Earth's Axis: What is Figure Axis & Have Astronomers Had to Readjust?

  • Thread starter Thread starter curiouschris
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axis
Click For Summary
Recent discussions highlight that reports of the Earth's axis moving due to seismic events, particularly the Chile earthquake, may be misleading. The actual change pertains to the Earth's "figure axis," which is an imaginary line representing the center of gravity, rather than the physical axis of rotation. This figure axis shifted by approximately three inches, causing minor adjustments in measurements, but does not necessitate significant recalibration of astronomical equipment. The earthquake did shorten the Earth's day by about 1.26 microseconds, a change deemed negligible in the context of ongoing variations in Earth's rotation. Overall, while the figure axis may have shifted, the physical axis remains largely unaffected in practical terms.
  • #61
For me this is my last word of the subject.

D H said:
Nobody, including the press article you cited, said that the Earth shifted by 8 cm. The Earth's rotation axis moved, not the Earth as a whole. This continued misperception on your part

I never said the Earth shifted.

I said people are crazy if they think the Earth shifted. but that was the impression the articles (many of them) gave. Many of the contributors here concluded incorrectly that I thought the Earth shifted. No I didn't. read my first post.

I am again repeating myself here...

When someone says the Earth's axis has shifted most people, except the people of this forum will think that you mean the shaft about which the Earth rotates changed its alignment. The only reason I raised the point was because, hey! if the Earth supposedly did shift (and therefore I was wrong, in my belief that it DID NOT change its alignment). There would have been other ramifications (other than a few press articles misquoting a scientist) There may have been an alignment problem with telescopes, hence the choice of forum, and I am convinced other more dramatic problems like say the entire north pole shifting by 8cm and the consequences of that.

Now again because its been a few of lines since I wrote it last, I Do Not Believe nor ever have that the Earth shifted.

I think that's plain enough.

My apologies to ViewOfMars. I don't think I assigned gender but if my words bely that please forgive me. BTW to take the mickey out of someone is to call them a fool, in a roundabout sort of way. I never believed you did, but DH certainly inferred that.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #62
curiouschris said:
When someone says the Earth's axis has shifted most people, except the people of this forum will think that you mean the shaft about which the Earth rotates changed its alignment.
That is exactly what supposedly happened.

The only reason I raised the point was because, hey! if the Earth supposedly did shift
That is exactly what didn't happen. What supposedly did happen was that the Earth's rotation axis moved with respect to the Earth.

There would have been other ramifications (other than a few press articles misquoting a scientist) There may have been an alignment problem with telescopes, hence the choice of forum, ...
The operators of those telescopes, along with several other modern gizmos, need extremely precise knowledge of Earth's orientation -- and that is exactly why the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service (IERS) was formed.

As has been pointed out, those telescopes are not so sensitive that a tiny 2.7 milliarcsecond shift will affect them. However, this change is cumulative. If that change truly did occur, the effects of it will build up over time.
 
  • #63
Matterwave said:
But the Earth's rotation is also slowly slowing down due to tidal friction...anyone have an estimate on that rate, and how the change in rotation speed due to this earthquake is comparable?

I am not sure about the rate of slowing down, but the process will end when our day is as long as a month (and the month then will be longer than it is now). We have only one semisphere who can see moon all the time just as stationary satellites.
 
  • #64
curiouschris said:
A localised tsunami. but that's not a 5' tsunami that circled the globe. which is what you stated. If it did I didn't hear about that.
I said 3', but Hawaii is 6500 miles from Chile, which is a little more than 1/4 the circumference of the earth. Because of landmasses, it is tough for a tsunami to literally go all the way around the earth, but halfway would have the wave as spread out as it is going to get.
A wave is caused when I kick the the water at the beach. so what.
I don't see your point. Kicking the water doesn't cause a tsunami.
But take the entire globe and shift it by just 8 cm and I can't see that it wouldn't cause a massive disruption. You can't just pick up an ocean and move it.
The strength of a wave is a matter of amplitude and size. The way I understand tsunamis is that the amplitude is literally the amount the crust shifted. A 3' drop creates a 3' tsunami and a 3" drop would create a 3" tsunami...and direction matters: the ground moving laterally instead of up and down wouldn't cause a tsunami. I think that's why tsunamis are tough to predict.
 
  • #65
With reguards to the Sun, the Earth wobbles because of the Barycenter attraction of the Earth and the Moon and the not parallel axis of the Moon to the Ecliptic.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 142 ·
5
Replies
142
Views
132K
Replies
16
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
23K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K