02.04.2013 Views

The Earth's Shifting Crust by Charles Hapgood - wire of information

The Earth's Shifting Crust by Charles Hapgood - wire of information

The Earth's Shifting Crust by Charles Hapgood - wire of information

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

CAMPBELL'S MECHANISM 369<br />

hoping that you can give me a steer in nontechnical terms on the general<br />

concepts.<br />

My hunch is that, contrary to a widespread impression, it is the<br />

bulge alone that stabilizes the geographical poles. As I reason it out,<br />

if the earth were a perfect sphere, the energy <strong>of</strong> its rotation, derived<br />

from its mass in motion, would "stabilize" the speed <strong>of</strong> the rotation,<br />

but would have no reference to its direction. If we suppose that some-<br />

body could reach out from Mars with a pole, and give the earth a<br />

strong push at an angle <strong>of</strong> 90 from the direction <strong>of</strong> rotation, the<br />

earth would be shifted on the axis <strong>of</strong> rotation to an extent de-<br />

termined <strong>by</strong> the ratio <strong>of</strong> the force <strong>of</strong> the push to the mass <strong>of</strong> the<br />

earth. In fact, if the earth had no bulge, it would never have stable<br />

poles, but would rotate every which way.<br />

. . .<br />

If my view <strong>of</strong> the matter is sound, important consequences follow,<br />

but I am not quite certain <strong>of</strong> the validity <strong>of</strong> my premises.<br />

Dr. Shapley's reply, dated February 2, 1951, was, in part,<br />

as follows:<br />

Dr. [Harold] Jeffreys was fortunately here at the Harvard Ob-<br />

servatory and I could turn over your inquiry to him. I now have his<br />

reply. He says in effect that the fullest discussion <strong>of</strong> the points mentioned<br />

<strong>by</strong> you is in Routh's Rigid Dynamics, probably in volume I.<br />

Most textbooks <strong>of</strong> rigid dynamics will have something about it. <strong>The</strong><br />

theory goes back to Euler. Really both the rotation and the equatorial<br />

bulge are needed to maintain stability. Without rotation the<br />

body could be at rest at any position;<br />

with rotation but without the<br />

equatorial bulge it could rotate permanently about an axis in any<br />

direction. . . . (343).<br />

With this statement I decided to rest content. It seemed to<br />

me that Brown's position in the matter was correct. Maxwell<br />

showed both <strong>by</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> his dynamical top and theoretically<br />

what Brown showed <strong>by</strong> his device: that a rotating sphere<br />

tends to throw the heaviest weights on its surface to the<br />

equator <strong>of</strong> spin. Maxwell and, after him, George H. Darwin<br />

recognized that the equatorial bulge <strong>of</strong> the globe stabilized<br />

the direction <strong>of</strong> the earth's rotation just as a weight on the<br />

surface <strong>of</strong> a model sphere would do when the sphere was<br />

rotated rapidly.<br />

Yet there is a distinct difference between the earth and<br />

the model globe. <strong>The</strong> earth's approximately round shape is

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!