It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Japan’s earthquake shifted balance of the planet: Sped up our planet's rotation, and so could-

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Ending of title -it have impacts on climate change? To what degree? What is the history of such impacts?

Mon Mar 14, 9:56 am ET
Japan’s earthquake shifted balance of the planet
By Liz Goodwin


By Liz Goodwin liz Goodwin – Mon Mar 14, 9:56 am ET

Last week's devastating earthquake and tsunami in Japan has actually moved the island closer to the United States and shifted the planet's axis.

The quake caused a rift 15 miles below the sea floor that stretched 186 miles long and 93 miles wide, according to the AP. The areas closest to the epicenter of the quake jumped a full 13 feet closer to the United States, geophysicist Ross Stein at the United States Geological Survey told The New York Times.

The world's fifth-largest, 8.9 magnitude quake was caused when the Pacific tectonic plate dove under the North American plate, which shifted Eastern Japan towards North America by about 13 feet (see NASA's before and after photos at right). The quake also shifted the earth's axis by 6.5 inches, shortened the day by 1.6 microseconds, and sank Japan downward by about two feet. As Japan's eastern coastline sunk, the tsunami's waves rolled in.

Why did the quake shorten the day? The earth's mass shifted towards the center, spurring the planet to spin a bit faster. Last year's massive 8.8 magnitude earthquake in Chile also shortened the day, but by an even smaller fraction of a second. The 2004 Sumatra quake knocked a whopping 6.8 micro-seconds off the day.

After the country's 1995 earthquake, Japan placed high-tech sensors around the country to observe even the slightest movements, which is why scientists are able to calculate the quake's impact down to the inch. "This is overwhelmingly the best-recorded great earthquake ever," Lucy Jones, chief scientist for the Multi-Hazards project at the U.S. Geological Survey, told The Los Angeles Times.

read more> news.yahoo.com...


Each one of these events seem to change the Earth's speed of rotation. So I wonder what the total is through Earth's history? What the increases and decreases have been overtime, and what that balance sheet so to speak would look like if we had the means to assess it all. This is important in understanding climate change as the faster the Earth spins the hotter it becomes on average. I'm not an atmospheric scientist, and so I am cloudy when it comes to understanding exactly why such a claim can be made in the first place, but if it's true, then the event would mean it could have, or will rather, affect the Earth's temperature overtime despite how minuscule the overall impact is. However it is not minuscule considering the grand history of the Earth when compiling an estimation of these events, and assessing the shifts. If there have been more plate shifts that have sped up the Earth's rotation, or more that have slowed it down impacting Earth's climate history, I think therefore climatologist should at least make attempts to estimate such a balance sheet and its historical climate impacts. Maybe in conjunction with geologist who study geological history. Right now I'm thinking this could be something that is being overlooked in studying cause and effect of Earth's climate history. Speaking specifically to helping to answer the question, "To what estimated degree considered within the total of other factors impacting climate change history would the history of plate tectonics have on the overall result of current climate on our planet using a hybrid assessment of both known and abstract geological history of the Earth?"
edit on 14-3-2011 by LilDudeissocool because: Ending of title did not post in complete form. Edit was made to add the completed title at the top of the open with some additions.




posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Do I need to anchor myself to the ground? If it starts spinning too fast I do not want to get flung out into space when I am not ready. Just give me time to get my space suit on so I can enjoy the ride for a little while, my luck I would get slung into a satellite though.



edit on 14-3-2011 by Skewed because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skewed
Do I need to anchor myself to the ground? If it starts spinning too fast I do not want to get flung out into space when I am not ready. Just give me time to get my space suit on so I can enjoy the ride for a little while, my luck I would get slung into a satellite though.



edit on 14-3-2011 by Skewed because: (no reason given)


It can't rotate to the point of escape velocity at the equator where Earth would begin to lose material due to the most optimum tectonic shift which would facilitate such an occurrence. So no worries about being flung into space.

Now since you have touched on this sub topic I have a question for you, "If the Earth could reach a point of rotational velocity where it began to lose material what would be lost first, heaver or lighter material?" To help answer this question spin two different buoyant objects of different weights in a vortex of liquid. See which object leaves the center of the vortex first as you increase the speed. You can maintain the speed at a constant if the difference in weights are significant enough where the one object does not leave the vortex, but the other one does with the correct velocity field. You can use a magnetic stir bar if available or a home kitchen mixer/deicer to conduct this experiment.
edit on 14-3-2011 by LilDudeissocool because: Added text.



 
7

log in

join