Dear Old Physics:

"Old Physics" wrote in message
m...
Orbital Resonances

The mean solar day loses about 630 seconds over the lunar siderial
period (LSP) every million years, the LSP loses about 400s. The
difference is about 230s/MYr.

Keep in mind that the Moon's period is slowing also...

This means that there were 27.5 msds/lsp 66.5 MYrs ago,

"msds"? Not Material Safety Data Sheets...

28 at 250
MYrs ago, 28.5 433MYrs ago and 29 617 MYrs ago. These correspond to
the mass extinctions at the end of the Creteceous, Permian, Ordovicean
and Precambrian respectively.
What caused these resonances?

Ice ages would certainly take care of lifeforms without a good internal
temperature regulator. It would also limit the amount of angular momentum
transferred to the Moon.

How does this correspond to the Solar System's periodic egress from the
plane of the ecliptic of the Milky Way?

David A. Smith

Dear Old Physics:

"Old Physics" wrote in message
om...
\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:80_Wa.710$2g.613@fed1read05...
....
This means that there were 27.5 msds/lsp 66.5 MYrs ago,

"msds"? Not Material Safety Data Sheets...

msds means?

28 at 250
MYrs ago, 28.5 433MYrs ago and 29 617 MYrs ago. These correspond to
the mass extinctions at the end of the Creteceous, Permian,
Ordovicean
and Precambrian respectively.
What caused these resonances?

Ice ages would certainly take care of lifeforms without a good internal
temperature regulator. It would also limit the amount of angular
momentum
transferred to the Moon.

Excellent observations, as always David. There are a number of
notable paleontoligists, like Steven Stanly, author of the Sciam book
on extinctions, who don't accept the meteor hypothesis. The evidence
points to the earth getting cold and staying cold. Early mammals
similar to hamsters or pikas would have excelent heat retaining
behavior like burrowing and hibernating.

If you did a Neptune (I think it is), and aimed a pole at the Sun, most of
the planet would be cold.

In this case I am putting the egg before the chicken. I hold that
it was the change in the rate of transfer of angular momentum that
caused the earth's axis to increase its tilt and bring on severe
winters.

You'd have to change what we "know" about the mechanism of angular momentum
transfer. If the planet's water is frozen, the tides won't transfer much
momentum. I don't see how "lack of momentum transfer" can back propagate
and freeze the planet.

You might want to review "tidal rhythmites" for additional background on
length of year, length of day, length of month for up to 1 Gy.

Snow at the poles dosn't melt in summer and the reflected
light reduces the global temperature. This is why crocodiles no
longer swim in the polar sea.

I thought if might be because they got tired of getting snow in their
snorkels! ;}
They are reptiles, and have poor control of their body temperature. Also,
there is not a whole lot of life at the poles, at least land-based life.

How does this correspond to the Solar System's periodic egress from the
plane of the ecliptic of the Milky Way?

I've heard that used as a reason for extinction, like a change in
solar output. What is the periodicity?

http://physics.gmu.edu/classinfo/ast...t/ch20_txt.htm
20.3.3 ..."two or three times per orbit" ..."variation is probably not more
than 1000 ly"
20.2.4 ..."revolution period of the Sun and the solar neighborhood (230
million years)"

An event that is repeated 2 to 6 times (depending on interpretation of
cycle) would be 38 to as much as 115 million years between "maxima". Be
interesting if we encounter alterations in some physical "laws" as we
depart from the midplane. Alterations in the bond angles of water, changes
in nominal emissivities/absorptivities, or perhaps encounters with DM
and/or DE altering the rate at which the Sun releases energy (or that
survives to be absorbed by the Earth).

Maybe even blue fairies!

Going to bed... goodnight.

David A. Smith

Dear Old Physics:

"Old Physics" wrote in message
om...
\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:7m1Xa.847$2g.463@fed1read05...
....
msds means?

Mean solar days. 27.5 msds lose about 630s per MYr, the moon
Lunar siderial period losses about 400s for a difference of about
230s/MYrs.

Thanks for the clarification.

....
If you did a Neptune (I think it is), and aimed a pole at the Sun, most
of
the planet would be cold.

Actually it's the seventh planet, Herschel after its discoverer or
George the name he gave it. Uranus leads to too many klingon jokes.

Thanks again!

....
In this case I am putting the egg before the chicken. I hold
that
it was the change in the rate of transfer of angular momentum that
caused the earth's axis to increase its tilt and bring on severe
winters.

You'd have to change what we "know" about the mechanism of angular
momentum
transfer. If the planet's water is frozen, the tides won't transfer
much
momentum. I don't see how "lack of momentum transfer" can back
propagate
and freeze the planet.

I don't think all the water was frozen. The only thing I am
suggesting is that at these times the earth's magnetic field began
reversing, the equator rose relative to the poles and the earth got
cold because the axis went from no mor than five degrees off the
ecliptic to more than twenty.

The Moon does not have its own magnetic field. So momentum transfer to it
would be against whatever paramagnetism ir represents. And this would
mostly affect its spin (I think) and not its orbit. It is tides and tides
alone that drive this transfer from the Earth to the Moon. Now if they had
the same net non-zero charge...

You might want to review "tidal rhythmites" for additional background
on
length of year, length of day, length of month for up to 1 Gy.
Thanks for the tip.
Snow at the poles dosn't melt in summer and the reflected
light reduces the global temperature. This is why crocodiles no
longer swim in the polar sea.

I thought if might be because they got tired of getting snow in their
snorkels! ;}
They are reptiles, and have poor control of their body temperature.
Also,
there is not a whole lot of life at the poles, at least land-based
life.

But there was untill about 65 MYrs ago.

But this may only mean that it was NOT at the pole then. The net
rotational momentum of the Earth-Moon system may be "constant", but that
doesn't mean the Earth always spins around the same real estate. Look at
all the "crap" piled up near New Zealand's subduction zone.

How does this correspond to the Solar System's periodic egress from
the
plane of the ecliptic of the Milky Way?

I've heard that used as a reason for extinction, like a change in
solar output. What is the periodicity?


http://physics.gmu.edu/classinfo/ast...t/ch20_txt.htm
20.3.3 ..."two or three times per orbit" ..."variation is probably not
more
than 1000 ly"
20.2.4 ..."revolution period of the Sun and the solar neighborhood (230
million years)"

An event that is repeated 2 to 6 times (depending on interpretation of
cycle) would be 38 to as much as 115 million years between "maxima".
Be
interesting if we encounter alterations in some physical "laws" as we
depart from the midplane. Alterations in the bond angles of water,
changes
in nominal emissivities/absorptivities, or perhaps encounters with DM
and/or DE altering the rate at which the Sun releases energy (or that
survives to be absorbed by the Earth).

Far to long to account for Heinrich events that occur with a
periodicity of about 13000 yrs, half a precession cycle. If it were
180 to 184 Myrs orbital resonance theory of mass extinctions would
have serious competition.

Agreed.

David A. Smith

\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message news:rejXa.994$2g.194@fed1read05...
Dear Old Physics:

"Old Physics" wrote in message
om...
\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:7m1Xa.847$2g.463@fed1read05...
...
msds means?

Mean solar days. 27.5 msds lose about 630s per MYr, the moon
Lunar siderial period losses about 400s for a difference of about
230s/MYrs.

Thanks for the clarification.

...
If you did a Neptune (I think it is), and aimed a pole at the Sun, most
of
the planet would be cold.

Actually it's the seventh planet, Herschel after its discoverer or
George the name he gave it. Uranus leads to too many klingon jokes.

Thanks again!

...
In this case I am putting the egg before the chicken. I hold
that
it was the change in the rate of transfer of angular momentum that
caused the earth's axis to increase its tilt and bring on severe
winters.

You'd have to change what we "know" about the mechanism of angular
momentum
transfer. If the planet's water is frozen, the tides won't transfer
much
momentum. I don't see how "lack of momentum transfer" can back
propagate
and freeze the planet.

I don't think all the water was frozen. The only thing I am
suggesting is that at these times the earth's magnetic field began
reversing, the equator rose relative to the poles and the earth got
cold because the axis went from no mor than five degrees off the
ecliptic to more than twenty.

The Moon does not have its own magnetic field. So momentum transfer to it
would be against whatever paramagnetism ir represents. And this would
mostly affect its spin (I think) and not its orbit. It is tides and tides
alone that drive this transfer from the Earth to the Moon. Now if they had
the same net non-zero charge...

You might want to review "tidal rhythmites" for additional background
on
length of year, length of day, length of month for up to 1 Gy.
Thanks for the tip.
Snow at the poles dosn't melt in summer and the reflected
light reduces the global temperature. This is why crocodiles no
longer swim in the polar sea.

I thought if might be because they got tired of getting snow in their
snorkels! ;}
They are reptiles, and have poor control of their body temperature.
Also,
there is not a whole lot of life at the poles, at least land-based
life.

But there was untill about 65 MYrs ago.

But this may only mean that it was NOT at the pole then. The net
rotational momentum of the Earth-Moon system may be "constant", but that
doesn't mean the Earth always spins around the same real estate. Look at
all the "crap" piled up near New Zealand's subduction zone.

Most of Canada is a "craton", it has been stable at the same
latitude for atleast 500 million years. The Champosaur (relative of
the crocodile) was found near what is now the artic circle, the temp
would have been about 60F year round. Evidence is that the whole
earth went down in temperature by atleast 15 degrees.

How does this correspond to the Solar System's periodic egress from
the
plane of the ecliptic of the Milky Way?

I've heard that used as a reason for extinction, like a change in
solar output. What is the periodicity?


http://physics.gmu.edu/classinfo/ast...t/ch20_txt.htm
20.3.3 ..."two or three times per orbit" ..."variation is probably not
more
than 1000 ly"
20.2.4 ..."revolution period of the Sun and the solar neighborhood (230
million years)"

An event that is repeated 2 to 6 times (depending on interpretation of
cycle) would be 38 to as much as 115 million years between "maxima".
Be
interesting if we encounter alterations in some physical "laws" as we
depart from the midplane. Alterations in the bond angles of water,
changes
in nominal emissivities/absorptivities, or perhaps encounters with DM
and/or DE altering the rate at which the Sun releases energy (or that
survives to be absorbed by the Earth).

Far to long to account for Heinrich events that occur with a
periodicity of about 13000 yrs, half a precession cycle. If it were
180 to 184 Myrs orbital resonance theory of mass extinctions would
have serious competition.

Agreed.

David A. Smith

Thanks again, David, sk

Far to long to account for Heinrich events that occur with a
periodicity of about 13000 yrs, half a precession cycle. If it were
180 to 184 Myrs orbital resonance theory of mass extinctions would
have serious competition.

Agreed.

David A. Smith

Thanks again, David, sk

Orbital Resonances

The mean solar day loses about 230 seconds over the sidereal lunar
orbit, SLO, every million years.
Take the present SLO, 27.32166 days and divide by 27.5. Subtract
the result from one and multiply by the SLO, 2360591.47s for the
result of 15408s. Divide this by 230s for the result of 66.5 million
years.
Follow the same procedure for 28, 28.5 and 29 msds per SLO to get
the result of 249.8, 430 and 606 million years ago respectively.
These results are very close to the cretaceous, permian, ordovicean
and precambrian extinctions respectively.
At these times the earth's magnetic field began reversing at an
increased rate of as much as 35000 percent, and sea leavels began to
rise at high latitudes and fall at middle latitudes. Temperatures
dropped with the draining of inland seas.
Could there be a siderial link between the moon's orbit and the
earth's rotation?

stephen kearney

Just a repost. sk