Can Gravitational Differential Explain Celestial Rotational Energies?

[scott_sieger]

HI guys,


Your responses to the post "round and round she goes" has prompted me to post this new thread.

The folllowing is a theory in development thingo but I think very appropriate to the other post. I am sure that if it is more appropriate to post it in the physics theory dev, section that admin will shift it any way. I am going too post it there as well any way if I'm allowed. But in the interests of general discussion on the nature of rotational energies and Celestial mechanics here it is. Your criticisms and counter logic would be welcome.

Gravitational differential.

The Earth and the sun share an attraction called gravity.

The Earth is always in the sun light therefore as the planet spins it is always heating up and cooling down. Sunrise and sunset happening continuously.

The temperature differential being say approximately 20 degrees C...

We know that as mass cools it increases it’s density. We infer that an increase in density also increases the mass’s gravitational attraction.

So therefore on this continuous sunrise (horizon) is a gravitational differential which means that the sunrise ( cooler – more dense) is more attractive than the sunset (Hotter)

This differential imparts a torsional effort on the planet thus generating it’s rotational state.

The above may, in part, explain the rotational effect on matter.

 

[Phobos]

Originally posted by scott_sieger
We know that as mass cools it increases it’s density.

Not true for water's liquid-to-solid phase transition.

The folllowing is a theory in development thingo but I think very appropriate to the other post. I am sure that if it is more appropriate to post it in the physics theory dev, section that admin will shift it any way. I am going too post it there as well any way if I'm allowed. But in the interests of general discussion on the nature of rotational energies and Celestial mechanics here it is. Your criticisms and counter logic would be welcome.

I'm willing to have this kick around here for a bit & let the astro-folks have a go at it before it gets lost in Theory Development.

 

[thed]

So therefore on this continuous sunrise (horizon) is a gravitational differential which means that the sunrise ( cooler – more dense) is more attractive than the sunset (Hotter)

This differential imparts a torsional effort on the planet thus generating it’s rotational state.

As there is a much higher temperature differential between the Poles and Equator (about 80 Kelvin difference) you'd expect a shear to take place.

If you care to plug the numbers you'll find that the variation in density os so little that the gravitational effects are negligble. Ergo no spin is generated.

You also need to explain why rotational velocity was larger in the past.

 

[Andre]

It appears that Scott is pursuing a mechanism that looks like the precession of the Equinoxes

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/PrecessionoftheEquinoxes.html

Gravitational difference on the equatorial bulge looks more real than gravitaitonal difference on a minute temperature difference.

 

[scott_sieger]

may be we can stand back a little and have a think about the two priciples I am trying to show without reference to the rotation of the planet.

The first is a continuuous event horizon and the second is an attraction differential that requires no polarity yet imparts rotation.

Are these principles valid and are they of any use in any other aspect of physics or celestial mechanics?