Conservation of angular Momentum

  • 29 Replies
  • 4277 Views
Conservation of angular Momentum
« on: July 27, 2017, 02:26:20 AM »
I will admit that I was wrong about my calculations of the earth rotation do to leap second.

We are all agreeing that the earth is slowing down.

We have been told that the universe was created by a very fast dot that was spinning so fast and the gravitational forces were so strong that it exploded.

Conservation of angular momentum dictates that the parts that exploded of must keep the spin rate.

From my calculations, the earth 10 billion years ago was only spinning at the rate of 5 times today's spin.

So we can have two possibilities

1)   The big bang dot was not spinning very fast as they told us.
2)   A braking system was applied to the earth to stop spinning.

Either way, the Big Bang has a problem

Was the dot spinning very fast as we been told or was there a braking mechanism that made the earth stop?

Please explain and show physics to back up your claims.

To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #1 on: July 27, 2017, 04:02:39 AM »
Let me clarify my calculations.

For a circle to make 1 revolution, it needs to go threw 360 degrees or 2pi or 6.283 rad

A year has 365.25 Days, so a Day has 6.283 rad
In 1 year we have 365.25 days times 6.283 rad = 2294.933 rad

1 day has 86400 sec and a year has 31,557,600 sec

From 1972 till 2016 we have 44 years

In 44 years we have  1,388,534,427 sec (including the 27 leap second) and we have traveled by 100,977.071 rad

The angular velocity originally is 6.283 rad  / 86400 sec = 7.272205216643E-05   rad/sec

The angular velocity after 44 years is the distance traveled divided by the time needed

100,977.071 rad / 1,388,534,427 sec = 7.272205075235E-05   rad/sec

Final angular velocity = Initial angular velocity + angular acceleration * Time

We get an angular deceleration of 1.018396E-21 rad/sec^2 for the 44 year duration.

So, if you put the numbers back to the equation and since acceleration is the opposite of deceleration ...

You get the table below.


To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2017, 04:17:54 AM »
I will admit that I was wrong about my calculations of the earth rotation do to leap second.

We are all agreeing that the earth is slowing down.

We have been told that the universe was created by a very fast dot that was spinning so fast and the gravitational forces were so strong that it exploded.

Conservation of angular momentum dictates that the parts that exploded of must keep the spin rate.

From my calculations, the earth 10 billion years ago was only spinning at the rate of 5 times today's spin.

So we can have two possibilities

1)   The big bang dot was not spinning very fast as they told us.
2)   A braking system was applied to the earth to stop spinning.

Either way, the Big Bang has a problem

Was the dot spinning very fast as we been told or was there a braking mechanism that made the earth stop?

Please explain and show physics to back up your claims.

Big bang is not eqaul to the formation of the earth. Please make specific claims, with your specific evidence :

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2017, 04:21:09 AM »
I will admit that I was wrong about my calculations of the earth rotation do to leap second.

We are all agreeing that the earth is slowing down.

We have been told that the universe was created by a very fast dot that was spinning so fast and the gravitational forces were so strong that it exploded.
Did "they" tell you? Who are "they"?

Your claim sounds totally illogical as "spinning fast" does not cause "gravitational forces",
so it looks like you are making up your own gobble-de-gook.

So I couldn't care less what "we have been told" unless:
1) The source is deemed credible and
2) It passes my own "bunkum detector",

So show what the source of your claim is and quote exactly what that source actually says, not own your twisted version.

PS You might note that I usually try to give the sources of any claims that I make.

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2017, 04:25:35 AM »
I will admit that I was wrong about my calculations of the earth rotation do to leap second.

We are all agreeing that the earth is slowing down.

We have been told that the universe was created by a very fast dot that was spinning so fast and the gravitational forces were so strong that it exploded.

Conservation of angular momentum dictates that the parts that exploded of must keep the spin rate.

From my calculations, the earth 10 billion years ago was only spinning at the rate of 5 times today's spin.

So we can have two possibilities

1)   The big bang dot was not spinning very fast as they told us.
2)   A braking system was applied to the earth to stop spinning.

Either way, the Big Bang has a problem

Was the dot spinning very fast as we been told or was there a braking mechanism that made the earth stop?

Please explain and show physics to back up your claims.

Big bang is not eqaul to the formation of the earth. Please make specific claims, with your specific evidence :

If the earth is not do to the Big Bang, then where did it come from and please provide citation...
To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #5 on: July 27, 2017, 04:26:58 AM »
I will admit that I was wrong about my calculations of the earth rotation do to leap second.

We are all agreeing that the earth is slowing down.

We have been told that the universe was created by a very fast dot that was spinning so fast and the gravitational forces were so strong that it exploded.

Conservation of angular momentum dictates that the parts that exploded of must keep the spin rate.

From my calculations, the earth 10 billion years ago was only spinning at the rate of 5 times today's spin.

So we can have two possibilities

1)   The big bang dot was not spinning very fast as they told us.
2)   A braking system was applied to the earth to stop spinning.

Either way, the Big Bang has a problem

Was the dot spinning very fast as we been told or was there a braking mechanism that made the earth stop?

Please explain and show physics to back up your claims.

Big bang is not eqaul to the formation of the earth. Please make specific claims, with your specific evidence :

If the earth is not do to the Big Bang, then where did it come from and please provide citation...

No problem, as I said do some research on official theories and refine your claim.

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2017, 04:33:52 AM »
I will admit that I was wrong about my calculations of the earth rotation do to leap second.

We are all agreeing that the earth is slowing down.

We have been told that the universe was created by a very fast dot that was spinning so fast and the gravitational forces were so strong that it exploded.
Did "they" tell you? Who are "they"?

Your claim sounds totally illogical as "spinning fast" does not cause "gravitational forces",
so it looks like you are making up your own gobble-de-gook.

So I couldn't care less what "we have been told" unless:
1) The source is deemed credible and
2) It passes my own "bunkum detector",

So show what the source of your claim is and quote exactly what that source actually says, not own your twisted version.

PS You might note that I usually try to give the sources of any claims that I make.

I was told in college that it was a dot that was spinning and with the gravitational forces it exploded.

If they have changed the fair-tail again, and did away the spinning dot, I do not know..
To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2017, 05:51:40 AM »
I'm just going to copy my post from before in the other thread and note that you are still assuming a rate which you don't have evidence for:

Now if the Spherical Earth believers think that it is OK, after all that energy that was released in the Big Bang, that threw the earth billion of miles to only have the earth rotate 5 times the speed of today's rotation, then I’m OK with it.
Earth did not exist at the time of the big bang, so it wasn't thrown. It only formed roughly 5 billion years ago if I recall correctly, so that would only put it at roughly 3 times.
However, that still appears to be based upon a linear extrapolation, which will not necessarily hold for that length of time.

It also wouldn't mean much. The centrifugal force for Earth at the equator works out to be roughly 0.3% of gravity if I recall correctly. (F=omega^2*r, omega=2*pi/T=2*pi/86400=7.27e-5 rad/s.
Thus F=(7.27e-5)^2*6371000=0.03 m/s^2. Gravity is roughly 10 m/s^2, thus the centrifugal force is roughly 0.3% of gravity).
It is proportional to the angular velocity squared. So multiplying it, even by 5, only increases it by a factor of 25, which brings it up to 7.5%.
So gravity still wins by a very large margin and thus things still stay on Earth.

A 100 kg person would appear to weigh roughly 93 kg.

To me it does not make any common sense, that such an explosion would make the earth to rotate so slowly. Hey, but yesterday you proved that you don’t have any common sense in your group.
Firstly, the big bang wasn't an explosion, it was an expansion of space time.
Secondly, and far more importantly, why would that impart angular momentum?
It is effectively pushing everything outwards. No rotation.

In order to provide rotation it needs to spin one part one way and another part the other way.

Don’t forget that the dot was spinning very fast.
Says who?

So we can deduce that the notion of a rapid spin of the dot is false, unless you have the physics to show what put the brakes on the earth to stop spinning.
I would say that rapid spinning dot is likely false.

As for what puts the brakes on Earth, that would be the moon. Earth doesn't simply lose angular momentum, it transfers it to the moon extending its orbit. That was already pointed out to you.

A brief explanation:
The moon is orbiting Earth, while Earth rotates.
The water on the surface of Earth is somewhat free to move.
The moon exerts a tidal force on Earth and everything on it. This is because one side is closer and thus has more gravitational attraction than the other.
This causes the water to bulge out off Earth (i.e. tides).
But this water doesn't just stay there. It is still spinning with Earth. This means the bulge of water is slightly in front of the moon (measured along the direction of rotation/orbit). You can think of this as it getting pulled up in line with the moon only to move forward a bit due to Earth's rotation.
This makes Earth asymmetric, with a bulge slightly in front of the moon's path.
This in turn exerts a gravitational force on the moon, accelerating it along its orbit and in turn slowing Earth down.
This results in the moon going to a higher orbit and thus taking longer to orbit. This process transfers angular momentum from Earth to the moon.

This makes it a complicated effect.
It is dependent upon the strength of the tidal forces, which is dependent upon the distance between the moon and Earth and thus on the time (as the moon moves further away over time, where this rate varies based upon the strength of the force between the tides and the moon and the size of the moon's orbit). It is also dependent upon how far in front the tides are which is dependent upon the rotational speed of Earth.
I'm not sure what it would end up as.

As for the rest:

I was told in college that it was a dot that was spinning and with the gravitational forces it exploded.
This seems to be combining several different points which I will get to in a moment.
The tiny dot part is the big bang possibly. The explosion could refer to several things.

If the earth is not do to the Big Bang, then where did it come from and please provide citation...
Stellar nebulae.
Basically a gravitational collapse of gas and dust to form stellar systems. They slowly accumulate into stars and planets.
First stars were formed which went through their life to form heavier elements and then exploded.

They form from the gas and dust by exchange of angular momentum between the particles combined with gravitational forces (and other interactions to cause collisions) resulting in a collapse of a the dust and gas into stars and planets.
The star is formed first similar to Jupiter with it continuing to accumulate more and more mass until it eventually has enough for the force of gravity to crush it enough to start nuclear fusion. This kicks off the solar wind which then blows away a lot of gas and dust, with larger bits continuing to clump together to form larger planets or moons or asteroids or the like.

Some angular momentum is "lost" by ejecting some mass from the system making exoplanets.

As for citation, here is a starting point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebular_hypothesis


Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2017, 08:11:35 AM »
The big bang was not with an explosion?

Well Stephen Hawkings believes that it burst (video time 1:10)



Listen, get all the scientist to agree about the fair-tale strait and then let's talk.

If their was no explosion, then why did they use the word Bang.

To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #10 on: July 27, 2017, 03:34:04 PM »
I will admit that I was wrong about my calculations of the earth rotation do to leap second.

We are all agreeing that the earth is slowing down.

We have been told that the universe was created by a very fast dot that was spinning so fast and the gravitational forces were so strong that it exploded.

Conservation of angular momentum dictates that the parts that exploded of must keep the spin rate.

From my calculations, the earth 10 billion years ago was only spinning at the rate of 5 times today's spin.

So we can have two possibilities

1)   The big bang dot was not spinning very fast as they told us.
2)   A braking system was applied to the earth to stop spinning.

Either way, the Big Bang has a problem

Was the dot spinning very fast as we been told or was there a braking mechanism that made the earth stop?

Please explain and show physics to back up your claims.

From your calculations!.......Omg......please do share them, I would love to see you pre- inflation early universe sums.

One additional question...have you stopped taking your meds  again,....or is it just a bit more trolling?

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #11 on: July 27, 2017, 04:03:58 PM »
The big bang was not with an explosion?
Well Stephen Hawkings believes that it burst (video time 1:10)
That isn't Hawkings. Bursting doesn't equal explosion either.
It was rapid expansion/inflation.

Do you think inflating a balloon is an explosion?

If their was no explosion, then why did they use the word Bang.
To contrast it from the steady state model, possible to make fun of it, coined by a guy who rejected it who said it on radio.
It stuck.

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #12 on: July 27, 2017, 06:07:46 PM »
The big bang was not with an explosion?
...

If [there] was no explosion, then why did they use the word Bang[?]

That's an interesting question that has an ironic answer.

After evidence for the expansion of the universe became well established, cosmologists generally coalesced on two main hypotheses to characterize the nature of the expanding universe - steady-state, championed by Dr. Fred Hoyle, which postulated that the density of the universe remains constant but expanding, and a competing idea whose main proponent was Dr. George Gamow, postulating that the mass of the expanding universe is constant.

Interestingly, the name "big bang" was invented by Dr. Hoyle himself in an effort to make the competing hypothesis sound silly. Unfortunately for him, the other camp embraced the term because it was catchy, succinct, and, to a certain degree, describes their idea in an easy to understand way.

In the 1960s, there was lively debate among cosmologists over which of these (or another) would prevail; later research tilted heavily in favor of the inadvertently-named "big bang", and, as far as I know, the old steady-state hypothesis has been completely abandoned in favor of the  "big bang" because later data convincingly supports it better.

[Edit] Link to origin of term "big bang", minor corrections.
« Last Edit: July 27, 2017, 06:15:12 PM by Alpha2Omega »
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #13 on: July 27, 2017, 06:21:21 PM »
I will admit that I was wrong about my calculations of the earth rotation do to leap second.

We are all agreeing that the earth is slowing down.

We have been told that the universe was created by a very fast dot that was spinning so fast and the gravitational forces were so strong that it exploded.
Did "they" tell you? Who are "they"?

Your claim sounds totally illogical as "spinning fast" does not cause "gravitational forces",
so it looks like you are making up your own gobble-de-gook.

So I couldn't care less what "we have been told" unless:
1) The source is deemed credible and
2) It passes my own "bunkum detector",

So show what the source of your claim is and quote exactly what that source actually says, not own your twisted version.

PS You might note that I usually try to give the sources of any claims that I make.

I was told in college that it was a dot that was spinning and with the gravitational forces it exploded.

If they have changed the fair-tail again, and did away the spinning dot, I do not know..
What college was this again?  What degree?  Also give me a decade this time was too?  I don't want to slam a college too bad if they fixed their issues of the past.  I need to research them a bit.  It really scares me that one of my kids may be considering this college.  I have 2 that are planning on attending a college shortly, possibly as early as Summer semester 2018. 

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #14 on: July 27, 2017, 08:52:26 PM »
I will admit that I was wrong about my calculations of the earth rotation do to leap second.

We are all agreeing that the earth is slowing down.

We have been told that the universe was created by a very fast dot that was spinning so fast and the gravitational forces were so strong that it exploded.

Conservation of angular momentum dictates that the parts that exploded of must keep the spin rate.

From my calculations, the earth 10 billion years ago was only spinning at the rate of 5 times today's spin.
You may want to double check your calculations, because the general consensus among RE'ers is that the earth is around 4.5 billion years old.

If you can make such a simple, yet fundamental error, you may want to double check the rest of your math.

By the way, don't forget to take into account the effect of the impactor that formed the moon.  It was initially thought that days were about 5 hours long at the time of the impact, but some think that a day may have been as short as 2.5 hours.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22393-fast-spinning-earth-settles-mystery-of-moons-make-up/
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2017, 12:26:40 AM »
My god man, please, I beg you, realize your own limitations and work with them.

My scientific education ends at high school level as I went into the arts, but even I am spotting your errors.

And please stop saying Fair-Tail!!! What does that even mean, is it meant to be some kind of joke? Are you actually getting fairy-tail wrong over and over again or is it some obscure play on words?

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #16 on: July 29, 2017, 12:59:51 AM »
OK, lets talk in a different way.

Once the earth was formed, did it rotate at the same rate that it rotates today and what evidence do you have for this.

If it rotated faster, then what was the breaking mechanism to slow it down.

To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #17 on: July 29, 2017, 01:29:59 AM »
I never knew a human could be capable of such utter nonsense while superficially sounding reasonably intelligent.

You have made me question some pretty fundamental things, none to do with the shape of the earth unfortunately.

You make me feel sad for all humanity...

*

Pezevenk

  • 15363
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #18 on: July 29, 2017, 02:36:27 AM »
OK, lets talk in a different way.

Once the earth was formed, did it rotate at the same rate that it rotates today and what evidence do you have for this.

If it rotated faster, then what was the breaking mechanism to slow it down.

It spun faster. It now spins slower mostly because angular momentum is transferred to the moon because of the way tides work, the changes in the shape of the earth, etc. As for evidence, I remember reading something about stromatolites, I don't remember exactly what it was, so GOOGLE IT.
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #19 on: July 29, 2017, 02:42:24 AM »
OK, lets talk in a different way.

Once the earth was formed, did it rotate at the same rate that it rotates today and what evidence do you have for this.

If it rotated faster, then what was the breaking mechanism to slow it down.
I already answered most of that.
It is slowing down by transferring angular momentum to the moon via tides.

I'm not sure of the evidence for it.

*

Pezevenk

  • 15363
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #20 on: July 29, 2017, 02:47:04 AM »
There, I used google:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/1999RG900016/abstract

Pretty impressive what a google search can do for you, huh?
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #21 on: July 29, 2017, 07:37:42 AM »
I never knew a human could be capable of such utter nonsense while superficially sounding reasonably intelligent.

You have made me question some pretty fundamental things, none to do with the shape of the earth unfortunately.

You make me feel sad for all humanity...

Answer the question, was it going at the same angular velocity, smaller, greater or I don't know.

pick one
To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #22 on: July 29, 2017, 07:39:14 AM »
OK, lets talk in a different way.

Once the earth was formed, did it rotate at the same rate that it rotates today and what evidence do you have for this.

If it rotated faster, then what was the breaking mechanism to slow it down.

It spun faster. It now spins slower mostly because angular momentum is transferred to the moon because of the way tides work, the changes in the shape of the earth, etc. As for evidence, I remember reading something about stromatolites, I don't remember exactly what it was, so GOOGLE IT.

Good fair-tail about the Moon slowing it down, any physics to back up your story?

Show the physics to your answer.
To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #23 on: July 29, 2017, 07:40:04 AM »
OK, lets talk in a different way.

Once the earth was formed, did it rotate at the same rate that it rotates today and what evidence do you have for this.

If it rotated faster, then what was the breaking mechanism to slow it down.
I already answered most of that.
It is slowing down by transferring angular momentum to the moon via tides.

I'm not sure of the evidence for it.

Show the physics behind it!!!
To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #24 on: July 29, 2017, 07:54:44 AM »
Off the top of my head, the Big Bang did not occur because of rotation.  It occurred because of the intense pressures involved where everything in the universe was compacted into one tiny area where gravitation was no longer able to hold it together.  Rotation has nothing to do with it.

Regarding the orbiting of planets and subsequent spinning, try this thought experiment:  imagine two particles free floating through space at perpendicular trajectories.  Newton says that they will continue in the same direction until an outside force acts upon them.  As their trajectories get close, the gravity from particle A will cause the trajectory of particle B to bend towards it, and the gravity from particle B will cause the trajectory of particle A to bend towards it.  Because they have forward velocity as well, they don't immediately plunge towards each other, but rather their path is a gentle curve towards one another, slowly spiraling together.

Three possibilities:  1 - their forward velocity is too great and, while bending towards each other, eventually continue on their way.  2 - their velocity is too small, and they spiral in until they collide.  3 - their velocity is just right to enter a stable, mutual orbit.

I'll wager that #1 and #2 are the far more common, but when you have billions of stars, then #3 becomes a statistical necessity.  Size doesn't matter, particle or planet or star, the rotation comes from the interaction between two bodies, not some latent force from the Big Bang.  Vectors and rotation change, that's the nature of forces acting upon one another.

Here's one site with diagrams:

http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/projects/vss/docs/space-environment/1-what-causes-an-orbit.html

As the small particles of dust and rock slowly pull towards each other to form a planet, their tangential velocities would be enough to cause the proto planet to begin spinning.

?

Kami

  • 1158
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #25 on: July 29, 2017, 09:02:29 AM »
We simply do not know what caused the big bang or what exactly it is. Our physical understanding can pretty well reconstruct the events up to a fraction of a second after the big bang, but everything before that is just an educated guess.

As for the physics behind tidal friction: click.

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #26 on: July 29, 2017, 09:07:24 AM »
OK, lets talk in a different way.

Once the earth was formed, did it rotate at the same rate that it rotates today and what evidence do you have for this.

If it rotated faster, then what was the breaking mechanism to slow it down.

It spun faster. It now spins slower mostly because angular momentum is transferred to the moon because of the way tides work, the changes in the shape of the earth, etc. As for evidence, I remember reading something about stromatolites, I don't remember exactly what it was, so GOOGLE IT.

Good fair-tail about the Moon slowing it down, any physics to back up your story?

Yes.

Quote
Show the physics to your answer.

No. It's not trivial, and even if you did understand it, you'd just blow it off, anyway.

Here's a summary written for the layman.

If you're interested, learn physics.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #27 on: July 29, 2017, 01:07:03 PM »

Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #28 on: July 29, 2017, 01:35:47 PM »
OK, lets talk in a different way.

Once the earth was formed, did it rotate at the same rate that it rotates today and what evidence do you have for this.

If it rotated faster, then what was the breaking mechanism to slow it down.
I already answered most of that.
It is slowing down by transferring angular momentum to the moon via tides.

I'm not sure of the evidence for it.

Show the physics behind it!!!
Here you go...

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=angular+momentum+tidal+forces+moon
Since it costs 1.82¢ to produce a penny, putting in your 2¢ if really worth 3.64¢.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Conservation of angular Momentum
« Reply #29 on: July 29, 2017, 03:38:46 PM »
Show the physics behind it!!!
Is your Google broken? Look it up yourself, you lazy blighter!