Great video! I still have a question that has to do with tidal forces. In many explanations it is stated that it is the centrifugal force that gets added to the gravitational force. And there lies my problem. The centrifugal force is as great as the centripetal force (gravity), yet in all of these explanations it is stated that the centrifugal force on earth is the same everywhere. It kinda makes sense when you take the centre of earth as your reference frame, basically subtracting its centripetal force (or adding its centrifugal force) also onto every place on earth. But this wouldn't be the centrifugal force, but the centrifugal force of the centre of earth. This motion is also described by a revolution around the barycentre. But isn't it just the centre of earth that makes this revolution around the barycentre and not the entire earth? How does one explain the tides in a non-rotating referenceframe? Or does the explanation of taking the referenceframe of the centre of earth still hold?
You don't need to use a centrifugal force to describe tidal forces. Gravity from the moon is weakest on one side of the earth and highest on the other which means the earth is accelerated unequally across its body by the moon. If you're in the frame where the surface isn't moving relative to you then you'll see a force which pulls up water from the sides of the earth facing towards and directly away from the moon, and a force pushing down on the perpendicular sides. ie tidal forces. So you don't need to put yourself in a rotating frame, in fact you shouldn't as this does not cause tidal forces. You put yourself in a free falling frame and see what forces arise from the pov of the center of mass.
@@greenappleisspicy Stop with the mind games! Even if you PRETEND your fake glob earth was solid titanium, it would still destruct the moment you tried to spin it. No material has the tensile strength to spin 1000 mph. And no cracked body can spin, so your ludicrous CRACKED glob debunks itself. It has zero tensile strength. Real engineering physics here flat.wtf
I don't know... While I understand some of what you are saying, you speak at the speed of a newscaster on CCTV with your desk in Beijing. Huh? Well, I wrote in English with relatively simple words but unless you've watched the news in Beijing you don't really understand the context. If you could explain what you are/were trying to get across to the audience in narrative sans formulae...that would be something! Mathematics! The First religion. Because we don't want any but the select few to get it. Besides, Einstein has been shown to be wrong. What now? Just like much in academia, over time, the thought of the month is really just a fad.
Forces such as the Coriolis, Centrifugal and Euler forces only exist due to us living on a spinning ball. From our ( apparently stationary) perspective on the surface, these forces seem to arise from nothing (as we don't feel Earth's rotation), but from someone looking at the Earth from afar they clearly see how the rotation is causing these effects. I appreciate that this video involves a lot of mathematics which can be difficult to understand, but I like to go beyond what other science channels might discuss in their videos on certain topics and provide more rigorous (often mathematical) explanations.
@@OVAstronomy Thanks! That was pretty cool of you to respond and I do appreciate it! I play golf and am intrigued by the many "physics" based attempts at an explanation as to what actually powers the club-head and in turn imparts the force on to the ball. Would you care to make an attempt at that? What strikes me most in that regard is that everyone only addresses the player hitting the ball and not the ball hitting the player. For every force there is an equal and opposite reaction, yes? Or am way off base here? I'm concerned by the number of serious injuries sustained by elite level players and no one seems to consider that the players "hit" themselves as the cause of the injuries. The vulnerable areas seem to be various locations on the lead-side leg, the lower back, and the lead shoulder.
I've never heard of these being called "fictitious" once.
Great video!
I still have a question that has to do with tidal forces. In many explanations it is stated that it is the centrifugal force that gets added to the gravitational force. And there lies my problem. The centrifugal force is as great as the centripetal force (gravity), yet in all of these explanations it is stated that the centrifugal force on earth is the same everywhere.
It kinda makes sense when you take the centre of earth as your reference frame, basically subtracting its centripetal force (or adding its centrifugal force) also onto every place on earth. But this wouldn't be the centrifugal force, but the centrifugal force of the centre of earth.
This motion is also described by a revolution around the barycentre. But isn't it just the centre of earth that makes this revolution around the barycentre and not the entire earth?
How does one explain the tides in a non-rotating referenceframe? Or does the explanation of taking the referenceframe of the centre of earth still hold?
You don't need to use a centrifugal force to describe tidal forces. Gravity from the moon is weakest on one side of the earth and highest on the other which means the earth is accelerated unequally across its body by the moon. If you're in the frame where the surface isn't moving relative to you then you'll see a force which pulls up water from the sides of the earth facing towards and directly away from the moon, and a force pushing down on the perpendicular sides. ie tidal forces.
So you don't need to put yourself in a rotating frame, in fact you shouldn't as this does not cause tidal forces. You put yourself in a free falling frame and see what forces arise from the pov of the center of mass.
@@greenappleisspicy Stop with the mind games! Even if you PRETEND your fake glob earth was solid titanium, it would still destruct the moment you tried to spin it. No material has the tensile strength to spin 1000 mph. And no cracked body can spin, so your ludicrous CRACKED glob debunks itself. It has zero tensile strength. Real engineering physics here flat.wtf
I don't know... While I understand some of what you are saying, you speak at the speed of a newscaster on CCTV with your desk in Beijing. Huh? Well, I wrote in English with relatively simple words but unless you've watched the news in Beijing you don't really understand the context. If you could explain what you are/were trying to get across to the audience in narrative sans formulae...that would be something! Mathematics! The First religion. Because we don't want any but the select few to get it. Besides, Einstein has been shown to be wrong. What now? Just like much in academia, over time, the thought of the month is really just a fad.
Forces such as the Coriolis, Centrifugal and Euler forces only exist due to us living on a spinning ball. From our ( apparently stationary) perspective on the surface, these forces seem to arise from nothing (as we don't feel Earth's rotation), but from someone looking at the Earth from afar they clearly see how the rotation is causing these effects. I appreciate that this video involves a lot of mathematics which can be difficult to understand, but I like to go beyond what other science channels might discuss in their videos on certain topics and provide more rigorous (often mathematical) explanations.
@@OVAstronomy Thanks! That was pretty cool of you to respond and I do appreciate it! I play golf and am intrigued by the many "physics" based attempts at an explanation as to what actually powers the club-head and in turn imparts the force on to the ball. Would you care to make an attempt at that? What strikes me most in that regard is that everyone only addresses the player hitting the ball and not the ball hitting the player. For every force there is an equal and opposite reaction, yes? Or am way off base here? I'm concerned by the number of serious injuries sustained by elite level players and no one seems to consider that the players "hit" themselves as the cause of the injuries. The vulnerable areas seem to be various locations on the lead-side leg, the lower back, and the lead shoulder.