Friday - page 12
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Go on, chatterbox - big boy....
It's not clear which cause is more important.
Most importantly, the Moon appears to be over different parts of the Earth for both reasons (rotation around the Earth and the Earth's rotation around its axis).
It is theoretically possible that the Earth and the Moon would always be facing each other on the same side due to the prolonged action of tidal (dissipative) forces. There would simply be a hump of water always in one place on the Earth.
This is most likely the case: the Moon cannot not revolve around the Earth - otherwise it would have fallen on it. This is the law of universal gravitation, from which there is no escape. So the real reason is not in it but in the changing orientation of the Earth's oceans relative to the Moon. As the moon rotates too slowly around its axis (it always has one side towards us) the daily rotation of the Earth around its axis is to blame.
It's not clear which reason is more important.
Most importantly, the Moon appears to be over different parts of the Earth for both reasons (rotation around the Earth and the Earth's rotation around its axis).
It is theoretically possible that the Earth and the Moon would always be facing each other on the same side due to the prolonged action of tidal (dissipative) forces. There would simply be a hump of water always in one place on the Earth.
This is most likely the case: the Moon cannot not revolve around the Earth - otherwise it would have fallen on it. This is the law of universal gravitation, from which there is no escape. So the true cause is not in it but in the changing orientation of the Earth's oceans relative to the Moon. As the moon rotates too slowly around its axis (it always has one side to us) the daily rotation of the Earth around its axis is to blame.
Here we are. There would be no moon, there would be no tides. That's it.
There is a joke among astronomers about the time the moon rotates around its axis. One non-earthly mind says to another - Well what other hints do they need about the existence of an extraterrestrial civilisation? We gave them the moon.
--------------
I mean the probability with which it is possible to coincide the time of the moon revolving around its axis and the time of the moon revolving around the earth.
Alexei, can you roughly estimate that probability? )
Mish, read my previous comment before yours. Everything will become clear.
It is clear that without the moon there would be no tides. I'm not arguing. But with the moon there would be no tides at all, right?
Not the worst, I must say.
Hello, all!
This refers to the probability with which it is possible for the time of the moon's rotation around its axis and the time of the moon's revolution around the earth to coincide.
What does probability have to do with anything? This wonderful theory was not created to replace physics for those who are unwilling to try to find fully deterministic cause-effect relationships.
Mish, read my previous comment before yours. Everything will become clear.
It is clear that without the moon there would be no tides. I'm not arguing. But with the moon there would be no tides at all, right?
The timing of the earth's rotation around its axis is irrelevant to the presence of the phenomenon, the moon might not have rotated around the earth and would not have fallen and flown away while in a geostationary orbit. Yeah, and the moon might not have been .
What the hell with the moon, it's obviously not aliens involved ))
What does probability have to do with anything? This wonderful theory was not created as a substitute for physics for those unwilling to try to find fully deterministic cause-effect relationships.
Shit, it's not a theory, it's a fucking joke .