The purpose for me in creating this threat is to find a rational explanation, not necessarily a scientific one, for why the moon's rotation is locked
to its orbit around the earth.
"Tidal lock" is problematic because, even here on earth, scientists do not have a decent explanation for why there are two tides each day, one on
the side close to the Moon, and one on the opposite side. It squarely contradicts our understanding of gravity. (Why do oceans not take an egg-white
shape, with the earth being the yolk?) We have been observing the tides for thousands of years yet we cannot explain half of it. To claim that we
"know" that the Moon's rotation is caused by "tidal lock" - where we CANNOT observe any tides, much less "tidal forces", is pure hypocrisy, not
The self-appointed task of science is to observe phenomena and explain them with a theory. But each theory is only valid until ONE contradiction has
been found. People need to realize that science only offers theories, NOT knowledge. It is up to everybody themselves to decide which explanation or
theory is adequate and which one is not.
"torque is defined as the cross product of the lever-arm distance and force, which tends to produce rotation."
To explain my disagreement I will first consider a moon that is solid and has a center of gravity that is away from its axis of rotation. When trying
to rotate, gravity will slow it down, because the "torque" on one side would be greater than on the other. When the center of gravity gets to the
other side, however, torque will apply the same amount of force to re-accelerate it.
IF a moon is a perfect sphere, but has oceans or other liquids, then earth's gravity will pull the liquids closer, thereby causing it to bulge, or be
squeezed (hence the name "tidal force"). The elongated shape of molten metal at the core of a moon would essentially make it asymmetric, causing
torque forces to be out of balance, and thereby slowing its rotation. Contrary to the above example with the solid moon, the center of gravity will
NOT sling to the other side (therefore does not re-accelerate it).
However, this effect of torque would not apply to water. Due to its low "viscosity" (resistance to flow: honey versus water), water flows easily,
and, as fast as gravity commands it to. Therefore, the elongated shape will always point directly at earth. With the center of gravity NOT removed off
the axis of symmetry, torque forces apply equally to both, the approaching side as they do to the side that is turning away.
On the other hand, moving liquids cause friction. With friction, tidal force generates heat, which is a loss of energy, reducing the inertia (tendancy
to maintain its speed) of the rotation.
Let's look at our actual Moon. It has a core that is molten to some extent. Due to its small size (relative to its whole body), the high viscosity,
and the high pressure that prevents any significant movement, the bulging or any other movement would seem to be minimal. The extent of the bulge
needs to be calculated as a function of these factors before one can even look at the torque that it will cause.
Conclusion: To determine how many millions or billions of years it would take for such a bulge to cause a moon or planet to be "tidally locked"
requires a monstrous calculation, with many factors being little more than vague estimates. It is hardly something that can be asserted with today's
insights and technological abilities to measure. I would consider this our "best available" scientific theory, a plausible assumption, not
Where do you think I am correct or incorrect? I hope to get criticism and/or corrections of my explanations and conclusions. I do not need to be
told, that I am "obstinate stubborn", or any other mischaracterization for refusing to accept a theory just because it is THE theory deemed
"knowledge" by mainstream scientists - yet appears to me to contradict itself or to lack rational, logical reasoning.