This is certainly an interesting thread. The mainstream explanation is that the Earth (and other planets) got there [url2=http://www.ccmr.cornell.edu/education/a ... ?quid=1181]rotation[/url2], as they condensed, by gravitational attraction, from the [url2=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebular_hypothesis]original cloud [/url2] of dust and gases from which the solar system was formed, 4.5 billion years ago. This explanation is rejected in Electric Universe theory:
Wal Thornhill wrote:Answer: The three theories above demonstrate blind ‘faith’ in the idea that the planets were formed from a nebula as one ‘family,’ roughly where we see them today. There is no scientific reason to adhere to such a belief while there is an avalanche of data from space to contradict it. We do not know that Mercury has a high density. There is no need for far-fetched scenarios involving the early Sun or a colossal impact. Planet and star formation by gravitational accretion has never been observed and it cannot be shown to work in theory. “There is a general belief that stars are forming by gravitational collapse; in spite of vigorous efforts no one has yet found any observational indication of confirmation. Thus the ‘generally accepted’ theory of stellar formation may be one of a hundred unsupported dogmas which constitute a large part of present-day astrophysics.” —Hannes Alfvén, G. Arrhenius, Evolution of the Solar System, NASA 1976.
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=8qysa3zk
With regard to the rotation of stars (could a similar logic be applied to planetary rotation?) Don Scott wrote on p159 of The Electric Sky:
There are several rotational anomalies in our solar system for which mainstream has no explanation or has to resort to coincidence.From an electrical standpoint we make the simple observation that increasing electric current input to stars results in increasing maximum rotational speeds.
bold in original text
-the similarity between the rotation rates of Mars and Earth
-the similarity of the tilt of the axes of rotation of Mars and Earth (also Saturn and Neptune)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_tilt
-the synchronization of the rotations of Venus and Earth, Electric Sky p138:
Also, another rotational anomaly of immense interest. Has the rotational period of Saturn slowed down in recent years as measured by space probes? or are these enigmatic results due to inadequacies in measuring techniques?Each time Venus makes its closest approach to Earth (this position is called inferior conjunction), the same face of Venus looks toward Earth each time.
These inferior conjunctions occur repetitively at precisely five specific points in Venus's orbit. This is what engineers call a "phase lock."
bold in original text
This could warrant further investigation.Cassini took readings of the day-length indicator regarded as most reliable, the rhythm of natural radio signals from the planet. The results give 10 hours, 45 minutes, 45 seconds (plus or minus 36 seconds) as the length of time it takes Saturn to complete each rotation. Here's the puzzle: That is about 6 minutes, or one percent, longer than the radio rotational period measured by the Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecraft, which flew by Saturn in 1980 and 1981.
Cassini scientists are not questioning Voyager's careful measurements. And they definitely do not think the whole planet of Saturn is actually rotating that much slower than it did two decades ago. Instead, they are looking for an explanation based on some variability in how the rotation deep inside Saturn drives the radio pulse.
[snip]
"I think we will be able to unravel the puzzle, but it's going to take some time," said Gurnett. "With Cassini in orbit around Saturn for four years or more, we will be in an excellent position to monitor long-term variations in the radio period, as well as investigate the rotational period using other techniques."
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassi ... 62804.html
nick c