-
Before you go and lock the thread, I'd like to introduce Scott to this person:
With this guy on your team you can only succeed!
McBryce.
To many noise kids and grandparents around me to watch it just now.
2 seperate 360° wqves around the toroid commonly referred to as a double helixs or a single 720° wave is the only possible configuration to produce a quadrupole. This is fairly simple stuff and well understood from every 4 pole motor on the planet and also the penning and paul traps. I suspect the polar flows are a single 720° wave, while the central toroid is a double helics. Each double helixs obviously completes 1 roll around the toroid axis in 1 rotation of the poloidal axis. Giving the 1° trajectory around the central toroidal axis and creating the increase in rotation speed on the sun at the equator.
The hydrogen atom wave function is a double helix as shown before.
Lets say we have 3 toroids of different size each with a double helical wave and we manage to stick a clamp meter around the entire toroid and measure the current in each
We get a reading of 10, 100 and 1000 amp, we know the resistance to the current is zero since its a superconductor. So are we all going to claim that the power of each toroid is zero since anything multiplied by zero equals zero? So rotating 1000 amps of current around a coil/toroid produces no magnetic field now? Voltage requires resistance.
-
Also we don't actually have any viable fusion reactors yet on which to build this...
I dont know how many times ive said this is not a fusion reactor. -
-snip-
The whole idea of venting plasma from a fusion reactor to drive a prop/turbine is utterly ludicrous.
1. The constant loss of plasma would require fuel to be added continuously; no mean feat as you're causing cool spots wherever you inject new fuel, and the energy required to continuously heat new fuel to the 150 million Kelvin or so operating temperature would be not insignificant. It would be the equivalent of constantly having to apply start-up level energy to the reactor, which is the most energy hungry point of a fusion reaction.
2. The materials needed for such a prop/turbine do not exist (outside Star Trek et al). The reactor itself is never directly exposed to these temperatures; the magnetic field constricts the plasma and keeps it away from surfaces. Props and turbines work by direct contact with the fluid medium they work in. I know of no material that can directly withstand these temperatures, even allowing for the likely much reduced temperature in the "drive section" of this imaginary device due to expansion and therefore cooling of the plasma as it exits the reactor.
Certainly you aren't going to be able to 3DP such.
First of all their is no constant lose of plasma. Its a closed circuit unless the plasma is used as thrust. Like any rocket in space 1 burn is all that is needed to speed the craft up. Maybe you should watch apollo 13 again. They werent burning fuel all the way to the moon. 😂
Secondly as stated countless times this is not a fusion reactor. Plasma temperature (energy since heat is a human construct) does not need to be 3 million decrees. Air has an ions density of between 3000 and 10000 ions per cm3 at sea level. It is the manipulation of the ions trajectory that causes foils to produce lift. Go to the NASA website explaining the incorrect lift theory's that are currently taught as gospel by physics teachers around the world. If the most common theory was true a sail boat would not be capable of producing lift. -
Indeed, and I was so vexed I forgot point 3:
Whilst the temperature inside a tokomak is huge, the pressure is not, it's actually quite low, the highest achieved to date is around 10 atmospheres. Not a very big pressure differential if you want to use it to provide thrust to a prop/turbine.
But a tokamak uses linear plasma, unless they are experimenting with magnetic islands, then it creates an explosive pressure gradient. As shown by the 2006 research paper into the subject. -
So, nonlinearplasma, are we done yet? if I lock the thread will you get lost and not come back? I think we have established that no one here wants to put money into your piggy bank.
You are welcome to go chat to others inventors on the forum Simon. Im happy replying when i have time. -
Not unusual. My limited company registered address was above a strip club in East London. That's what happens when you buy one from a company registration service
He probably expected to find my sail boat in the drive way too, along with a tokamak fusion reactor that i keep telling him is an entirely different design trying to do an entirely different thing.
I will make sure to tell the water postie to delivery all my mail to my gps coordinates next time. 😂 -
.
-
I understand that some may find it entertaining, but IMHO allowing these kind of threads to survive more that the strictly necessary time to ascertain what its kind is, devaluates the forum.
It's why we have this particular forum section. -
Ummm... yeah... that video has nothing to to with the theoretical physics you're plagiarizing here; he's suggesting that all these ancient civilizations were somehow exposed to real-world examples turned into working technology.
So... a dissertation suggesting that the core premise of Stargate (aliens with FTL travel technology were actually all our old gods) was maybe real is somehow your proof that this technology is possible with our current level of scientific knowledge and manufacturing capability?
Okay... this is no longer amusing, even if you are a bot.
mnem
*toddles off to do something, even if it's wrong*
Just because he didnt consider the possiblity that they were drawing the inside of the sun after a micronova/recurrent nova. Remember they worshipped the sun as the life give. To me it sounds like she looked like this for around 3 days before recollecting the material she lost. And "god" said let there be light, died on the cross, is the southern cross. The squatterman is the son of god, the immaculate conception. Satan is Saturn. The 3 kings orions belts. If you want to go down stargate conspiracy theory stuff then by all means knock yourself out. But i perfere to think of it as a method of telling a story that need to be passed from generation to generation. Like all chinese whispers you have to take some info with a pinch of salt. Who knows how old the story is. But one thing is for sure our ancestor build working models of the solar system (greeks), they created a calander of our path around the galaxy, the 12 star signs are a calander, that takes a level of knowledge i think we would struggle with. We only got our calqnder of earths rotation correct a few hundred years ago. We had to remove 2 weeks in the 1800 if i recall correctly.
This is because the sun rolls around its second axis every 22 years. Its entire magnetosphere including our planet completes 1 extra rotation every 22 years. As shown in attached image. It shouldnt be 2 difficult to figure out how a rotating unbalanced system rotates around its second axis. This is why Einstein need time dilation to make his model work. Since time is a measurement of distance.
-
I understand that some may find it entertaining, but IMHO allowing these kind of threads to survive more that the strictly necessary time to ascertain what its kind is, devaluates the forum.
It's why we have this particular forum section.
Yea just let it go, no one is forced to read it.But a tokamak uses linear plasma, unless they are experimenting with magnetic islands, then it creates an explosive pressure gradient. As shown by the 2006 research paper into the subject.
Nonlinearplasma,
I know from checking that They (the Super-Smart people a.k.a physicists) trying to design fusion reactors have and/or are working on computer simulations to prove the designs are valid. Of course it's all based on math and the physics of all the materials used.
Do you plan on getting a computer simulation going to prove your design is valid? From what I saw it's a non-trivial thing to do (to say the least). -
It's why we have this particular forum section.
But, it is not necessarily meant for the actual creator/inventor/(possibly deluded individual) of the technology (dodgy), to be publicly ridiculed, played with and/or have possibly delusional theories given exposure, activities and so on.
TL;DR
It might be harmful to the OP, in some cases. But I'm not sure. -
I dont know how many times ive said this is not a fusion reactor.
To save me reading, many pages of 'stuff'. Where exactly is your 'energy' source coming from?
Also (IMPORTANT), is it a well proven, widely believed in scientific communities and/or proved in real life, energy source? -
Nonlinearplasma,
I know from checking that They (the Super-Smart people a.k.a physicists) trying to design fusion reactors have and/or are working on computer simulations to prove the designs are valid. Of course it's all based on math and the physics of all the materials used.
Do you plan on getting a computer simulation going to prove your design is valid? From what I saw it's a non-trivial thing to do (to say the least).
Offcourse if i get the opportunity to do that it would help immensely. I havent been in an english speaking country since arriving in europe. When i get home to scotland life will be considerably easier to communicate with "super smart people" that so far dont have a mechanism for the magnetic changes in the sun. -
It's why we have this particular forum section.
But, it is not necessarily meant for the actual creator/inventor/(possibly deluded individual) of the technology (dodgy), to be publicly ridiculed, played with and/or have possibly delusional theories given exposure, activities and so on.
TL;DR
It might be harmful to the OP, in some cases. But I'm not sure.
he can post on any other forum and get the same treatment. We are after all one of the more polite forums out there, if he can't take this then someone better stop him posting anywhere else. I'm starting to think he wants to start a mini cult that will just keep drip feeding little donations into his account so that he can not bother to work. Who knows, if he gets another chance to just sail the high seas he may come back with even more revelations. -
I dont know how many times ive said this is not a fusion reactor.
To save me reading, many pages of 'stuff'. Where exactly is your 'energy' source coming from?
Also (IMPORTANT), is it a well proven, widely believed in scientific communities and/or proved in real life, energy source?
https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.03299
https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-suggest-earth-s-core-could-be-in-a-superionic-state
"Self sustaining dyanmo" & "superionic plasma"
Im sure everyone will disagee but superionic plasma has to form a toroid to create the quadrupoles on our planet and sun. If it forms a toroid it must also form a z pinch. If it forms a z pinch its a seperate plasma flow to the toroid. Let the toroid form a self sustaining dynamo from the superconducting superionic plasma and tap the super compressed plasma energy in the z pinch to rotate the generator. As long as you dont slow the reactor down by stalling it by exacting to much power the self sustaining dynamo will keep producing the z pinch. And the z pinch will keep the reactor turning. How much input energy is required is a complete unknown, how much power can be extract is a complete unknown. Hence the need for R&D, but every time you convert energy from 1 form to another or transfere energy from 1 medium to another you lose energy. Im not transfereing energy from plasma to water tho the walls of the reactor. So it will inevitable be more efficent than a tokamak.
Not to mention the fact plasma expands at a far greater rate than steam does, as shown in this paper.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-plasma-physics/article/an-alfvenic-reconnecting-plasmoid-thruster/F296E45CC504E8FF2586EA79117E2514
Essential that means you use less volume of plasma to generate the same amount of thrust.
The same is true for burning hydrocarbons and oxygen. You can look up the terminal velocity of a craft using hydrocarbons, eventually the craft out runs the speed of expansion.
It shouldnt take a rocket scientist to figure out the plasma in the polidal jets of say a pulsar is going to expand faster than a rocket. You can read about it in the paper or multiple articles on the internet. Search for solar flare thruster and you should find plenty -
Before you go and lock the thread, I'd like to introduce Scott to this person: https://youtu.be/CF5AIfuM0Uw With this guy on your team you can only succeed! - McBryce.
Wait.... what the...?
Did this guy just incorporate Body Thetans into Unified Field Theory...?!?
mnem
Please forgive this math-defective old dwagon for his incomplete understanding*
-
https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.03299
https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-suggest-earth-s-core-could-be-in-a-superionic-state
"Self sustaining dyanmo" & "superionic plasma"
Im sure everyone will disagee but superionic plasma has to form a toroid to create the quadrupoles on our planet and sun. If it forms a toroid it must also form a z pinch. If it forms a z pinch its a seperate plasma flow to the toroid. Let the toroid form a self sustaining dynamo from the superconducting superionic plasma and tap the super compressed plasma energy in the z pinch to rotate the generator. As long as you dont slow the reactor down by stalling it by exacting to much power the self sustaining dynamo will keep producing the z pinch. And the z pinch will keep the reactor turning. How much input energy is required is a complete unknown, how much power can be extract is a complete unknown. Hence the need for R&D, but every time you convert energy from 1 form to another or transfere energy from 1 medium to another you lose energy. Im not transfereing energy from plasma to water tho the walls of the reactor. So it will inevitable be more efficent than a tokamak.
Not to mention the fact plasma expands at a far greater rate than steam does, as shown in this paper.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-plasma-physics/article/an-alfvenic-reconnecting-plasmoid-thruster/F296E45CC504E8FF2586EA79117E2514
Essential that means you use less volume of plasma to generate the same amount of thrust.
The same is true for burning hydrocarbons and oxygen. You can look up the terminal velocity of a craft using hydrocarbons, eventually the craft out runs the speed of expansion.
It shouldnt take a rocket scientist to figure out the plasma in the polidal jets of say a pulsar is going to expand faster than a rocket. You can read about it in the paper or multiple articles on the internet. Search for solar flare thruster and you should find plenty
Just because a particular power source, is extremely complicated, and perhaps, not well understood yet. Doesn't mean that you can start believing that it will be a source of unlimited energy (free energy), i.e. like a perpetual machine.
I get the impression, that you seem to think, that as long as this mechanism, is NOT abused. I.e. That too much energy in one go (or continuously), is NOT allowed. You can travel for huge distances, using this energy source, unlike limited, one-use power sources, such as batteries or burning rocket fuel (and ejecting it), to create motion, in space rockets.
Some theoretical energy sources, such as fusion energy (but also Nuclear fission types), can be expected/calculated, to have a huge amount of energy, which can be extracted, with some loss of mass, with the fuel materials (I.e. Einsteins's E = MC^2).
But in general, energy sources, based on some peoples ideas on how 'free energy', 'perpetual motion machines' and possibly other similar ideas. Are widely considered to be unproven (no experiments showing them working, except some suspected scam experiments, with hidden batteries/motors or secret mains connection wires, etc). have been demonstrated, as far as I'm aware.
Also, scientifically, they are considered, somewhat or fully, impossible. Since they would defeat a number of fundamental laws of Physics, such as conservation of energy, E = MC^2, making energy/matter out of nothing, etc.
If I'm mistaken, and that is NOT what you think. Then without Fusion, Fission, big tanks of rocket fuel, relying on getting enough solar energy with solar cells or relying on conservation of momentum, when the space vehicle is traveling at enough speed. Where exactly is any energy needed to power the space ships systems and/or CHANGES in speed, going to come from ? -
he can post on any other forum and get the same treatment. We are after all one of the more polite forums out there, if he can't take this then someone better stop him posting anywhere else. I'm starting to think he wants to start a mini cult that will just keep drip feeding little donations into his account so that he can not bother to work. Who knows, if he gets another chance to just sail the high seas he may come back with even more revelations.
That's a very good answer!
You're right, he can. That's the thing with the internet, these days. There are many good things about the internet. But also, a number of downsides. Such as that a person, simply has to feel or believe that something is right. They can then attempt to tell thousands or even millions of people, on what they think is the truth.
The human mind, seems to be too susceptible, to thinking or believing in things, which may not be right.
E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect -
The human mind, seems to be too susceptible, to thinking or believing in things, which may not be right.
That sums up the population of Tinder very well
-
Yeah, okay; the issue here is a matter of scale. It's really hard to visualize the scale of what you're hoping to accomplish.I dont know how many times ive said this is not a fusion reactor.
To save me reading, many pages of 'stuff'. Where exactly is your 'energy' source coming from?
Also (IMPORTANT), is it a well proven, widely believed in scientific communities and/or proved in real life, energy source?
https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.03299
https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-suggest-earth-s-core-could-be-in-a-superionic-state
"Self sustaining dyanmo" & "superionic plasma"
Im sure everyone will disagee but superionic plasma has to form a toroid to create the quadrupoles on our planet and sun. If it forms a toroid it must also form a z pinch. If it forms a z pinch its a seperate plasma flow to the toroid. Let the toroid form a self sustaining dynamo from the superconducting superionic plasma and tap the super compressed plasma energy in the z pinch to rotate the generator. As long as you dont slow the reactor down by stalling it by exacting to much power the self sustaining dynamo will keep producing the z pinch. And the z pinch will keep the reactor turning. How much input energy is required is a complete unknown, how much power can be extract is a complete unknown. Hence the need for R&D, but every time you convert energy from 1 form to another or transfere energy from 1 medium to another you lose energy. Im not transfereing energy from plasma to water tho the walls of the reactor. So it will inevitable be more efficent than a tokamak.
Not to mention the fact plasma expands at a far greater rate than steam does, as shown in this paper.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-plasma-physics/article/an-alfvenic-reconnecting-plasmoid-thruster/F296E45CC504E8FF2586EA79117E2514
Essential that means you use less volume of plasma to generate the same amount of thrust.
The same is true for burning hydrocarbons and oxygen. You can look up the terminal velocity of a craft using hydrocarbons, eventually the craft out runs the speed of expansion.
It shouldnt take a rocket scientist to figure out the plasma in the polidal jets of say a pulsar is going to expand faster than a rocket. You can read about it in the paper or multiple articles on the internet. Search for solar flare thruster and you should find plenty
Even a math-defective old fart like me can see that the amounts of thrust generated vs what is needed here amounts to a butterfly fart vs a hurricane.
Our current VX-200 plasma drives produce ~5-10N or ~1-2 lbs of thrust... this is enough to hold ~16-32 ounces of mass aloft against Earth's gravity. In comparison, a cordless leaf-blower produces approximately 15N, and a big gas-powered one ~35N. Commercial jet engines produce between ~130,000 and 450,000 N thrust. EACH.
A (very quick) Google shows that an average electric power plant generates approx 350-500MW; there are of course much larger and much smaller ones out there. The US alone has approximately 1.14 million MW of electricity production total. Again, just going by a quick Google, power in to power out of one of these plants is at best approx 75% efficiency.
Now... here's where my simple maths fall down, because I don't know how to calculate how many N of thrust one needs inside an average commercial electric turbine to generate 1MW of electricity, but I know that 1Nm/s= 1 Watt, and that has to be sustained for 360 seconds to generate 1 W/hour of power.
Even with my horrible maths, I can see you need to make a plasma engine hundreds of millions of times more powerful than anything we have in order to replace even one commercial electric plant.
What you're suggesting is the equivalent of that episode of Star Trek where they fed the warp core recursively with its own warp bubble to achieve exponential warp velocity... but we don't even have a working warp engine yet. Or even a really effective ion drive.
mnem
The Three Laws of Thermodynamics For The Real World
You can't win.
You can't break even.
You can't even get out of the game. -
Just because a particular power source, is extremely complicated, and perhaps, not well understood yet. Doesn't mean that you can start believing that it will be a source of unlimited energy (free energy), i.e. like a perpetual machine.
I get the impression, that you seem to think, that as long as this mechanism, is NOT abused. I.e. That too much energy in one go (or continuously), is NOT allowed. You can travel for huge distances, using this energy source, unlike limited, one-use power sources, such as batteries or burning rocket fuel (and ejecting it), to create motion, in space rockets.
Some theoretical energy sources, such as fusion energy (but also Nuclear fission types), can be expected/calculated, to have a huge amount of energy, which can be extracted, with some loss of mass, with the fuel materials (I.e. Einsteins's E = MC^2).
But in general, energy sources, based on some peoples ideas on how 'free energy', 'perpetual motion machines' and possibly other similar ideas. Are widely considered to be unproven (no experiments showing them working, except some suspected scam experiments, with hidden batteries/motors or secret mains connection wires, etc). have been demonstrated, as far as I'm aware.
Also, scientifically, they are considered, somewhat or fully, impossible. Since they would defeat a number of fundamental laws of Physics, such as conservation of energy, E = MC^2, making energy/matter out of nothing, etc.
If I'm mistaken, and that is NOT what you think. Then without Fusion, Fission, big tanks of rocket fuel, relying on getting enough solar energy with solar cells or relying on conservation of momentum, when the space vehicle is traveling at enough speed. Where exactly is any energy needed to power the space ships systems and/or CHANGES in speed, going to come from ?
Simon said these process are "well understood" and you say they arent, which is it?
The drag created by the solar wind on our magnetotail should be slowing our planet down, but 2020 had 26 of the fast days on record. Where does that energy come from? Scientifically they say the earth spins because the gas cloud was spinning when it formed, i can only assume they think from some form of gravitational collapse. That was a long time ago, and we are still rotating so that sounds like perpetual motion to me. Does fusion or fission contribute to the energy of earths rotation now as well?
How about we walk before we can run. First we have to built the reactor, refine it and see what is possible. The internal combustion engine is basically an advancement of the steam engine and it is still being improved upon 200 years later. If ITER works how long do you think it will take us to refine that process down to a useable source of power that we can get into orbit? We have spent decade's of considerable man hours and money on it so far and havent really got anywhere close to that point. Maybe thats because the power source of the sun is MHD and not fusion. Fusion being a by product of MHD since all fusion reactors use MHD to control and confine the plasma.
The chances are, any ship for deep space exploration would use a combination of technologies such as the solar flare propulsion system. That system still needs a power source.
If a plasma superconductor can be formed inside the reactor then there is no resistance to stop it from rotating. I assume you agree that plasma is an electrically conducting fluid, and that a superconductor has no resistance once the structure of the toroid has a trajectory of around 1.1° it will become a superconductor as shown in the link from MIT with graphene. If you made a toroid out of graphene using the magic angle for the trajectory of the electron and sent 1000A around it, where would the resistance come from to stop the 1000A of current from rotating? Thus producing a z pinch and a magnetic field continuously
https://news.mit.edu/2020/twists-magic-angle-graphene-map-0508 -
The drag created by the solar wind on our magnetotail should be slowing our planet down, but 2020 had 26 of the fast days on record. Where does that energy come from? Scientifically they say the earth spins because the gas cloud was spinning when it formed, i can only assume they think from some form of gravitational collapse. That was a long time ago, and we are still rotating so that sounds like perpetual motion to me. Does fusion or fission contribute to the energy of earths rotation now as well?
Err what? the earth spins in the same way a spinning top does. It was form by stuff colliding and stuff has collided with it and this is what caused it to spin the way it does today. Just the result of random stuff hitting other stuff. Given that space has nothing in it to offer friction it will continue to spin for a very very long time, simply because there is no reason for it to slow down. In the same way you say your rocket ship only needs to expel material to accelerate not to just coast through space.
When the chinese built their mega damn hydroelectric station and filled the artificial lake they had created for it, the earths rotation slowed by 1µs per day. This is because the lake/reservoir is quite high up and holding more water up there than there was before was enough of a shift of mass compared to that of the earth that it caused the ever so slight slowing down of our rotation. -
Yeah, okay; the issue here is a matter of scale. It's really hard to visualize the scale of what you're hoping to accomplish.
Even a math-defective old fart like me can see that the amounts of thrust generated vs what is needed here amounts to a butterfly fart vs a hurricane.
Our current VX-200 plasma drives produce ~5-10N or ~1-2 lbs of thrust... this is enough to hold ~16-32 ounces of mass aloft against Earth's gravity. In comparison, a cordless leaf-blower produces approximately 15N, and a big gas-powered one ~35N. Commercial jet engines produce between ~130,000 and 450,000 N thrust. EACH.
A (very quick) Google shows that an average electric power plant generates approx 350-500MW; there are of course much larger and much smaller ones out there. The US alone has approximately 1.14 million MW of electricity production total. Again, just going by a quick Google, power in to power out of one of these plants is at best approx 75% efficiency.
Now... here's where my simple maths fall down, because I don't know how to calculate how many N of thrust one needs inside an average commercial electric turbine to generate 1MW of electricity, but I know that 1Nm/s= 1 Watt, and that has to be sustained for 360 seconds to generate 1 W/hour of power.
Even with my horrible maths, I can see you need to make a plasma engine hundreds of millions of times more powerful than anything we have in order to replace even one commercial electric plant.
What you're suggesting is the equivalent of that episode of Star Trek where they fed the warp core recursively with its own warp bubble to achieve exponential warp velocity... but we don't even have a working warp engine yet. Or even a really effective ion drive.
mnem
The Three Laws of Thermodynamics For The Real World
You can't win.
You can't break even.
You can't even get out of the game.
Im trying to recreate anthony perratts squatter man inside my invention, using the pressure gradient in the North pole of the plasma rotation as the plasma exits the z pinch to rotate the reactor which can then be used to turn a generator. A prototype could be as small as a soccer ball to possible 1m in diameter. If you succeed at that then it will scale up to basically any size you want, only limited to you manufacturing capabilities and materials. Which will increase dramatically once you bring home some minerals from the asteriod belt. Imagine the tungsten that will be out there and possible better metal than even that. Who knows but we have to go to find out.
We have never successfully or even attempted to create a superconducting plasma toroid. All research has been focus on fusion to my knowledge. Superconductors are useless in the windings of a generator since we require voltage to be produced by the generator and voltage requires resistance. Plasma is a different animal, because it isnt trying to supply the electrical grid we can use it to generate the z pinch which can then be used to pump plasma around the turbine blades of the reactor.
"Feeding the wrap drive" essential a toroid does feeds itself, plasma goes one way, electrical current the other, constantly to form the "infinity loop" and since resistance has been reduced to zero from the double helical trajectory the toroid forms the same lattice structure that is found in the MIT graphene research.
-
Err what? the earth spins in the same way a spinning top does. It was form by stuff colliding and stuff has collided with it and this is what caused it to spin the way it does today. Just the result of random stuff hitting other stuff. Given that space has nothing in it to offer friction it will continue to spin for a very very long time, simply because there is no reason for it to slow down. In the same way you say your rocket ship only needs to expel material to accelerate not to just coast through space.
When the chinese built their mega damn hydroelectric station and filled the artificial lake they had created for it, the earths rotation slowed by 1µs per day. This is because the lake/reservoir is quite high up and holding more water up there than there was before was enough of a shift of mass compared to that of the earth that it caused the ever so slight slowing down of our rotation.
https://phys.org/news/2021-01-earth-faster.html
I must have missed that big random thing hitting us in 2020. Maybe the virus came from an asteriod, E.T trying to wipe us all out so he had the planet to himself 😂
Does the teardrop shape not suggest drag to you? The solar wind is a pretty fast medium and it certainly is not nothing over millions of years.
-
Yes your article says what I just explained. Sure it may alter but nothing is making it spin, that energy was impated billions of years ago. Yes it may vary, sit on a chair and have yourself spun around with your arms close to your chest, now put them out, you slow down, pull them back in and you speed up again, I dunno, must be the solar wind or something.