Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of the physics of your idiot guru

Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:

Am Donnerstag000019, 19.12.2024 um 08:02 schrieb Maciej Wozniak:

 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
As seen, the definition of second loved so
much to be invoked by relativistic morons -
wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru
lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary
1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics.
 

Look at this:
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_length_fluctuations#/media/File:Deviation_of

_day_length_from_SI_day.svg

 
We can see, that length of the solar day is shifting by about 1 ms per
day within a year.
 
The length of the day is also about 1 ms longer than 86400 seconds on
average over the entire plot.
 
Would we add this 1 ms to the day, we could see, that Earth' rotation is
actually speeding up occasionally, because the delta t value also goes
down in recent years.
 
Iow: if delta t is less today than half a century ago and we had already
added one or two ms to the day length, now the Earth would rotate faster
than before.
 
This is so because in that case, the cumulative delta t curve would go down.
 
Another good question would be:
 
what causes this pronounced 1ms shift in the length of day within every
single year.
 
This does not sound like much, but actually means, that the Earth
rotation is speeding up and down significantly and with a distinct
measurable pattern of 1ms per day.
 
Given the large mass of the Earth this would require a lot of angular
momentum to be lost and gained (every single year).
 
Somehow I cannot believe this could happen in reality. So, the only
possible explanation is, that the UTC-time itself is shifting by 1ms per
day within a year (which is colossal number, if you take the assumed
precision of atomic clocks into consideration).

Your mistake lies in the assumption that all those short term
fluctuations involve a change in angular momentum.
Only a part of the long term trend is caused by that,

Jan