The Flood- one explanation

Threads like this should be euthanised.John Paul,Did you ever take any high school physics?Also shame on other people for not seeing the overwhelming errors in the original post.I am going to let you suffer in ignorance.PSYes! I am being snotty BUT come on guys, it is so obvious what is wrong in this thread.

No - you're presenting physical impossibility. Physics doesn't work like this. Your hypothesis is lunacy.Here is a hint:Why is there no big whirlpool at the North Pole?The way you describe physics there would be.

No offence Rei but all of you guys are screwing up basic physics here.The only way to tilt the Earth would be a direct collision by something pretty massive. I might calculate this tonight for fun but my guesstimate right now is the colliding object would have to be at least as massive as Mars.

Are you serious????This was a Velikovsky idea wasn't it?

1) I agree you could have a net torque causing a tilt due to the already present equatorial bulge.But for this to happen the interloping object would have to be so close/massive that two things would happen first.i) The Moon would already have been either lost completely or in a very eccentric orbit.ii) The Earth itself would be totally rearranged due to the tidal disruption, making any tilt meaningless comapared.2) Any object that was big enough to do this would still be observable. If it collided with the Earth then the Earth would have been a little more damaged than a flood.Remember if you want to roughly calculate this stuff yourself, a good rule of thumb is that an object or system becomes disrupted tidally when the mean density of the system/object is exceeded by the mean density of the system/object plus the 'new' interloping object.
Basically because the tidal force goes as 1/r^3.

Ok William Scott Anderson,Give us a short synopsis of your (undoubtedly cranky) flood theory.

John Paul,I see on your profile that you say that you're an electronics engineer.Would you please explain, if that is the case, why your knowledge of basic physics is flat out absurd.And I am not being impolite here, just 'calling 'em as I see 'em.'I mean, you haven't addressed my earlier disparaging comments about your physical model for the Earth and the effects of it's rotation.
Do you stick by your hypothesis?[This message has been edited by Eta_Carinae, 12-16-2003]

Evidently he knows very little physics, or if he did it was long since forgotten.

John Paul,Physics does not work in the manner you require.I pointed out (with a hint) in an earlier post that the way you describe basic physical laws we would have a huge whirlpool at the north pole.Do you have any clue that what you are saying is pure lunacy.Your physics knowledge is no better than a kid in junior high.I don't mean to be rude BUT you are just wrong. This is not a disagreement on anything in scripture or creationism BUT you have fundamental physics WRONG.

I can find no reference to a Dr. Paul Back.Also from reading your blurb on him, I think my Physics qualifications outweigh his.But this is immaterial.You are screwing up basic classical mechanics. This isn't quantum gravity research, it is basic mechanics.Can't you figure this out yourself?If you brought it here for discussion why haven't you first figured it out for yourself?Your opening statements about water moving at 1000 mph blah blah shows your just screwing up the basic physics.[This message has been edited by Eta_Carinae, 12-17-2003]

Yes that is approx. correct linear velocity at the Earth's equatorial surface.OK let me state a couple of things about your scenario.1) Why would tilting the Earth (as you put it) change the rotation axis. The equator would still be the equator the poles would still be the poles. All that you have changed is the tilt of this axis with respect to the ecliptic.To change the rotation axis itself ou would literally have to bring the Earth to a stop, and then restart it again with a new rotation axis. This is basically impossible.2) Even to tilt it by the amount you mention (which as I said above would not change the rotation axis) would involve an interaction with another large body that would be almost guaranteed to destroy the Moon's orbit (it would not remain approx. circular or in the ecliptic plane.)3) The Earth itself would be more than just tilted, it would be totally rearranged.4) Though what you suggest CANNOT occur let's for a second suppose it could. Any interaction with another body would not be instantaneous. The change would be essentially adiabatic. The only way around this would be for the other body to be travelling ridiculously fast. BUT this is immaterial - the rotation axis is not going to change AND your scenario requires this.