If earth rotated the opposite direction.?
would this turn back time??
Answers:
Added to all that the learned have already described.
You would start out life
waking up in a oap home and start feeling better every day.
You get kicked out of there for being too healthy, go collect your pension, then, when you start work, you get a gold watch on your first day.
You would then work 40 years until you're young enough to enjoy your retirement.
You start to drink alcohol, you party, you're "generally" promiscuous and you get ready for High School.
After High School, you go to primary school, you become a kid, you play or
nap all day, you have no responsibilities.
You become a baby with no cares whatsoever.
Then, you spend your last 9 months floating peacefully with luxuries like central heating, spa treatments, room service on tap, larger living quarters everyday.and then. you finish off as an orgasm!
Yes, electricity would flow the other way as well. North would become South. Water would swirl down the plug hole the other way. The Nike Swoosh would flip horizontally and you would disappear up your own backside :-)
no. it would just be normal, except seasons, climates & stuff would be in backwards order
And you start to float around!
Hope not imagine going through pubity again
I thought it would make people lose their balance and fly off into space.
No, only in Superman movies. It makes no difference which way the earth turns, except that if it turned in the opposite direction the sun would rise in the west and set in the east.
Nope, it would only mean the water in the toilet would drain in the opposite direction.
no, but we would be functioning backward and everything will goes the opposite direction. imagine going backward and now picture it.
Errr, no.
Why would it?
Yes everything would be reversed. We would evolve from the dead (buried), grow-down, walk,talk,and eat backwards etc..lol
no time is a man made concept
time would be reversed e.g. 12.pm would become 10am before it became 10pm
who cares?
Hang on, I've only just got used to which way the clocks go forward and back - don't confuse me!
No it would not turn the clock back. Nothing else would change, not even the seasons order. Except that the Sun would rise in the West and set in the East. Venus rotates from East to West, whereas the Earth rotates from West to East.
no.
time is not rotation related, it is a space continuous phenomenon.
simply you would see the Sun sooner than you thought and on the wrong end of the planet. The time zones would all be reversed, so Europe would turn the New Year After the US for example, as the Sun would pass through the American continent first, them Europe, Africa, Asia, Oceania. right now we would the Sun around 3 am!!! can u imagine that!
No. But the world would be slightly different. It would affect the flow of water in and out of bodies of water and weather patterns would be different.
In any event, it's a distinct impossibility, since the direction of the earth's rotation is a product of the gravitational forces of the earth's orbit around the sun, and the sun's gravitational pull as well.
Superman II was just a movie. It's not real.
The Rotating Earth
The reduction of effective gravity by the Earth's rotation
One important rotating frame is the surface of the Earth, rotating with a period of about 24 hours--more accurately, 23 hrs 56.07 min or 86164 seconds. If the equatorial radius of Earth is 6378 kilometers, the circumference comes to 40074 kilometers--slightly more than the 40,000 kilometers supposed to be the pole-to-pole circumference, implied by the definition of "one meter." The difference comes because the Earth bulges out at its equator. The velocity of the equator then is
40074 / 86164 = 0.4651 kilometers = 465.1 meter/sec
That velocity is directed eastwards and is significantly faster than the speed of sound, which is about 335 m/s. Space rockets from Cape Canaveral need to attain about 8 km/s (in the frame of reference of the non-rotating center of the Earth ) to achieve orbit, so to give them a favorable starting velocity, such rockets are generally launched eastwards.
To derive the centrifugal acceleration on the equator (i.e. the force in Newtons on one gram mass, rotating with the Earth), we calculate in meters and seconds
v2 / r = (465.1)2 / 6378000 = 216318 / 6378000 = 0,03392 m/s2
Comparing this to the acceleration of gravity--say 9.81 m/s2--it is only 0.00346 or 0.346%. Effective gravity on the equator is reduced by the rotation, but only by about 1/3 of a percent
The bulge of the Earth's equator
Assuming the Earth is exactly spherical, we expect gravity to always point towards the center of Earth. However, the centrifugal force is perpendicular to the axis of the Earth. Except on the equator, therefore, it is not exactly opposed to gravity, but adds a small horizontal vector component, pointing towards the equator (dashed arrow in the figure). As a result, not only is effective gravity weakened, but its direction is modified--instead of pointing to the center of the Earth, is slants (ever so slightly) towards the equator.
Does this mean that if you placed a perfect ball on a very smooth horizontal surface, gravity would make it roll equatorward.? Suppose it was so. That same force would also act on the water of the ocean and make it flow equatorwards, and even the solid Earth might deform!
How long would this go on? Well, until the equatorial pile-up of material forms a "hill" around the Earth, rising slightly towards the equator, where its top would be. No more flow towards the equator would occur once the slope of the ground, as modified by the hill, would be exactly perpendicular to the effective direction of (modified) gravity. With such a slope, a perfect ball placed on a perfectly horizontal surface would no longer try to roll anywhere, and forces on oceans and on land would no longer try to move matter horizontally.
By now you should realize what this gives us--an explanation to the equatorial bulge of the Earth! That bulge is nothing but the "hill" described above, and the shape of the surface is such that the ground is always perpendicular to the effective gravity
Jupiter rotates in just under 10 hours and has an equatorial radius about 11 times that of Earth, creating a much stronger centrifugal force. As a result, in spite of a surface gravity 2.64 times stronger than Earth's, Jupiter is much more oblate, by about 6.5%. The oblateness of Jupiter was noted through the telescope by Giovanni Cassini (1625-1712), director of the Paris observatory, However, he and his son also claimed that Earth was different, that it bulged at the poles (more like a lemon than like a grapefruit). They based their claim on measurements on the ground, which suggested lines of latitude became closer together as one approached the pole.
Their result was later disproved by more accurate observations, but even before that, Newton by the following simple argument showed this could not be so. Assume Earth is a sphere, and imagine two deep holes extending to its center (see drawing), meeting there and filled with water. If Earth did not rotate, one may have expected the height of each water column to be the same: at the center of the Earth, by symmetry, each column would push down with the same weight, creating an equilibrium.
On a rotating Earth, however, the centrifugal force acts to reduce the weight of the water in the equatorial hole, and the water would rise there to greater height. Newton then argued that water anywhere would rise to the same level
.if our earth were not a little higher around the equator than at the poles, the seas would subside at the poles and, by ascending in the region of the equator, would flood everything there.
For more about the bulge of the Earth (including a more advanced mathematical treatment) see web site "The Bulging Earth".
Jet planes above the equator
The centrifugal force is a useful concept when figuring out equilibria in a rotating frame of reference, cases where forces balance exactly and no motion occurs.
To calculate motion in a rotating frame is much more complicated, and in general is beyond the level of this presentation. All that will be done in this section and the one that follows is point out some complications. Let us assume the reduction of effective gravity is the same at jet-plane altitude--a small difference exists, but does not affect the argument below. Two jet airplanes fly along the equator at equal speeds--one eastwards, the other westwards. Since they fly in circles around the center of Earth, the effective gravity aboard each of them is further changed. Do both sense the same change?
You might think so, but it isn't true.
It would be the same if the Earth did not rotate (neglect here the attraction of the Sun and the rotation of the Earth around it, two effects which about balance). Without Earth rotation, in the frame of the universe, the eastward and westward motions are completely symmetric.
Actually, however, the speeds of the jets are measured relative to that atmosphere, which itself also rotates around the center of the Earth. Viewed from the frame of the universe, the speed of the Eastward jet is added to the rotation of the atmosphere, the one of the westward jet is subtracted.
Suppose these are two supersonic Concorde airliners, flying at 465.1 meter/sec. Rather than study the motion in a rotating frame, which may or may not give correct answers, we can always go back to the non-rotating frame of the universe. In that frame, the rotational velocity of the westward jet is zero, and it senses no effective reduction of gravity. In the same frame, the eastward jet has twice the velocity, and since the centrifugal force is proportional to the velocity squared (v2), it senses four times the centrifugal force. Effective gravity aboard that jet is reduced by four times the amount felt on the ground, or 1.384%.
What it means
The above example suggests that we better watch out before applying Newton's laws in a rotating frame.
Newton's first law certainly does not hold--a body not acted on by any force will not stay at rest but will fly off at a tangent. One can salvage this part of the law by adding a centrifugal force in any calculation of balanced forces. But if such forces are not balanced, if they cause motion in the rotating frame, then a modified form of Newton's laws must be used. They do exist, but are beyond the level of this course. The above example suggests some of the problems of rotating frames, and more examples are in the next section, which tells about the Coriolis effect.
You and I, and anyone else on Earth, live in a rotating frame of reference. Should we therefore refrain from using Newton's equations in everyday life? It turns out that for motions on a scale much smaller than the size of Earth, at moderate velocities, the effects are negligible.
One example concerns the famous question of whether draining water in kitchen sinks on opposite sides of the equator swirls in opposite directions, as is sometimes claimed. It turns out (see next section) that the effect in principle exists, but is much too small to affect observations. In the world wars, gunners firing big cannons corrected their aim (slightly) to account for the Earth's rotation, but you and I can usually ignore it, except for the modification of gravity by the centrifugal force.
" would this turn back time?". No, of course it wouldn't!
Assuming all factors except the direction of rotation were to remain the same, you would simply see the sun rise in the west and set in the east! But why worry about such an improbable situation?
Mercury? i belive rotates backwards, so i don`t know!
What does GPS stand for?
aerial views letchworth garden city?
What happens to farmland and what can famrers do after a major volcano eruption/meteor struck?
Another question for guys?
Have you noticed, nobody has a clue about geography any more?
Are there documented cases of lesbianism in the animal kingdom?
Does the earth literally spin so fast?
If and when a full face transplant is performed, what will happen if it is rejected by the recipient?
Answers:
Added to all that the learned have already described.
You would start out life
waking up in a oap home and start feeling better every day.
You get kicked out of there for being too healthy, go collect your pension, then, when you start work, you get a gold watch on your first day.
You would then work 40 years until you're young enough to enjoy your retirement.
You start to drink alcohol, you party, you're "generally" promiscuous and you get ready for High School.
After High School, you go to primary school, you become a kid, you play or
nap all day, you have no responsibilities.
You become a baby with no cares whatsoever.
Then, you spend your last 9 months floating peacefully with luxuries like central heating, spa treatments, room service on tap, larger living quarters everyday.and then. you finish off as an orgasm!
Yes, electricity would flow the other way as well. North would become South. Water would swirl down the plug hole the other way. The Nike Swoosh would flip horizontally and you would disappear up your own backside :-)
no. it would just be normal, except seasons, climates & stuff would be in backwards order
And you start to float around!
Hope not imagine going through pubity again
I thought it would make people lose their balance and fly off into space.
No, only in Superman movies. It makes no difference which way the earth turns, except that if it turned in the opposite direction the sun would rise in the west and set in the east.
Nope, it would only mean the water in the toilet would drain in the opposite direction.
no, but we would be functioning backward and everything will goes the opposite direction. imagine going backward and now picture it.
Errr, no.
Why would it?
Yes everything would be reversed. We would evolve from the dead (buried), grow-down, walk,talk,and eat backwards etc..lol
no time is a man made concept
time would be reversed e.g. 12.pm would become 10am before it became 10pm
who cares?
Hang on, I've only just got used to which way the clocks go forward and back - don't confuse me!
No it would not turn the clock back. Nothing else would change, not even the seasons order. Except that the Sun would rise in the West and set in the East. Venus rotates from East to West, whereas the Earth rotates from West to East.
no.
time is not rotation related, it is a space continuous phenomenon.
simply you would see the Sun sooner than you thought and on the wrong end of the planet. The time zones would all be reversed, so Europe would turn the New Year After the US for example, as the Sun would pass through the American continent first, them Europe, Africa, Asia, Oceania. right now we would the Sun around 3 am!!! can u imagine that!
No. But the world would be slightly different. It would affect the flow of water in and out of bodies of water and weather patterns would be different.
In any event, it's a distinct impossibility, since the direction of the earth's rotation is a product of the gravitational forces of the earth's orbit around the sun, and the sun's gravitational pull as well.
Superman II was just a movie. It's not real.
The Rotating Earth
The reduction of effective gravity by the Earth's rotation
One important rotating frame is the surface of the Earth, rotating with a period of about 24 hours--more accurately, 23 hrs 56.07 min or 86164 seconds. If the equatorial radius of Earth is 6378 kilometers, the circumference comes to 40074 kilometers--slightly more than the 40,000 kilometers supposed to be the pole-to-pole circumference, implied by the definition of "one meter." The difference comes because the Earth bulges out at its equator. The velocity of the equator then is
40074 / 86164 = 0.4651 kilometers = 465.1 meter/sec
That velocity is directed eastwards and is significantly faster than the speed of sound, which is about 335 m/s. Space rockets from Cape Canaveral need to attain about 8 km/s (in the frame of reference of the non-rotating center of the Earth ) to achieve orbit, so to give them a favorable starting velocity, such rockets are generally launched eastwards.
To derive the centrifugal acceleration on the equator (i.e. the force in Newtons on one gram mass, rotating with the Earth), we calculate in meters and seconds
v2 / r = (465.1)2 / 6378000 = 216318 / 6378000 = 0,03392 m/s2
Comparing this to the acceleration of gravity--say 9.81 m/s2--it is only 0.00346 or 0.346%. Effective gravity on the equator is reduced by the rotation, but only by about 1/3 of a percent
The bulge of the Earth's equator
Assuming the Earth is exactly spherical, we expect gravity to always point towards the center of Earth. However, the centrifugal force is perpendicular to the axis of the Earth. Except on the equator, therefore, it is not exactly opposed to gravity, but adds a small horizontal vector component, pointing towards the equator (dashed arrow in the figure). As a result, not only is effective gravity weakened, but its direction is modified--instead of pointing to the center of the Earth, is slants (ever so slightly) towards the equator.
Does this mean that if you placed a perfect ball on a very smooth horizontal surface, gravity would make it roll equatorward.? Suppose it was so. That same force would also act on the water of the ocean and make it flow equatorwards, and even the solid Earth might deform!
How long would this go on? Well, until the equatorial pile-up of material forms a "hill" around the Earth, rising slightly towards the equator, where its top would be. No more flow towards the equator would occur once the slope of the ground, as modified by the hill, would be exactly perpendicular to the effective direction of (modified) gravity. With such a slope, a perfect ball placed on a perfectly horizontal surface would no longer try to roll anywhere, and forces on oceans and on land would no longer try to move matter horizontally.
By now you should realize what this gives us--an explanation to the equatorial bulge of the Earth! That bulge is nothing but the "hill" described above, and the shape of the surface is such that the ground is always perpendicular to the effective gravity
Jupiter rotates in just under 10 hours and has an equatorial radius about 11 times that of Earth, creating a much stronger centrifugal force. As a result, in spite of a surface gravity 2.64 times stronger than Earth's, Jupiter is much more oblate, by about 6.5%. The oblateness of Jupiter was noted through the telescope by Giovanni Cassini (1625-1712), director of the Paris observatory, However, he and his son also claimed that Earth was different, that it bulged at the poles (more like a lemon than like a grapefruit). They based their claim on measurements on the ground, which suggested lines of latitude became closer together as one approached the pole.
Their result was later disproved by more accurate observations, but even before that, Newton by the following simple argument showed this could not be so. Assume Earth is a sphere, and imagine two deep holes extending to its center (see drawing), meeting there and filled with water. If Earth did not rotate, one may have expected the height of each water column to be the same: at the center of the Earth, by symmetry, each column would push down with the same weight, creating an equilibrium.
On a rotating Earth, however, the centrifugal force acts to reduce the weight of the water in the equatorial hole, and the water would rise there to greater height. Newton then argued that water anywhere would rise to the same level
.if our earth were not a little higher around the equator than at the poles, the seas would subside at the poles and, by ascending in the region of the equator, would flood everything there.
For more about the bulge of the Earth (including a more advanced mathematical treatment) see web site "The Bulging Earth".
Jet planes above the equator
The centrifugal force is a useful concept when figuring out equilibria in a rotating frame of reference, cases where forces balance exactly and no motion occurs.
To calculate motion in a rotating frame is much more complicated, and in general is beyond the level of this presentation. All that will be done in this section and the one that follows is point out some complications. Let us assume the reduction of effective gravity is the same at jet-plane altitude--a small difference exists, but does not affect the argument below. Two jet airplanes fly along the equator at equal speeds--one eastwards, the other westwards. Since they fly in circles around the center of Earth, the effective gravity aboard each of them is further changed. Do both sense the same change?
You might think so, but it isn't true.
It would be the same if the Earth did not rotate (neglect here the attraction of the Sun and the rotation of the Earth around it, two effects which about balance). Without Earth rotation, in the frame of the universe, the eastward and westward motions are completely symmetric.
Actually, however, the speeds of the jets are measured relative to that atmosphere, which itself also rotates around the center of the Earth. Viewed from the frame of the universe, the speed of the Eastward jet is added to the rotation of the atmosphere, the one of the westward jet is subtracted.
Suppose these are two supersonic Concorde airliners, flying at 465.1 meter/sec. Rather than study the motion in a rotating frame, which may or may not give correct answers, we can always go back to the non-rotating frame of the universe. In that frame, the rotational velocity of the westward jet is zero, and it senses no effective reduction of gravity. In the same frame, the eastward jet has twice the velocity, and since the centrifugal force is proportional to the velocity squared (v2), it senses four times the centrifugal force. Effective gravity aboard that jet is reduced by four times the amount felt on the ground, or 1.384%.
What it means
The above example suggests that we better watch out before applying Newton's laws in a rotating frame.
Newton's first law certainly does not hold--a body not acted on by any force will not stay at rest but will fly off at a tangent. One can salvage this part of the law by adding a centrifugal force in any calculation of balanced forces. But if such forces are not balanced, if they cause motion in the rotating frame, then a modified form of Newton's laws must be used. They do exist, but are beyond the level of this course. The above example suggests some of the problems of rotating frames, and more examples are in the next section, which tells about the Coriolis effect.
You and I, and anyone else on Earth, live in a rotating frame of reference. Should we therefore refrain from using Newton's equations in everyday life? It turns out that for motions on a scale much smaller than the size of Earth, at moderate velocities, the effects are negligible.
One example concerns the famous question of whether draining water in kitchen sinks on opposite sides of the equator swirls in opposite directions, as is sometimes claimed. It turns out (see next section) that the effect in principle exists, but is much too small to affect observations. In the world wars, gunners firing big cannons corrected their aim (slightly) to account for the Earth's rotation, but you and I can usually ignore it, except for the modification of gravity by the centrifugal force.
" would this turn back time?". No, of course it wouldn't!
Assuming all factors except the direction of rotation were to remain the same, you would simply see the sun rise in the west and set in the east! But why worry about such an improbable situation?
Mercury? i belive rotates backwards, so i don`t know!
The answers post by the user, for information only, UKQnA.com does not guarantee the right.