PDA

View Full Version : The wobble has stopped - what does it mean



bmpbmp
2006-Feb-10, 05:40 PM
http://www.michaelmandeville.com/earthmonitor/polarmotion/2006_wobble_anomaly.htm

SolusLupus
2006-Feb-10, 05:43 PM
Errr... I just did a bit of checking of the whole website. http://www.michaelmandeville.com/

...


No work comes close to presenting the real Edgar Cayce, his life, his work, his detailed predictions, and why this psychic is the most important prophet of our times. Unmatched anywhere, here is an extraordinary vision of the future, including the "Great Leveling" of the "classes and masses" which must occur to create true justice and democracy, the advent of spiritual values which will transform the Earth, the catastrophic Earth Changes which will culminate in geological upheavals and a catastrophic shifting of the Earth's Spin Axis, the opening of the "Hall of Records" which will reveal the true origin and history of humanity, the Destiny of America, Russia, Japan, and China, and much much more.

Errr, yeah... I highly doubt that it's a reliable source.

On the other paw, I am curious as to what the answer it. I dunno myself. :)

bmpbmp
2006-Feb-10, 05:45 PM
isn't this dangerous

bmpbmp
2006-Feb-10, 06:18 PM
Don't take this as a stupid question but with the no wobble will this cause the earth to fall of it's access or something

01101001
2006-Feb-10, 06:27 PM
You're obviously very worried about this. Why?

Wikipedia: Chandler wobble (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandler_wobble):


During the first hour of the national radio broadcast of Coast to Coast AM on January 28, 2006, Lloyd Stewart Carpenter reported that the Chandler wobble has stopped (i.e., its amplitude has reduced to zero) -- which could be a harbinger of a catastrophic pole shift. This is however completely unfounded speculation as the actual recorded data shows no indication that the wobble has stopped, or shows any signs of stopping. If it did stop for any length of time this would be of great interest in gaining a better understanding the causes, but would not cause any catastrophic changes in the overall rotation axis of the planet.

bmpbmp
2006-Feb-10, 06:33 PM
Cause I have no idea what it means, can someone explain it to me

01101001
2006-Feb-10, 06:47 PM
The observers: INTERNATIONAL EARTH ROTATION & REFERENCE SYSTEMS SERVICE (http://hpiers.obspm.fr/)

The data: COORDINATES OF THE POLE - POLAR MOTION (http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc/earthor/polmot/pm.html)
(If you look at the historical record of the x and y movement of the poles [Figure 2] you'll see there is a periodic lessening of the wobble every few years. It hasn't hurt us before.)

Popular version, Straight Dope: How come the Chandler wobble hasn't dampened out?
(http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a991203.html)

JPL: A MYSTERY OF EARTH'S WOBBLE SOLVED: IT'S THE OCEAN (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/releases/2000/chandlerwobble.html)

hhEb09'1
2006-Feb-10, 06:56 PM
Errr... I just did a bit of checking of the whole website. http://www.michaelmandeville.com/I just checked out the article in the OP, it says "The Spin Axis is not really moving, it stays oriented to the same fixed stars. It is really the crust of the Earth which is moving, sliding over the Spin Axis"

That's nonsense, pretty much. They don't seem to know what they're talking about.

Popular version, Straight Dope: How come the Chandler wobble hasn't dampened out?
(http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a991203.html)
Hey! that's me.

Halcyon Dayz
2006-Feb-11, 01:43 AM
Cecil's latest gift to mankind, Triumph of the Straight Dope, is hitting the bookstores now and can also be ordered on-line... :whistle:

Ken G
2006-Feb-11, 01:59 AM
Interesting question hh (you're famous!), sounds like the answer is that the CW is driven somehow. My question is, how can a 50 foot wobble in the pole amount to a fifth of a mile error in navigation? Why don't you just miss by the 50 feet the pole has moved?

hhEb09'1
2006-Feb-11, 12:59 PM
sounds like the answer is that the CW is driven somehow.Exactly. But the real question was how. Some people have called it the holy grail of geophysics. The solution that everyone has so far accepted is certain fluccuations in ocean currents, but I haven't had a chance to really look into it.

The chandler wobble spectrum is extremely narrow, and although the seasonal driven wobble spectrum is a lot wider, they're far enough apart that they don't overlap--there is little chance that seasonal effects can drive the chandler wobble. So, how do ocean currents deviate so much from the seasonal cycles? I'm not sure yet.
My question is, how can a 50 foot wobble in the pole amount to a fifth of a mile error in navigation? Why don't you just miss by the 50 feet the pole has moved?Navigators?

Jens
2006-Feb-12, 02:48 AM
Don't take this as a stupid question but with the no wobble will this cause the earth to fall of it's access or something

Well, there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers, as they say. But to respond to your question, the earth can't "fall off its axis" because it's not attached to anything. It's just a ball floating in space. You see, a spinning top on the earth can suddenly flip, but that's because the gravitational pull is being stopped, if you want. Obviously, a big body smashing into the earth could change the axis, but it won't "flip" on its own. Floating bodies simply don't do that unless some external force is applied.

Omicron Persei 8
2006-Feb-12, 04:23 AM
You see, a spinning top on the earth can suddenly flip, but that's because the gravitational pull is being stopped, if you want.

No, it's because a top is top heavy to begin with and is spin-stablized. The gyroscopic effect keeps the top from finding its equilbrium center of gravity state....at least I think that's it.

Jens
2006-Feb-12, 09:34 AM
You see, a spinning top on the earth can suddenly flip, but that's because the gravitational pull is being stopped, if you want.

No, it's because a top is top heavy to begin with and is spin-stablized. The gyroscopic effect keeps the top from finding its equilbrium center of gravity state....at least I think that's it.

I'm sure your explanation is a better one. But it doesn't invalidate my initial claim (I hope), i.e. that the earth is not in danger of suddenly finding a new equilibrium center of gravity upside down or something like that. When you stop a spin from spinning, it will find its equilibrium. But if you stopped the earth from rotating, it would just continue to drift in the same position, I assume.

Omicron Persei 8
2006-Feb-12, 09:48 AM
I'm sure your explanation is a better one. But it doesn't invalidate my initial claim (I hope), i.e. that the earth is not in danger of suddenly finding a new equilibrium center of gravity upside down or something like that. When you stop a spin from spinning, it will find its equilibrium. But if you stopped the earth from rotating, it would just continue to drift in the same position, I assume.

Oh I wasn't disagreeing with you on that point. The Earth will continue to orbit the sun if it were to stop spinning. Our climate, on the other hand, would be pretty messed up.

Faultline
2006-Feb-12, 05:17 PM
Stop the world and let me off. I'm getting dizzy. :shifty:

The Saint
2006-Feb-12, 11:01 PM
The Apocalyptists are all abuzz about Chandler because of Isaiah 24's
"The Earth is shaken and it will reel to and fro like a drunkard, and be removed like a frail hut".

Is there any natural mechanism whereby the Earth could literally start reeling?

hhEb09'1
2006-Feb-12, 11:13 PM
What does "reeling" mean, literally?

Ken G
2006-Feb-12, 11:14 PM
Well, some kind of violent re-arrangement of the mass distribution could do that, but the required event would be so violent that "reeling" would come after, not before, our extinction.

Metricyard
2006-Feb-12, 11:28 PM
Well, some kind of violent re-arrangement of the mass distribution could do that, but the required event would be so violent that "reeling" would come after, not before, our extinction.

I've always wanted to try and stop the Earth from spinning.
If we could get every car in the world to face west and gun the gas, we just might be able to stop the Earths rototion. I say we give it a try. And if a cop tries to give you a ticket, just tell them you're doing a scientific expreiment. Don't tell them you're trying to stop the Earths spin though, they might think your crazy.

Ken G
2006-Feb-13, 12:42 AM
Actually, the Earth's mass is about a billion trillion cars, and the equator is already moving at about a thousand miles an hour. I'm afraid you'd have to do a lot more than violate the speed limit to have even the minutest impact....

hhEb09'1
2006-Feb-13, 01:48 AM
Actually, the Earth's mass is about a billion trillion cars,Those would be about 6-ton cars, too :)

Jens
2006-Feb-13, 01:50 AM
No, I think the thing to do to stop the rotation of the earth would be to make a very long and very strong rope, tie one end around the earth, and then tie the other end around jupiter.

And about reeling, I think it's true. The earth is reeling. Just six months ago, we were on the totally opposite side of the sun, and now we're all the way over here. If you don't call that reeling, what would you?

hhEb09'1
2006-Feb-13, 01:57 AM
If you don't call that reeling, what would you?I dunno, I was in Las Cruces six months ago, and I haven't been reeling.

Metricyard
2006-Feb-13, 12:30 PM
Actually, the Earth's mass is about a billion trillion cars, and the equator is already moving at about a thousand miles an hour. I'm afraid you'd have to do a lot more than violate the speed limit to have even the minutest impact....


Oh sure, ruin my fun :)

I wonder, would gravity probe B notice the Earths wobble? It was in a polar orbit. Would the wobble show up in a frame dragging experiment?

Mendel
2006-Feb-13, 01:33 PM
Anyways, if someone was actually reading from the beginning of that article ( http://www.michaelmandeville.com/earthmonitor/polarmotion/2006_wobble_anomaly.htm ) and got a bit worried, with confused shilling feelings... you should have read a bit more after all. I did and the further I got, the more dubious it seemed, I started to doubt about the article more and more, until finally this came:



A now old friend called me as I sat working on my keyboard this past weekend wondering these issues, pondering all of this relatively fast breaking news, wondering how to work this into the final new edition copy of “The Prophecies”, in the chapters where I verify the omen trends for the Changes In The Earth, wondering specifically how “apparent” or how “real” this sudden change in the wobble is and how I should handle it in copy I will have to live with for the next 30 years (I do not intend to re-edit it).

She is a very psychic woman who goes by the name of Hotno, who lives very remotely in the vast interior of Canada, a veritable spirit guide in the woods.


Having read that, I had to go no further, they could as well be talking of the distress of the green fairies next.


edit: At least they make clear predictions though!


The change to come in the wobble pattern will not be evident for two more months. It will seem to be in limbo even though a new pattern is already beginning. After four months, the new pattern will begin to be evident even to those who do not understand the change in the earth. The consequences will begin to come in about 7 to 14 months, major upheavals will begin and progressively build, leading eventually to the radical shifting of the poles. It is all real, you are entering the shift real time. Get with it and proceed accordingly.

Let's revisit this thread in 7 to 14 months, shall we?


Tip to apocalypse mongerers wanting to create buzz: Keep your doomsday scenarios strictly professional and to the point, don't add paranormal nonsense or agendas there, it'll only serve to ruin your story.

Ken G
2006-Feb-13, 01:47 PM
I wonder, would gravity probe B notice the Earths wobble? It was in a polar orbit. Would the wobble show up in a frame dragging experiment?
Too small an effect. It should barely be able to observe the Earth's rotation itself. (But there are easier ways to detect the wobble if you are lucky enough to actually be on the object in question....)

swansont
2006-Feb-13, 01:58 PM
I've always wanted to try and stop the Earth from spinning.
If we could get every car in the world to face west and gun the gas, we just might be able to stop the Earths rototion. I say we give it a try. And if a cop tries to give you a ticket, just tell them you're doing a scientific expreiment. Don't tell them you're trying to stop the Earths spin though, they might think your crazy.

I remember doing a back-of-the-envelope calculation on this. I think if everyone with a car did it, you might be able to detect the slowing with current atomic clock technology. i.e. parts in 10^14 or so.

Ken G
2006-Feb-13, 03:01 PM
That agrees with my numbers, and is an interesting thought! But whether or not 1 part in 10^14 is detectable depends on what time interval you are talking about. Can an atomic clock measure to within 10^-14 of a second, or would you need to maintain the experiment for much longer than a second?

hhEb09'1
2006-Feb-13, 03:06 PM
That agrees with my numbers, and is an interesting thought! But whether or not 1 part in 10^14 is detectable depends on what time interval you are talking about. Can an atomic clock measure to within 10^-14 of a second, or would you need to maintain the experiment for much longer than a second?Surely the experiment would be measuring the offset for the rotation, which would require external reference points--whose measurement would not be accurate to 1 part in 10^14, except over long periods of time. The individual clocks themselves tend to drift over long periods of time.

swansont
2006-Feb-13, 08:59 PM
That agrees with my numbers, and is an interesting thought! But whether or not 1 part in 10^14 is detectable depends on what time interval you are talking about. Can an atomic clock measure to within 10^-14 of a second, or would you need to maintain the experiment for much longer than a second?

That would be the fractional frequency change, so you'd integrate to get the phase (time) change, so we're talking nanosecond(s) a day at that level. The clocks can do that; the hard part becomes measuring the earth orientation parameters to sufficient precision. EO isn't my area, but the impression from discussions I've had is that yes, you can do that with VLBI measurements. But it would take a reasonable fraction of a day, not a few seconds. We'd have to start on one coast and drive toward the other. :)

swansont
2006-Feb-13, 09:08 PM
Surely the experiment would be measuring the offset for the rotation, which would require external reference points--whose measurement would not be accurate to 1 part in 10^14, except over long periods of time. The individual clocks themselves tend to drift over long periods of time.

I agree about the orientation, but you can characterize drift and remove it. It's the change in drift that's the problem (much more for H masers than Cs beam clocks). Clock precision can be done to parts in 10^15. (it's precision, i.e. stability, that matters here, and not accuracy)

01101001
2007-Mar-13, 08:34 PM
The observers: INTERNATIONAL EARTH ROTATION & REFERENCE SYSTEMS SERVICE (http://hpiers.obspm.fr/)

The data: COORDINATES OF THE POLE - POLAR MOTION (http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc/earthor/polmot/pm.html)
(If you look at the historical record of the x and y movement of the poles [Figure 2] you'll see there is a periodic lessening of the wobble every few years. It hasn't hurt us before.)

I was just looking up one of these URLs for another thread.

Looks like the Chandler Wobble has resumed -- or more properly the wobble has continued as ever after a perfectly normal and practically predictable, temporary, brief, cessation of movement one year ago.

Where are the victims now? Where are the predictors of doom? (I know: off to other things.)


Let's revisit this thread in 7 to 14 months, shall we?

Revisiting!

Before this gets locked for the 30-day rule, does/did it belong in ATM? Nobody was really advocating that a cessation of wobble movement signaled impending disaster, just asking about it. Oh, go ahead, lock it if you will. There's probably not much more to be said, than: the doom-predictors were wrong.

Jerry
2007-Mar-13, 09:12 PM
As long as the earth is sloshy - full of water, magna and a plastic crust that bends with the tide of the moon and sun, the earth will wobble like a drunken sailor.

It is like spinning a top made out of uncured clay. It wobbles.

hhEb09'1
2007-Mar-14, 04:21 AM
As long as the earth is sloshy - full of water, magna and a plastic crust that bends with the tide of the moon and sun, the earth will wobble like a drunken sailor.

It is like spinning a top made out of uncured clay. It wobbles.Sure, but that ain't the Chandler wobble. The Chandler wobble is bigger than that.

Nereid
2007-Mar-14, 08:31 AM
Moved, from ATM section to General Science ...

publiusr
2007-Mar-15, 07:42 PM
There is nowhere for the Earth to "fall." Its already "down"