# Earth The Giant Pump

1. Dec 15, 2004

### errorist

I figured out how to modify (weaken) a Hurricane and prevent tornados with
a pipeline while using the rotational velocity of the Earth. Actually, the
Earth is a Giant Pump.Gravity is greater at the poles of the Earth because
the Earth is not spinning with as much velocity. This why you would weigh
more at the poles. At the Equator the Earth is rotating at near >1000kmphr.
If you were to run a pipeline with both openings at the same elevation at
each location water would flow from the pole to the equator.If we can build
a pipeline from the artic ocean to the Fl keys it would be possible to pump
very cold water using the Earth as a pump. No electricity needed. Open a
valve near the end and cold water would flow and mix into the gulfstream
near keys thus weakening hurricanes and perhaps preventing tornados if cool
water is sent to the Gulf Of Mexico,also.

Can you Calculate the exit velocity of the water from the pipeline at the Equater and don't forget the angular velocity?

"Earth The Giant Pump"

PS Think of the electricity it can make???

2. Dec 15, 2004

### Staff: Mentor

Because of the centrifugal force, the oceans and continents already pile up at the equator, making the earth a flattened (oblate) sphereoid. So this wouldn't work.

Welcome aboard, though!

edit: The difference between the polar and equatorial radius of the earth is about 13 miles, so if the earth were a perfect sphere (and you could somehow keep the oceans in place), such a device would work like a 13 mile-high hydroelectric dam.

Last edited: Dec 15, 2004
3. Dec 15, 2004

### errorist

If the elevation is the same then the shape of the Earth should not matter.Also, a 200 LB man at the poles would weigh 199.5 lbs at the Equator.This means there is more force at the poles and there would be a difference in pressure between the two pipe ends.Difference in pressure= flow.

Last edited: Dec 15, 2004
4. Dec 15, 2004

### rachmaninoff

If the elevation is the same at the polar end as at the equitorial end, then the pipe would have to start 13 miles above the artic ocean, wouldn't it?

5. Dec 15, 2004

### errorist

I know the ocean has about a six inch bulge at the equator but I dought a 13 mile difference between the pole and equator. Circumference maybe but not radius.It would be 13 miles higher if the Earth was not rotating but it is.

Last edited: Dec 15, 2004
6. Dec 15, 2004

### krab

1. Circumference at equator = 40 074 km

2. Circumference at poles = 40 007 km

3. Diameter at equator = 12 756 km

4. Diameter at poles = 12 714 km

The earth is a large squishy ball, so the effect you speak of does no longer exist. Earth equilibrates itself. Think of it this way: There already is a water pathway between the poles and the equator. Do you imagine that wrapping some of that water in a pipe is going to magically make it flow? Reminds me of the old joke about the "outer space vacuum pump": since there is good vacuum in space, all we need to do is run a copper pipe from there to here and we can suck all the vacuum we want

Last edited: Dec 15, 2004
7. Dec 15, 2004

### errorist

A 200 lb man at the same elevation at the pole would weigh 199.5 lbs at the same elevation at the equator. This difference in weight is a difference in force. More force at the pole would mean a flow would occur. Any pressure difference = flow.

8. Dec 15, 2004

### FZ+

At the same elevation! But the earth has been allowed to run as a 'pump' for billions of years, and there is no longer such a same elevation. Pressure at sea level everywhere is the same. Perturb it, and it will return to equilibrium.

9. Dec 15, 2004

### errorist

Not exactly, otherwise a 200lb man would weigh 199.5 lbs at the pole.

10. Dec 15, 2004

### chroot

Staff Emeritus
errorist,

You seem to be repeating the same things over and over again, apparently because you are not reading the responses you have already been given. As hard as it may be to accept, your idea is flawed, and no such "pump" would work. Please take the time to understand the counter-arguments presented before simply repeating yourself.

- Warren

11. Dec 15, 2004

### errorist

I am but a difference in force equals a difference in pressure. A difference in pressure = flow. It is well documented.

12. Dec 15, 2004

### FZ+

Methinks you are misquoting something, here.

Suppose you are right.

Consider a hill, with a river running up it. No really, running up that hill. Gravity, as we know, is weaker at higher altitude. So yes, there is low pressure up high. Funny how we don't see many uphill-flowing rivers.

13. Dec 15, 2004

### Bystander

Net Force --- don't just look at gravitational force. You are fighting isostasy with an incomplete analysis.

14. Dec 15, 2004

### Staff: Mentor

Wait, guys, I think errorist may be on to something:
Pressure difference is indeed what drives water flow. But why stop there? A man in geostationary orbit, 22,000 miles above the Indian Ocean is weightless - so why not send a pipe up to him and have the pressure difference siphon water out of the Indian Ocean (driving a turbine, of course) and out into space?

Well, maybe thats too expensive - how 'bout this: The Colorado river (before the dams) runs from the Rockes in Utah to Baja California. Since the rockies are higher above sea level, that 200lb man would weigh less in the Rockies than in Baja. So why not just run a pipe along the river from Baja to the Rockies in Utah and let the water flow (through a turbine, of course) up to Salt Lake?

Or am I doing something wrong...? errorist?

15. Dec 15, 2004

### errorist

The reason he weighs less at the equator is because of the rotational velocity of the Earth.

16. Dec 15, 2004

### chroot

Staff Emeritus
errorist,

Your "paradox" has been explained several times now, yet you continue to repeat the same things. You've been given the answer. I'm locking this thread.

- Warren