Oceanic Waters center of gravitation should be attracted to the center of gravity of the Earth. However, because the water of the oceans is different from the solid mass of the Earth, the water of the oceans might be slightly attracted to the gravity of the Moon differently from the rest of the solid mass of the Earth. This differences in the gravitational masses between the oceanic water and the solid Mass of the Earth would be enhanced by the tilting of the Earth seasonally 23.5 degrees? The real shape of the Earth probably isn't an even because the astroids hit Earth and have added to its mass unevenly, so the Earth rotate unevenly and the water covers the surface mostly evenly to make up the difference but the will affect the gravitational masses and all be attracted to the center mass of the largest mass which is the Earth it self center of gravity; however the water being liquid which maintain volume but not shape the character that is different from solid matter which is important in gravitational centers determinations. And that is why most likely we are having gravitational centers shifting and summing up to a new final total gravitational mass for the whole Earth constantly. The key point is there water can't keep it's shape therefore it's center of gravity is different from the rest of the solid mass of the Earth and this should be happening constantly causing the water vs land distribution constantly seeking hypothetical equilibrium or an ideal gravitational mass which satisfy all physical conditions? Probably all these could be calculated? That's the South Pole, what happens if the South Pole's land losses it's private protection of the glacier s? Increase in liquid water vs land lateral pressure? This might soften the South Pole anchoring position? If so, the South Pole could be lost? The Earth loses its geographical poles? Earth try to re-establish new other geographical Poles or Rotation of the Earth will wobble? Earth go out of it's solar orbit? not sure about the time frame nor the climate nor life? https://www.yahoo.com/news/scientists-warm-water-vital-point-063457873.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/thwaites-glacier-antarctica-185028043.html
https://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&type=E211US105G0&p=seafloor%20spreading
Non of the seismic calculations takes into account/separate the adjacent ocean water activities role in an earthquake, it measures/assume the solid land seismic activities only? Volcanoes too? Perhaps ocean's Water's, 70% of Earth surface, role in land distribution is negligible? e.g. the Richter scale was first introduced in 1935 and it is used with some modifications? The modified Richter scale does not give us any break down of the forces which had lead to the earthquake. If it was the sun hitting the earth, the Richter scale could not till us why an earthquake had happened. We have the theory of seafloor spreading describes tensions, crust, magma, and it talks about the oceans, and seas as they are there (i.e. neutral by stander?) but does not account them in physically into the process of land distributions? which I think what makes the seafloor spreading theory missing a tremendous amount of truthfulness? there is also continental drift but does not count for the ocean water but somewhat use the tidal waves caused by the moon explanation for the continental drift (Frank Bursley Taylor) which is has some merit of truth; since the ocean participate in dynamic, constant basis. The earth expanding theory because the earth does receive, I am not sure because the earth loses and gain matter to and from space? and this is should be counted too? and how much of water, from space hypothetically in the form of hydrogen and oxygen, will the earth gravitational mass allow gain more, or did the earth its maximum limits for holding water? It is now recognized that continental crust is inheritance lighter and different in composition from the oceanic crust which in my opinion makes the continental crust easier to be manipulated by the ocean waters? Nevertheless, non of these theories are taking into consideration s the oceans and seas surface water as an equal factor let alone as a main factor in the land distribution. These theories do not give the ocean waters, as I understood them, any active role at all in the land distribution? I am not suggesting that the oceans water is the only factor acting on land distribution there are many factors which work in coherence to produce the observed earth land distribution e.g. the molten mantel rotation, the earth orbits around the sun the and moon, the tilting of the earth, the mass gained and lost to space, the volume of surface water, the movement of the ocean water and other foreseen factors and all these factors should be taken in present time? In addition to the 50% of fresh water supplied to the land from the oceans on the form of rain, this will manipulate the land soil even further into becoming soft by dissolving salts back to the seas.
This Continental drifting is more like oceanic controlled continental fragmentation? South pole focaled? However, after sufficient continental fragmentation the South Pole will probably loses it's anchrining glacier s? And become fragmented its self?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_Earth
https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AwrE1.GNbR5e1hIA6RtXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzMXJhNGlqBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDQTA2MTVfMQRzZWMDcXJ3?type=E211US105G0&fr=mcafee&ei=UTF-8&p=how+much+does+the+earth+receive+of+matter+from+space+yearly&fr2=12642
Table 1: Volumes of the World's Oceans from ETOPO1
http://phl.upr.edu/library/notes/analysisofthedistributionoflandandoceans
Documentary Our planet Netflix the seas
1st The tidal is not because of moon gravity, earth has tidal, is coming from earth rotation. Nor earth or moon has gravity, if earth had gravity we would not have rain. Article Gravity is an Internal Force
Why w have Earthquake?
Article Quantum Mechanics Earthquake
I know, you might not agree with me, it is OK.. But foundation of Gravity that we leaned from text book is totally is incorrect. We have to think out the box. best
The Pangaea Broke up billions of years ago but the South Pole didn't move from it's original position? To my knowledge?
https://www.livescience.com/38218-facts-about-pangaea.html?fbclid=IwAR1vJclFEiCwQoTeB1XiFI0V2RiQ1S3kncf2qdeH3MAg13ekBf77VrKAjGo
- the south pole fragmentation force (or anchoring force) is equal to Continental fragmentation caused by oceanic control?
- the core mental
- the earth solid mass topography only map with caves
- the earth orientation
I am not sure how to edit or add to the question, so, I am adding info. in the form of the answers. Taking all the possible variables contributing to the land distribution constant changes on earth, the oceanic factor seems to me the most major dynamically active contributing factor in this matter.
Dear Taissir
when you write some comment, there is an upside-down arrow, click and edit you comment.
The Pole of earth or any planets (suns as well) is indicating that galaxy has top and bottom as well.
My theory, when our galaxy movement of its somersault is passed over 180 deg, all the planets Pole in the galaxy is changed.
scientists find out through volcanoes lava, that every some millions years, earth Polarity change. I believe it is coming from galaxy's somersault movement .
Friction is very important in this issue. Water don't have much attraction to solid land as solid land to solid land. However, water keep it's volume not shape?
I use my phone sometimes. Will do thanks.
With regard to seafloor spreading, the water doesn't travel with the seafloor spreading because the friction is minimal, so the seafloor spreading travel horizontally towards where it meet equal pressure of land to rise land? More reading...?
Or to push the non water submurged land? Inhananced by directional oceanic favored water wave resonance?
- Badges
- Science topic