialogue on the causal mechanism. I had the idea hit me and it's very simple. Mind you, it may not be correct but lots of theories aren't. Suffice it to say, it has to do with the planets hitting the peaks or troughs of long range sine waves in the radio spectrum emanating from the Sun. It may, too, be a function of acoustic waves in space. In other words, "sound" may be keeping the solar system in orbit and in prograde motion both in orbits and in axial spins of planets.

I have another model, too, that may render the same result--of the Sun's ballistic trajectory making continual aether ripples, akin to a pebble being perpetually dropped in a pond. Mechanical waves of the aether, in this case, create the peaks and troughs that the planets' surfaces encounter to counter any retrograde spin, over time, to a prograde direction.

First off, watch this video sequence to get the general idea. Notice how the incident angle (attack angle) of the incoming planet can hit a peak or trough and then reverse its axial spin. Disregard the "bouncing" and reversal of direction as a planet would not do that in such a "hard" fashion, and would encounter waves in space more tacitly, over millions of years.

Although simple and crude this is the essence of the idea:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW9y-un_YJ8

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Fri Aug 22, 2014 7:52 pm

Read the diagram from right to left, the direction of the Sun's axial rotation as seen from its north pole:

Image

And of course this is just a diagram. It will take thousands or millions of orbits around the Sun, with the planet experiencing the Sun's wave envelope (which is really a continual extension of its surface) for the retrograde axial spin of a planet to correct itself to prograde.

The ripples/waves act as a skid/friction surface for the near/Sun side of the planet. It's so simple that it's dumb 8-) The principle is based on simply extending the Sun's surface out to the entire solar system--experienced as layers of waves--which is what the wave envelope environment/heliosheath basically is. The helopause would be, then, where the waves' periodicity drops to zero.

Venus would be, then, at the end of its retrograde spin profile, slowing to a temporary "lock," then reversing spin to prograde. In other words, I doubt Venus will remain tidally locked. But we will never know in this lifetime.

jtb
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 12:36 am

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by jtb » Mon Dec 01, 2014 4:08 am

Just had another thought. I was traveling in my car and a burst of wind pushed it slightly sideways. A change in wind velocity altered the direction of my forward motion.

Supposedly Earth spins west to east: 1,000 mph at the equator decreasing to 0 mph at the poles. If the atmosphere is locked to Earth's rotation, shouldn't an airplane traveling south to north have to compensate for the changing velocity of the atmosphere?

User avatar
CharlesChandler
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by CharlesChandler » Mon Dec 01, 2014 11:32 am

jtb wrote:Supposedly Earth spins west to east: 1,000 mph at the equator decreasing to 0 mph at the poles. If the atmosphere is locked to Earth's rotation, shouldn't an airplane traveling south to north have to compensate for the changing velocity of the atmosphere?
Indeed -- this is known as the Coriolis Effect, and it's what turns tropical depressions into tropical cyclones -- the air doesn't know to compensate. So air starting at the equator, with the maximum velocity, and moving north toward a low pressure, misses the target to the right, and then careens into a left-hand turn, still under the influence of the low pressure. Air starting at the equator and moving south misses the target to the left, and falls into a right-hand turn.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms

jtb
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 12:36 am

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by jtb » Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:29 am

Hi Charles,
Sorry, I changed the subject without a detailed explanation. In this instance I was thinking [whenever I started a sentence with "I was just thinking", my foreman would say "now jtb, don't attempt anything your not equipped for"] what if the weather between the equator and the north pole was relatively calm with minimum winds. An airplane flying at constant speed from the equator to the pole would be constantly compensating for the changing w-e velocity of the rotating atmosphere to fly in a straight line. Failing to compensate for the changing velocity would result in a curved path and add many miles and hours to the flight.

If the container of the earth was moving in a straight line and Earth/atmosphere was not rotating, no compensation would have to be made traveling in any direction. It would be like the atmosphere in a moving bus (container). You could throw a ball in any direction and it would travel the same distance in a straight line. If you spin in a swivel chair on that bus, you have to compensate to hit your target.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest