There would be a lot more weeing on shoes. The coriolis effect causes the urine to spin as it passes through the urethra. The upshot of this is similar to rifling a bullet, and greatly increases accuracy of urination. So the closer you are to the equator the larger the volume of inaccurate pish that is spouted.
Chat Forum
[closed]
if the world stopped spinning...
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Interesting - thanks.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Realman,
You've actually got that completely backwards
Gravity is slightly stronger at the poles
Posted 1 year ago # -
samurai, the gravity at the poles and equator is the same, its just the centripetal acceleration that means the person at the equator has a slightly smaller reaction force (eg: a person stands on a set of scales, the scales will read higher at the poles).
Nope, it's not.
If someone lives all their life at the pole, then even if the effect is tony, everytime they pick something up, they have to work that little bit harder so by the time they reach 30, they'll be that much stronger.
Someone on the equator is further away from the apparent centre of mass of the earth (because the earth bluges on the equator due to those same rotational forces) and therefore experiences a smaller gravitational pull than they guy at the pole.
I reckon if the muscular eskimos all turned up at Singapore and started kicking off, the locals would have an awful time dealing with them and would need to import some Aussies or someone to deal with it all.
Or Lee Majors.
Posted 1 year ago # -
the gravity at the poles and equator is the same
You have to be very careful what you mean by gravity! The earth isn't a sphere, it's an oblate spheroid, so if you're on the equator you're further from the centre. If you're as old as me you will have learned in school the gravitational force is G*m1*m2/(r^^2) so the gravitational force at the equator is less. Younger people probably won't have learned this in their media studies and sports management GCSEs.
Posted 1 year ago # -
richmtb, when I wrote
the gravity at the poles and equator is the same
I wanted to write "almost the same" but didn't want to confuse more.
The earth is slightly squished, right? So yes, gravity would be slightly stronger at the poles, but look at this
Distances from points on the surface to the center range from 6,353 km to 6,384 km
31km in it. That won't have any noticeable effect, especially over the difference in reaction force caused by the earth spin.
Posted 1 year ago # -
oops, double post.
And yes, because of the formula being a reverse square law, the 31km is negligible.
Perhaps, samurai, if two identical twins did the exact same training, one at the equator, one at the pole, a difference would be noticeable, which would be pretty cool. You'd have to build some nice facilities to remove temperature and air pressure and humidity out of the equation though.
Posted 1 year ago # -
The water in our sink and bath do it, they drain really slowly so water is practically at a standstill. So not really a myth then?
It might look still, but it's stll moving about. Unless you've left the water in your sink untouched for a few days, residual angular momentum in the water will be greater than the coriolis effect. Even then, pulling the plug will exert a force and potentially skew your results, as will any imperfections in the bowl.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Unless you've left the water in your sink untouched for a few days
What about air movement above the sink, thermal movement within the water itself, and the effects of the plughole not being in the centre of the sink.......wouldn't they have any effect ?
Or is the chaos theory/butterfly effect bollox ?
Posted 1 year ago # -
would TJ start posting pictures of boobs?
Posted 1 year ago # -
richmtb, when I wrote
the gravity at the poles and equator is the same
I wanted to write "almost the same" but didn't want to confuse more.
The earth is slightly squished, right? So yes, gravity would be slightly stronger at the poles, but look at this
Distances from points on the surface to the center range from 6,353 km to 6,384 km
31km in it. That won't have any noticeable effect, especially over the difference in reaction force caused by the earth spin.
Yes but you've still got your forces backward. Centrepetal force has no effect on people standing at the equator (unless they are tied round the ankles by a piece of rope connected to the centre of the earth)
Centrifugal force due to their angular momentum decreases the apparent gravity
Posted 1 year ago # -
Due to the Earths rotation, it has formed into the shape of an oblate spheroid. It is flatter at the poles and bulges at the equator. This affects the oceans even more. Effectively the oceans bulge by up to 5 miles at the equator. If the world stopped spinning then the oceans would redistribute themselves into a northern and southern ocean separated by a huge new continent that circles the Earth at the equator.
Have a look at this.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Have a look at this.
That was very interesting and pretty cool
Posted 1 year ago # -
Based on futon river crossing's no spin means one day = 1 year scenario, the effect on the tides would be substantial.
The tides are predominantly caused by the sun, not the moon. The moon only causes the monthly variation in tide height and times. You would therefore have only two high tides and two low tides per year.Posted 1 year ago # -
Just thought some people might be interested in this
In Rio de Janeiro in 2016, the same jump will get an athlete 0.25% higher (>1cm) than in London four years prior.
And richmtb,
Centrifugal force due to their angular momentum decreases the apparent gravity
Centrifugal force doesn't exist lol.
Posted 1 year ago # -
GPS wouldn't work because you wouldn't be able to have geo-stationary satellites.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Centrifugal force doesn't exist lol.
Posted 1 year ago # -
If there was an aeroplane on a west (east?) facing runway and the world suddenly stopped spinning would it take off?
What if a plane was flying at 700mph east (west?) and the same thing happened? Would it suddenly drop?
Posted 1 year ago # -
depends how high the second plane was. and depends how suddenly you mean by suddenly. It's all about yer atmospheric boundary layer innit
Posted 1 year ago # -
What if a plane was flying at 700mph east (west?) and the same thing happened? Would it suddenly drop?
If the earth stopped spinning suddenly, would all the air stop spinning as well?
Posted 1 year ago # -
GPS wouldn't work because you wouldn't be able to have geo-stationary satellites".
GPS satellites aren't geo-stationary.
Posted 1 year ago # -
So if centrifugal force doesn't exist why does the Earth bulge at the equator?
Posted 1 year ago # -
So if centrifugal force doesn't exist why does the Earth bulge at the equator?
'Cos da Earf is 4.5 billion years old an' it's middle aged spread blud innit.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Oddly enough, this (and 5 other Alternate Earth scenarios) are outlined in this week's New Scientist
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20927960.400-what-if-the-earth-stopped-spinning.html
Not sure if you need to be a subscriber to see the full article though.
Everything on the surface would continue moving at up to 1667 kilometres per hour, the rotation speed at the equator. People outdoors would be flung outwards to an altitude of about 11 kilometres, then fall and hit the ground at more than 1000 kilometres per hour. Buildings would be ripped from their foundations, while the oceans would engulf the land. Such a catastrophe could extinguish all life on Earth.
Wacky stuff, love it.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@ RealMan - no, you'd get to see the Coriolis Effect big time then.
Posted 1 year ago # -
So if centrifugal force doesn't exist why does the Earth bulge at the equator?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Everything on the surface would continue moving at up to 1667 kilometres per hour, the rotation speed at the equator. People outdoors would be flung outwards to an altitude of about 11 kilometres, then fall and hit the ground at more than 1000 kilometres per hour. Buildings would be ripped from their foundations, while the oceans would engulf the land. Such a catastrophe could extinguish all life on Earth.
Oh no...that'll be the premise of another Emmerich disaster movie then.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Oh joy, another 2012 - what a hoot!
The article does make the distinction between 'stops suddenly' and 'stops gradually' - the latter being where hoodoo's (very cool) ESRI link comes in.
Posted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
