Re: Crustal rebound
Steve Allen said: > In brief, the ice load caused the mantle to flow toward the equator. > Lately it has been flowing back from the United States toward Canada, > from central Asia toward Siberia. So the earth as ice skater is > pulling its arms in as it gets less oblate. Thanks. That makes sense, and I'll pass it on to him. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Tel:+44 20 8495 6138 Internet Expert | Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Fax:+44 870 051 9937 Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 Thus plc||
Re: Crustal rebound
On Thu 2005-01-27T07:45:33 +, Peter Bunclark hath writ: > I guess the ice melted, flowed into the oceans and the whole planet is > closer to hydrostatic equilibrium. The crustal rebound must have a > counterpart in ocean-basin depressing (since presumably magma is an > uncompressible liquid). In brief, the ice load caused the mantle to flow toward the equator. Lately it has been flowing back from the United States toward Canada, from central Asia toward Siberia. So the earth as ice skater is pulling its arms in as it gets less oblate. Try this for recent details and changes. http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20020801gravityfield.html -- Steve Allen UCO/Lick Observatory Santa Cruz, CA 95064 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: +1 831 459 3046 http://www.ucolick.org/~sla PGP: 1024/E46978C5 F6 78 D1 10 62 94 8F 2E49 89 0E FE 26 B4 14 93
Re: Crustal rebound
I guess the ice melted, flowed into the oceans and the whole planet is closer to hydrostatic equilibrium. The crustal rebound must have a counterpart in ocean-basin depressing (since presumably magma is an uncompressible liquid). Pete. On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: > Markus Kuhn said: > > The US and UK are > > actually no different from that, except that the subtle differences > > between GMT and UTC have escaped political attention in these two > > countries so far, and as a result, they still have a technically rather > > vague definition of time in their law books, > > Actually, UK law is clear that civil time is GMT/GMT+1. > > Last night I found myself talking to a UK legislator on the matter of UTC > versus GMT. We got as far as the quadratic nature of the TAI-UT1 > difference, and that it was smaller than expected because - according to my > reading - of crustal rebound following the last ice age. > > At which point we were both confused about the physics involved. If the > crust is rebounding after being compressed by ice sheets, surely the > earth's moment of inertia will increase and the rotation should slow *more* > than otherwise expected. So can someone unconfuse us, please? > > -- > Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Tel:+44 20 8495 6138 > Internet Expert | Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Fax:+44 870 051 9937 > Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 > Thus plc|| >
Crustal rebound
Markus Kuhn said: > The US and UK are > actually no different from that, except that the subtle differences > between GMT and UTC have escaped political attention in these two > countries so far, and as a result, they still have a technically rather > vague definition of time in their law books, Actually, UK law is clear that civil time is GMT/GMT+1. Last night I found myself talking to a UK legislator on the matter of UTC versus GMT. We got as far as the quadratic nature of the TAI-UT1 difference, and that it was smaller than expected because - according to my reading - of crustal rebound following the last ice age. At which point we were both confused about the physics involved. If the crust is rebounding after being compressed by ice sheets, surely the earth's moment of inertia will increase and the rotation should slow *more* than otherwise expected. So can someone unconfuse us, please? -- Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Tel:+44 20 8495 6138 Internet Expert | Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Fax:+44 870 051 9937 Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 Thus plc||
