5 ms·
Wouldn't less ice at the poles (= more water at the equator = higher rotational inertia) mean a slower rotation? Maybe we can get that second back.
by scottw 14y ago
Wouldn't less ice at the poles (= more water at the equator = higher rotational inertia) mean a slower rotation? Maybe we can get that second back.
- bazzargh 14y agoReplacing water with ice at the poles would mean more mass at the poles, not less, since ice is displacing water and is less dense. So he may have a plausible argument that it's the other way round, but I haven't done the calculations.
- Groxx 14y agoI don't know that that works - the south pole at least has ground, and a LOT of permafrost that isn't displacing any water.
- zhoutong 14y agoIt doesn't work like that. The mass of water displaced is equal to the mass of the floating ice itself. Melting a piece of ice has no change on water level. so yeah, nothing changes.
- FreeFull 14y agoBoth the southern polar cap and the Greenland ice mass rest on ground rather than float in the ocean, which means any melting will cause the ocean levels to rise.
- zhoutong 14y agoI was talking about the displacement only (which the parent thread discusses). I of course acknowledge the common sense that not all ice is floating on water.
- bazzargh 14y agoDoh, of course you're right. The mass of water displaced is only greater if the ice is submerged.
- zhoutong 14y agoEven if that's so, we are not getting the second "back". This leap second is a second added to UTC, to adjust for the slowed-down earth rotation. There was never a leap second that removes a second from our UTC clock so far (it may happen in the future).
- mikeash 14y agoIt's not melting at the poles, but melting of glaciers. The meltwater flows downhill, causing a net movement of mass closer to the center of the planet.
- Thrymr 14y agoThe parent post is correct about the slowing. The land ice is (mostly) at high latitudes, and the meltwater tends to raise sea level, which moves the mass to lower latitudes, hence farther from the axis of rotation. Thus warming slows the Earth's rotation as its moment of inertia increases. The parent post is incorrect about getting it "back" however; leap seconds are added because the rotation is slowing (a "day" is getting longer). More ice caps melting will lead to more leap seconds, not fewer (or negative).
- NelsonMinar 14y agoI meant the global warming thing mostly as a joke. It was inspired by the Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%94T http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%94T, which says: "the melting of continental ice sheets ... removes their tremendous weight, allowing the land under them to begin to rebound upward in the polar regions, which ... brings mass closer to the rotation axis of the Earth, which makes the Earth spin faster". If it's on Wikipedia it must be true, right?