gravity versus centrifugal force

1- The force of Gravity at any point throughout the surface of the sphere of the Earth is a constant and unchangeable unit of One "G".

2- The enormous speed of rotation of the earth of 1/4 + more than the speed of sound, produces such a tremendous centrifugal force at any point along the equatorial parallel, that causes the Earth to bulge at its equator, and flatten it at its poles.

3- The force of gravity, in order to counterbalance, needs to be greater than that of the centrifugal force to be able to hold in place any object sitting along the equatorial line.

4- Hypothetically it's conceivable, depending on the size, speed and directional angle of impact of an asteroid, that the resulting speed of rotation can either increase or decrease, with a corresponding change in the centrifugal force.

5- Any person on the equator, stands to reason, will float away into space in the first case (3). But the question is, why in the second case, the person is not affected by the centrifugal force being that much weaker to counterbalance the One G?

Shouldn't that person have gained some weight? Why is it that people living in increasingly northern latitudes, being subjected to ever weaker centrifugal forces, until at the very Pole it's all but nonexistent, don't get a corresponding gain in weight?

Anybody with a convincing answer? My ignorance prompted me to ask those questions, but being immutable as they are, the laws of physics ought to apply both ways, not one way.

0  Views: 752 Answers: 3 Posted: 13 years ago
Tags:

GOD makes things good, that work.

I reall don't know the answer to your question, but it is a good one. Maybe a person standing close to one of the poles does weigh less than he/she does when standing at the equator. Possibly that difference would be so minimal (maybe a few grams, or even just a few milligrams?) that it is practically neglectable.

A centrifuge requires centrifugal motion to produce a force while, gravity is the mass an object exerts on an other one. This is science 101 not detailed as your fine explanation but, all from memory of physics 16 years ago. Plus I was to exhausted to read your in depth explanation.
Good question but, I used my daily amount of votes up for today already. Maybe tomorrow.

### Top contributors in Uncategorized category

ROMOS
Karma: 1101K

Colleen
Karma: 953K

country bumpkin
Karma: 838K

Benthere
Karma: 760K
> Top contributors chart

ww88pronet01
Answers: 0 Views: 8 Rating: 0
gamebaidoithuongzcom
Answers: 0 Views: 6 Rating: 0
keonhacaihay
Answers: 0 Views: 11 Rating: 0
oh mmy god
Answers: 0 Views: 12 Rating: 0
Nhà Cái HAY88
Answers: 0 Views: 11 Rating: 0