0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
And the real reason for this inconsistency is the giant whirlpool,
Do you mean this sort of thing?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_gyre
To say tides are the result of Earth born whirlpools, it sort of makes the idea of "new theory" very very "light", right?
Does the Van Allen radiation belt have mass that can affect the tidal force or axial tilt?
Many thanks to the creator of this forum, the moderators and my friends, for the opportunity to speak and be heard, which is extremely important to the farmer from the outback.
Let me ask this question; "if there was no moon would the Earth still be what it is"?
That may be true, yet have you heard of the idea of "mechanical resonance"? The idea is one of repeated juxtapositions of harmonic vibration that lead to far greater effects. I think Tesla presented this idea with his "earthquake maker" device. I also think Mythbusters did a segment on it, with surprising results.If there is no mechanical resonance between the Moon and Earth after so many years of their association, well, we're not really looking outside the square are we, right?Let me ask this question; "if there was no moon would the Earth still be what it is"?If this forum is a puppet show in a certain and hopefully limited regard, I can't help but think a puppet has descended from the higher eschelons of forum authority to make the "new ideas" segment something bordering on the ridiculous, right? The section is deliberately called "light", yet new ideas are what makes science evolve to greater domains, righty right?
The lunar theory of tides is based on:1. On the blind faith of people, on the printed word.2. People do not want to think for themselves.
(Minimal tides are formed in a full moon).