Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #659891

Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of the physics of your idiot guru

Show all headers | View raw

Am Montag000023, 23.12.2024 um 21:07 schrieb J. J. Lodder:
> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
> 
>> Am Donnerstag000019, 19.12.2024 um 08:02 schrieb Maciej Wozniak:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
>>> As seen, the definition of second loved so
>>> much to be invoked by relativistic morons -
>>> wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru
>>> lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary
>>> 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics.
>>>
>> Look at this:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_length_fluctuations#/media/File:Deviation_of
> _day_length_from_SI_day.svg
>>
>> We can see, that length of the solar day is shifting by about 1 ms per
>> day within a year.
>>
>> The length of the day is also about 1 ms longer than 86400 seconds on
>> average over the entire plot.
>>
>> Would we add this 1 ms to the day, we could see, that Earth' rotation is
>> actually speeding up occasionally, because the delta t value also goes
>> down in recent years.
>>
>> Iow: if delta t is less today than half a century ago and we had already
>> added one or two ms to the day length, now the Earth would rotate faster
>> than before.
>>
>> This is so because in that case, the cumulative delta t curve would go down.
>>
>> Another good question would be:
>>
>> what causes this pronounced 1ms shift in the length of day within every
>> single year.
>>
>> This does not sound like much, but actually means, that the Earth
>> rotation is speeding up and down significantly and with a distinct
>> measurable pattern of 1ms per day.
>>
>> Given the large mass of the Earth this would require a lot of angular
>> momentum to be lost and gained (every single year).
>>
>> Somehow I cannot believe this could happen in reality. So, the only
>> possible explanation is, that the UTC-time itself is shifting by 1ms per
>> day within a year (which is colossal number, if you take the assumed
>> precision of atomic clocks into consideration).
> 
> Your mistake lies in the assumption that all those short term
> fluctuations involve a change in angular momentum.
> Only a part of the long term trend is caused by that,

Actually I had assumed, that Earth cannot loose angular momentum at all.

If now a fluctuation in the apparent length of the solar does occurs, 
than something must be wrong.

The question would be: what is actually wrong, since it is simply 
impossible for the entire Earth rotation to speed up and slow down on an 
annual basis.

Therefore there must be a reason, which is possibly overlooked, that 
would make the solar day longer over the course of a year and later 
shorter again.

I personally would guess, that the elliptic form of Earth' orbit around 
the sun is responsible.

But that would require a reason, which was not yet covered by standard 
cosmology.


TH

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

A short proof of the inconsistency of the physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-12-19 08:02 +0100
  Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of the physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-12-22 07:33 +0100
    Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of the physics of your idiot guru nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2024-12-23 21:07 +0100
      Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of the physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-12-28 11:54 +0100
        Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of the physics of your idiot  guru The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-28 11:22 -0800
        Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of the physics of your idiot guru nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2024-12-29 20:36 +0100

csiph-web