The day the Earth stood still...

Mastermind · Post by **Mastermind** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:50 pm

An interesting article I found:

http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/secret ... vsky2.html

bob2010 · Post by **bob2010** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:01 pm

the book was written in the 1950s. i have never heard of it. the article is interesting. im looking up some info on the book. apparantly it was rejected by the scientific community. the guy that wrote it was trained in psychoanalysis so i wouldnt take it too seriously, you dont want to be like those jesus-mythers who use German professors for sources.

Mastermind · Post by **Mastermind** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:23 pm

Well, my understanding is that the Earth does change the direction of rotation every few thousand years, so even if Venus didn't do it, it probably still happened around that time.

bob2010 · Post by **bob2010** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:51 pm

earth wouldnt change the direction it is spinning by itself, it would require something catastropic happening.
the magnetic poles do flip every now and then, you are not confusing the two are you?

Mastermind · Post by **Mastermind** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 4:02 pm

No, I believe both the earth's rotation and the magentic poles alternate.

Mastermind · Post by **Mastermind** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 4:03 pm

Either that or the earth turns upside down(upper hemisphere becomes lower, and vice versa). This might also have the effect of an extended day or night. I find the fact that there is a global confirmation of strangely long days and nights quite convincing.

Felgar · Post by **Felgar** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:32 pm

bob2010 wrote:the magnetic poles do flip every now and then, you are not confusing the two are you?

Yeah the poles do flip on average once every 250,000 years... Though it hasn't flipped in 700,000 years according to the science community. And AFAIK the evidence used to track the flips is pretty reliable.

At any rate I would question the author, that neither the flipping of magnetic poles (as they haven't flipped in 700K years) nor the reversal of the Earth's rotation are reasonable explanations for the stopping of the sun. First I don't think even a nearby encounter with a planet would be enough to stop and change the Earth rotation. Second, Venus (a terrestial rock planet) is made of elements quite different from the Jupiter gas giant. And third I do believe (but could be mistaken) that all planets in the solar system rotate in the same direction - to me this supports the notion that they do not change over time.

Mastermind · Post by **Mastermind** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:10 pm

http://www.solarviews.com/eng/solarsys.htm

Venus, Uranus and Pluto turn in the opposite direction of earth. The interesting thing is that i would expect venus to turn in the other direction if its gravitational field had come into contact with Earth's

Prodigal Son · Post by **Prodigal Son** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 10:26 pm

interesting article. i think i will buy the book.

i heard that this recent tsunami sped up the rotation of the earth by half a second...interesting, huh?

The edge · Post by **The edge** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 10:03 pm

If the world had rotated backwards, the bible will be reporting that the sun moving backward.

BTW, anyone has the answers on why planets spin?

Felgar · Post by **Felgar** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:34 am

The edge wrote:BTW, anyone has the answers on why planets spin?

The theory is that as nebula material condenses (due to gravity) to form a planet, the rotation is created as a result of the compaction of material. Much like a figure skater greatly increases rotational speed by bringing their arms into their body...

I stand corrected about the rotation Mastermind...

bob2010 · Post by **bob2010** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:59 pm

The theory is that as nebula material condenses (due to gravity) to form a planet, the rotation is created as a result of the compaction of material. Much like a figure skater greatly increases rotational speed by bringing their arms into their body...

to put that simply, conservation of momentum. i think. havent sat through a physics class in a few weeks.

The edge · Post by **The edge** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:42 pm

So if a body does not spin at the onset, would it still spin as it is being compacted?
What if the motion of the individual masses started off as linear & not rotational while it's being compacted?

Does all planetary bodies spin?

Mastermind · Post by **Mastermind** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:44 pm

not all bodies spin. Asteroids don't spin(i think). planets stuck in an orbit do though.

Felgar · Post by **Felgar** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:31 pm

The edge wrote:So if a body does not spin at the onset, would it still spin as it is being compacted?
What if the motion of the individual masses started off as linear & not rotational while it's being compacted?

Does all planetary bodies spin?

I think you're right - in theory it would not spin. Except note that it's perhaps impossible to not have at least some motion at the onset of solar system formation. Points to bob also, for innerant simplicity.

Asteroids would be a little different because they are knocked around by each other and the planets, so their original rotation would not have been preserved since formation, and also being so small they may not have rotated much at all to start. The moon too, is said to have been influenced by the Earth's gravity to the extent that it has been forced into a rotational period equal to its orbit.

I should point out that a) I'm not even really that familiar with the latest theories of solar system formation, and b) even the latest theories have a long way to go before they'll have it down. Until we can observe Earth-like (and smaller) planets orbiting other stars which will allow us to observe many other systems in their entirety, all we're doing is taking wild guesses. Scientists once thought that gas giants like Jupiter could only form far from their star, but we've since seen many that orbit extremely close to their star... So obviously there's a lot more to learn yet. They are working on telescope systems much more powerful than Hubble to make these very observations.