a reply to: CharlesNPope
Time to revisit the Veritasium video about the Dzhanibekov effect, a.k.a. Tennis Racket / Intermediate Axis Theorem.
The video implies that a Dzhanibekov flip can only occur when a body is rotating about its intermediate axis. Bodies don't want to rotate about their
intermediate (2nd) axis, so something weird like twisting a wing nut off its bolt in space is necessary to induce a non-uniform body to perform this
trick. After so many spins the body will perform the flip or the flip can be induced by a slight bump. This is all fine and good. However, it's not
actually clear what axis the wing nut was actually rotating about when it was clearly flipping. It would seem to be its 3rd axis (max moment of
inertia) rather than 2nd (intermediate moment of inertia) or 1st (min moment of inertia). Likewise, the Tippe-top seems to be spinning around its 1st
axis when it flips rather than the 2nd axis. This needs to be confirmed or denied (see link below).
The official Russian website that honored the 70th anniversary of Dzhanibekov's birth in 2012 mentioned the hypothesis that the Earth could perform
such a flip and it apparently did not retract that hypothesis or refute it. Rather, it implied that some scientists (Russian or otherwise) might
still support it.
The video goes on to demonstrate that a body that contains sufficient liquid will not rotate about its 1st axis (lowest moment of Inertia, max kinetic
energy), but seeks to rotate about its 3rd axis (max moment of inertia, min kinetic energy). The video doesn't talk about the intermediate axis in
this case of a partially liquid body.
It seems to be happening quite often in Academia that a strong argument is made in support of something and then the opposite conclusion is made.
This seems to be due to there never being enough evidence to pole-flip an academic paradigm (haha).
So, where does that leave us with respect to a pole flip on Earth?
Not only is the earth not a rigid or uniform body, it also redistributes it mass and therefore changes its inertial properties. The EGM96 based
simulation would have to be enhanced to take that into consideration.
It could be that the Earth is capable of creating an intermediate axis "on the fly," i.e. as it moves mass from water in the oceans to ice at the
poles. The Earth is also regularly getting "bumps in the night" from meteorites and the like, as well as generating impulses from earthquakes and
When the video inserts the white boxes at the "poles" of the rigid disc, it sure elicited a comparison with the Earth's ice caps. It also recalls the
balancing of car tires by applying counterweights along the outer rim. I don't think that's what they were going for when they built the Giza
Pyramids (lol), but the Earth does have some ability to balance its own mantle for a "smoother ride." There are also the effects of the Moon, the Sun
and whatever the heck else causes Precession. I personally think it is our binary twin (failed brown dwarf) that contributes the most to Precession,
but don't know if it could produce enough torque to facilitate a flip (ala Peter Warlow's theory).
I have to say, certain apocalyptic statements make much more sense in terms of a pole shift (than other explanations):
"... nations will be in dismay, perplexed by the roaring of the sea and the waves. People will die in fear ..." (Luke 21)
"... and all the powers of the heavens shall melt, and the sky shall be rolled up like a scroll: and all the stars shall fall like leaves from a vine
..." (Isaiah 34 and Revelation 6)
Consciousness sucks sometimes!
It is also curious that the justification always given for withholding knowledge of the ET phenomenon is that there would be a huge panic. But, why
would it cause panic ... unless the ET's don't plan on bailing us out when the big reset happens?
"Eat, drink and be merry." And, "pray your flight (over the former pole) does not happen in (nuclear) winter."
If pole shifts don't happen, then who cares! If pole shifts do happen, it doesn't much matter (lol).
Here's to you, "Johnny Beckoff".
edit on 3-2-2022 by CharlesNPope because: (no reason given)