Why the core spin faster than the manlte

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joshua Nuijen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Core Spin
AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores why Earth's core spins faster than its crust, attributing this difference to the effects of the moon's gravitational forces and drag from space, which slow down the outer layers while the liquid core maintains more consistent inertia. As the Earth developed, the cooling of the outer crust and mantle led to alignment of electrons, potentially creating magnetic fields that influence the core's behavior. The conversation raises questions about whether Earth's rotation and the Sun's magnetic field affect the core's energy storage and movement. Additionally, it speculates on the gravitational differences between Earth, Venus, and Mars, linking them to core dynamics and energy storage capabilities. Overall, the thread seeks to understand the complex interactions between Earth's layers and their rotational characteristics.
Joshua Nuijen
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
This is more of a question. I don't have a background in physics as you might notice. I am looking for a little help.

Why the core spins faster than the crust?

At a point the earth’s rotation was much faster, both core and out layers pretty much at the same speed. Both the moon and space itself causes drag on the surface of the earth. Once the moon comes into play, the earth’s inertia is slowed down by the moon gravitational forces along with the drag of space itself.

Since the center is liquid and in itself has inertia does not mean that both the core and outer layers are affected the same. The inertia on the core remains more at a constant while the outer layers are dragged, if you will, against the moon’s forces causing the out layers to slow while the inner core is affected less .

Of course, over a considerable amount of time. This would cause a different in rotation for both the solid outer and the liquid core. During the development of the earth, the outer crust begins to cool while the mantle cools, and the mantles electrons would a line in the direction of the magnetic poles.

Due to the thickness of this direction line up of electrons in the crust and mantle wouldn’t the stationary crust/mantle electrons create lines of flux and the core of iron act as a conductor in a sense?

After the core begins to lap the crust/mantle a difference in magnetic fields (crust/mantle and core) will begin to conduct. The core is the conductor that stores energy and releases it in both a magnetic field and heat.

At this point could we consider the Earth as one massive inductor?

Does the core after lapping the solid outer mantle only can stored so much energy that is cannot appose/rotate anymore due to the magnetic differences and comes to a stop?

The core would change its rotation direction due to the opposition of fields. A total of two shift of rotation would have to be applied given what has been researched. The opposing core rotation would only last a faction of the time versus when it rotates the same direction.

Is it a possibility that our rotation and the Sun’s magnetic field play a part in the amount of energy the Earth takes in and keep its core moving?

Does the speed in which the planet rotation directly correlate with how much energy the planet can store?

Is the reason that Venus has a greater gravitational forces is become the crust and it mantle have been slowed down so mush versus its core causing a larger difference against the opposing fields?

Is the reason Mars has a less gravitational pull become it was not large enough to store enough energy to allow the core to spin and change direction?

Maybe after its first cycle it didn’t have the energy for its core to jump start again when it did change directions. That would be reason for it having an atmosphere for a given duration and the reason it die out long before Earth will.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Both the moon and space itself causes drag on the surface of the earth.
How does space cause drag?

and the mantles electrons would a line in the direction of the magnetic poles.
What does that mean/how?
Due to the thickness of this direction line up of electrons in the crust and mantle wouldn’t the stationary crust/mantle electrons create lines of flux and the core of iron act as a conductor in a sense?
I don't understand that.
After the core begins to lap the crust/mantle a difference in magnetic fields (crust/mantle and core) will begin to conduct.
How can "a difference in magnetic fields" conduct? And what does it conduct?

I cannot follow anything beyond that point.

The magnetic field of the sun at Earth's orbit is negligible.

Is the reason that Venus has a greater gravitational forces
It does not have that. And rotation does not matter there.

Is the reason Mars has a less gravitational pull become it was not large enough to store enough energy to allow the core to spin and change direction?
No, Mars has a lower mass, it is as simple as that.
 
Joshua Nuijen said:
This is more of a question. I don't have a background in physics as you might notice. I am looking for a little help.

Why the core spins faster than the crust?

At a point the earth’s rotation was much faster, both core and out layers pretty much at the same speed. Both the moon and space itself causes drag on the surface of the earth. Once the moon comes into play, the earth’s inertia is slowed down by the moon gravitational forces along with the drag of space itself.

Since the center is liquid and in itself has inertia does not mean that both the core and outer layers are affected the same. The inertia on the core remains more at a constant while the outer layers are dragged, if you will, against the moon’s forces causing the out layers to slow while the inner core is affected less .

Of course, over a considerable amount of time. This would cause a different in rotation for both the solid outer and the liquid core. During the development of the earth, the outer crust begins to cool while the mantle cools, and the mantles electrons would a line in the direction of the magnetic poles.

Due to the thickness of this direction line up of electrons in the crust and mantle wouldn’t the stationary crust/mantle electrons create lines of flux and the core of iron act as a conductor in a sense?

After the core begins to lap the crust/mantle a difference in magnetic fields (crust/mantle and core) will begin to conduct. The core is the conductor that stores energy and releases it in both a magnetic field and heat.

At this point could we consider the Earth as one massive inductor?

Does the core after lapping the solid outer mantle only can stored so much energy that is cannot appose/rotate anymore due to the magnetic differences and comes to a stop?

The core would change its rotation direction due to the opposition of fields. A total of two shift of rotation would have to be applied given what has been researched. The opposing core rotation would only last a faction of the time versus when it rotates the same direction.

Is it a possibility that our rotation and the Sun’s magnetic field play a part in the amount of energy the Earth takes in and keep its core moving?

Does the speed in which the planet rotation directly correlate with how much energy the planet can store?

Is the reason that Venus has a greater gravitational forces is become the crust and it mantle have been slowed down so mush versus its core causing a larger difference against the opposing fields?

Is the reason Mars has a less gravitational pull become it was not large enough to store enough energy to allow the core to spin and change direction?

Maybe after its first cycle it didn’t have the energy for its core to jump start again when it did change directions. That would be reason for it having an atmosphere for a given duration and the reason it die out long before Earth will.

I had trouble reading your post and so reformatted it for others.

Perhaps this earlier PF post will help answer your questions:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=211921
 
With that, thread closed.

Joshua, read your private messages.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top