Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

wrong again national geographic channel

Discussion in 'The Pub' started by D Stump, Oct 8, 2007.

  1. i think

    it just seems wrong to me, i dont know exactly but i have caught them out BIG TIME in the past and im getting jack of it.

    this is what the fox program "moon mysteries" said

    ^stump agrees with this bit

    NU AH! me dont think so. the equator [where i think chepel corby is] doesnt have seasons, tis always hot!

    now, be that as it may, night time still happens so the intensity of heat would subside each day [at 12 hrs apparently if there was no axis] so its not going to cook! the daily rotation of the earth would have to halt for that.

    am i cwazy, or did i miss the bit where they said 'without the moon there would be no daily orbit'? [which (acording to fox) has something to do with axis alone, yet fox decided to only talk "axis" for those who only just tuned in]

    the sun [as far as i know] does the anual orbit

    can anyone clear this up or cough up an occation where fox got it wrong?

    cheers :cool:

    yeah yeah i know, i want more :cool:
  2. Jax, the equatorial region does have seasons as the sun does not track along the equator 365 days a year, over the year it tracks from the tropic of cancer (23dec 27mins north) to the tropic of Capricorn (23dec 27mins south)

    Also are you SURE they said no axis? in which case we would be tumbeling all over the place or did the mean a constant axis where the sun always tracks exactly along the equator.

    Actualy thinking about it, we do have an extremely constant axis, it's the orbit around the sun that gives us seasons, nothing to do with the axis at all :shock:
    So now i'm confused :?

    Ok time for a lay down.
  3. It's not that we have a constant axis that is a given but it's the angle offset that gives us the seasons.
    I can't recall the exact figure but it's something around 23 degrees offset so that in our summer the southern hemisphere is "closer" to the sun and in winter it is "further" due to the angle offset of our axis.
    If we had no axis then we would tumble and it would make for interesting seasons.
    If the angle of our axis was straight up and down then the seasons would be constant and the equator would heat up a lot more.
  4. It's the constancy of the 23 and a half degree axis of the earth, (the only planet known to have an axis off vertical, by the way), that gives us our seasons, summer and winter, springtime and harvest :wink:.
  5. Ok Loz i give up what the hell is that??.Or is it your next cd cover titled looking for something :wink:
  6. Indonesia does have seasons, the dry and the wet season.
  7. Having lived there for a good part of my life - no, they have the drought and the flood seasons :p
  8. Earth isn't the only one not vertical they vary from 1 to 23 degrees, most are pretty close to vertical but not all.
  9. Hey, I lived there, too! We were in Jakarta from January '87 to August '89.

    Gotta love those daily floods, hey? At least it kinda kept the streets clean. :wink:
  10. Thats so sad... It was pregnant
  11. I'm not sure I understood stump's post in it's entirety :?

    Since I can't see photobucket pictures from work, I'm guessing Loz has posted up more trolleys?!!

    Stump said a science show made the statement "if earth had no axis there'd be no seasons". If true, they clearly they haven't got a clue. I'm guessing that interpretation is a stumpism as national geographic aren't a highschool production.

    So, sounds like they said a zero degree axis - in which case, the "seasons" as we know them would pretty much disappear. There could be expected to be some minor variations that result from the "wobble" in the earth's axis.


    Actually, come to think of it, given the earth's orbit is elliptical, there might be some kind of global season since the earth's distance from the sun varies over the year. :-k

    As to whether the equator would be a desert waste land - who can say? It depends on what weather patterns would result with a zero degree axis. :-k

  12. Not quite
    Many planets are off axis
    Especially Uranus which is waaaaay off axis to the point it is lying almost at 90 degrees.
  13. Thought there was one that laying down...
  14. smee wrote


    i get it now!! the equator is the closest point to the sun at all times [kinda like a beer belly] so if we had no tilt, then it would be closer

    templemonkey wrote

    that's got to be the FUNNIST thing ever said, and the fact there was a kiddie bike in it makes it all the funnier!

    :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: :eek: :LOL: :LOL: :eek: :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

    cheers :cool:
  15. What do you mean by closer :?: :?: :shock: If there was no axis (tilt), it would mean the equator would always be the same line of earth to be closest to the sun. I.e It would be the only spot (along the earth) to always be the closest to the snu and therefore be (awfully) hot (one long endless summer, literally). I don't think it would be physically any closer? (or am I wrong?)
  16. i guess thats possible undi, there are 2 positions of the axis and i picked one of them [the base] on the assumption that the top was the part that was tilted and not the base.
  17. I think the distance to the sun is not the major factor here as the difference, given the distance from the sun, is proportionally small. I think the major effect is where the sun sits in the sky. The more upright, the greater the heating effect as the same amount of energy is dispersed across a smaller surface area. Also, coming straight down, there is the less atmosphere for the radiant heat to pass through before it can heat up the surface and hence the more gets through. The greater the angle of incidence ie. the lower in the sky the sun is, the more area is heated by the same amount of light and the more atmosphere needs to be penetrated. How hot is it when the sun is about to set - not at all. Average that over a season and compare it to an area where the sun spends a much larger portion of it's time higher in the sky.

    By the way, the effect of the daily cycle of heating and cooling is called the diurnal effect. It plays a big part in aviation. I only added this to get stump going again!

    Of course, this is all a big picture theory as when the movement of air caused by the heating settles into a pattern, it gets phenomenally complex. You start getting things like the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone and the Equatorial Trough and all sorts of nice little patterns of heating and cooling. This drives our High and Low pressure systems.

    I worked out the difference between being at the equator to being at the pole in reference to the distance at the sun - about 0.004% difference. So it is even less than I thought.

    This is based on the average distance from the Earth to the sun being about 150million km and the Earth's radius being about 6000 km.
  18. [​IMG]

    heh heh, he said anus, heh heh