> Somebody wrote:
>
> My elementary geophysics tells me that the the earth is very, very,
> nearly
> >a perfect sphere. The much talked about equatorial bulges or "oblate
> >spheroid" shape is extremely small compared with the size of the earth.
>
> >
> >Then, my elementary physics tells me that a perfect spinning sphere has
>
> >*NO* gyroscopic stability. Nada, none at all. If the earth were a
> perfect
> >sphere, after a few years a gang of fleas all farting in the same
> direction
> >could tilt the earth off its axis. Of course it's not quite a perfect
> >sphere. So how does that tiny equatorial bulge stack up against the ice
>
> >packs anyway? Is much of that equatorial bulge made up of seawater? I'd
>
> >really be interested in a good explanation of the physics of the
> stability
> >of a spinning *elastic* sphere (perhaps fluid filled, like a
> near-spherical
> >water balloon for instance). I'd think its centrifugal bulge would
> >contribute to stability as expected, but is it truly the same as a
> rigid
> >solid having a fixed equatorial bulge? How would such a fluid system
> react,
> >for instance, to a field which applied force to all the elements
> (molecules
> >or whatever) of the system all at once? The earth, even the solid rock,
>
> >might as well be considered a near-fluid when taken altogether as a
> planet.
>
> look up in the sky, at night, an find the great stabilizer... the moon!
>
> Greetings
> Mario
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> To leave this list, email <listserver@dallastexas.net>
> with the body text: leave Keelynet
> list archives and on line subscription forms are at
> http://dallastexas.net/keelynet/
> -------------------------------------------------------------
Cool Mario, I didn't think anyone else had any notion. You probably know
that matter really isn't also.