Tide problem

[NWilner]

Well, the astronomers weighed in after all.

I guess the problem was too easy.

Sorry.

My informal surveys show that less than 1 person in 10^5 has the faintest idea what we're talking about.

So, assuming Lucy is not an astronomer, Lucy gets a prize, along with JamesM, who got right to the heart of the problem.

Fast company this.

I'll keep trying.

 

[LucyR]

Edited to say this was not directed at NWilner.

Oh! I see it all now. At first I thought 'wow! That's a well-written post', then I realized! You're all in this together. You see? I'm not stupid.

Now I'm going to hold my breath until you apologize.



NWilner,

Thank you. No not an astronomer.

 

[JamesM]

Oh! I see it all now. At first I thought 'wow! That's a well-written post', then I realized! You're all in this together.

Sorry LucyR, but it just had to be done.

 

[NWilner]

Lucy, of the rapier mind, that "avatar" (?) looks like an A-10. Are you an A-10 driver?

 

[bjornart]

Are you trying to kill me?

Can I answer yes even though I wasn't careful enough in looking for the term in the previous posts?

*must remember to use computers search mechanism, eye-ball search not very good*

 

[Dancing David]

Well duh,
the Moon is watery in nature and therefore has a greater influence than the firey Sun.

The moon is also more fun at party's , although the Sun wears the lampshade on it's head.

 

[CurtC]

uneasy wrote:
...and the earth spinning (creating centrifugal force pushing water away from the earth)...

Centrifugal force doesn't help explain tides at all. Well, lots of people use C.F. to try to explain them, but that explanation is simply wrong. And I'm not one of those people who insists that C.F. is not valid - I think it is as long as you know you're talking about a rotating reference frame - but C.F. just doesn't explain tides.

 

[rwguinn]

Centrifugal force doesn't help explain tides at all. Well, lots of people use C.F. to try to explain them, but that explanation is simply wrong. And I'm not one of those people who insists that C.F. is not valid - I think it is as long as you know you're talking about a rotating reference frame - but C.F. just doesn't explain tides.

True
at .0035g, it ain't a very big acceleration....
(2*pi radians/(24hr*3600 sec/hr)=w
x''=R*w^2
if R=4000 miles, x''=.11169 ft/sec^2
RW