[–] cumshartingfaggot 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 



[–] Grospoliner 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Huh, right. So... physics lesson time.

The angular velocity (ω) of a body around it's axis (rotational speed) is dependent on the the moment of inertia (I) of the object, and it's angular momentum (L), such that ω = L/I. Thus, when the moment of inertia of an object is reduced, the rotational speed of that object will increase.

The moment of inertia is the behavior of the distribution of a material over a given distance, literally mass (m) at a distance (r), from a given point of reference, such that I = mr^2 (at least for really simple point masses). For complex shapes, it's a little more complicated (I = ∫ r^2dm, but let's not get into that). So, as you can see, the further mass gets from a given reference point (such as the center of the earth), the greater it's inertia, and subsequently, the lower it's angular velocity if rotating.

This applies to rigidly interconnected objects incidentally, such as a stick or a sphere rotating about it's center of gravity. The longer the stick (L), the greater the stick's moment of inertia about it's center of gravity (I = 1/12mL^2) or any other given point (I = 1/3mL^2). Well the same applies to a sphere, hollow (I = 2/3m*r^2) or not (I = 2/5mr^2). So that means that all the crap sitting above sea level is indeed going to provide the Earth with additional inertia.

Now, the glaciers consist of only 1.7% of Earth's water mass, a measly 2.59×10^16 short tons (2000 lb/ton) out of some 1.52×10^18 short tons, and if all of them melted, it's estimated that the oceans would rise about 230 meters. So you might be thinking at this point, "Well that's going to increase the planet's inertia and slow the Earth down because the ocean levels rose, thus increasing the distance the mass is acting at!" at which point I would have to point out that the square of the distance has a significantly greater impact than the mass itself. So even if the oceans rose 230 meters, because things like the Lambert glacier standing 2500m above sea level will have a far greater impact on the moment of inertia than the entirety of the worlds water melted to the same height, especially when you take into account all the other ice standing above sea level.

So, the take away of all this, is that posting snarky comments without actually having a basic understanding of the topic makes you look like a mouth breathing dip-shit.


[–] Lag-wagon 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Lol, I liked the last paragraph. My thinking was that as the world slowly.... Very slowly, started to slow down the weather patterns would start to get screwed up and cause the weather to change. Nothing to do with inertia or cosmic variables. Just a mental exercise.