Tom Van Baak wrote:
Beside the general theoretical considerations as of what answer is
more acceptable (sincerely I agree so far) and what method could be
used to solve the matter, can anybody out there point me please to
any article on actual measurements of the variation rate of the
earth's rotational speed, not based on clocks?
Antonio,
Consider that you need at least two clocks before you can
make a rate measurement. One is the DUT; the other the
REF. So it is not possible to measure the earth (DUT) without
using some other clock (REF). Make sense?
(Speculative hint: We accept that the universe is expanding. Might
this affect the fine structure of matter, including cesium atoms? Is
there any adverse proof? What is easier to think? a) the expansion of
the universe doesn't affect at all the properties of matter. b) it
might.).
There is no small amount of effort being put into this question.
The results are not usually given as yes/no, zero or non-zero.
Instead they just calmly establish a new lower bound on what
the drift rate might be.
Whether the answer is (a) or (b) doesn't change the fact that
the earth day is a poor clock compared with other clocks now
available. Besides tidal friction effects which might be hard to
imagine, or lunar effects which you already know about, note
that every time it rains or glaciers form and melt it changes the
angular momentum of the poor spinning planet.
Surely you mean that it changes the moment of inertia of the planet???
Then again,
many OCXO are also affected by humidity...
/tvb
Bruce
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
