Interesting Items...

[MikeSh]

And where are the East and West Poles?

You're confusing the use of N, S, E & W as points of the compass (relative directions) with N & S heading lines of longitude (measured by angle E or W) and terminating in the poles, and E & W heading lines of latitude (measured by angle N or S) and which are endless.
Clear now?

 

[Trev]

And where are the East and West Poles?

90 degrees East and West
But a Pole is at each end of a rotation axis so is always in the same place. (Otherwise known as a long stick)

 

[Deleted member 473]

Some peples need to get a scent of humous.

 

[EEPhil]

Sometimes I do hate being right

You were and you weren't. I don't think ITV showed the programme. The result of the election though... (SFX: crash, bang).

 

[Deleted member 473]

But a Pole is at each end of a rotation axis so is always in the same place.

Relative to what? Relative to the convecting rocks of a celestial object? They convect on Earth, but not Mars, but then on Mars the motion of the rock is maybe more complicated.

On Earth we also have the magnetic pole, which drifts around a bit, but not aligned with the axis of rotation.

(If you really want serious.)

 

[MikeSh]

Relative to the convecting rocks of a celestial object?

Not sure what they have to do with it. Every rotating celestial body has 'physical' poles which it rotates around.
On earth we use the ones the crust rotates around, there may be a slight disconnect regarding parts of the interior but basically that is irrelevant. Same on Mars and other planets, we use what we can see.
Some bodies, such as earth, have a magnetic field which produces a pair of virtual poles, which as you say aren't fixed. They have no effect on our use of the physical poles, lat and long to define locations on the planet. The field is not useless by any means, but I don't understand your apparent confusion.

 

[Deleted member 473]

Apparent confusion? I am not at all confused.

An axis of rotation is a rigid body concept, and can be mathematically defined for rigid bodies in classical mechanics. There is no such concept for non-rigid bodies, where the crust, say, is in convective motion. It is a fine point, I agree, but worth pointing out to those who didn't understand my humour and tried to "put me right."

 

[MikeSh]

It is a fine point, I agree,

Indeed. (And my 'initial' post was also of humerus intent ... must use smilies, must use smilies, )

On a serious note - I wonder what the definition of rigid is? One thinks of concrete as rigid (when set, obs) but it bends under load.

 

[Deleted member 473]

True, nothing is really rigid, it's a mathematical ideal.

Things are even worse in relativity, where even the mathematical concept makes no sense.

 

[Deleted member 473]

The Tory £50bn magic money tree of borrowing could be threatened by the DUP energy plans.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_Heat_Incentive_scandal

If you think that is bad, look at their beliefs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/who-are-the-dup_uk_593a79c7e4b0b13f2c697d36

 

[Deleted member 473]

But a Pole is at each end of a rotation axis so is always in the same place. (Otherwise known as a long stick)

You mean Antarctica never drifted?

 

[EEPhil]

The Tory £50bn magic money tree of borrowing could be threatened by the DUP energy plans.

Coalition of chaos? (OK, so it isn't a coalition...)

 

[MikeSh]

The Tory £50bn magic money tree of borrowing could be threatened by the DUP energy plans.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_Heat_Incentive_scandal

If you think that is bad, look at their beliefs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/who-are-the-dup_uk_593a79c7e4b0b13f2c697d36

I thought it was Labour that had the magic money tree

As to the DUP, well, if you thought the country had voted for a car crash last year, this one is more of a motorway in fog job.
We love to blame the politicians, but it's our own stupidity really ... but that's getting too political, so I'll walk away now

 

[MikeSh]

You mean Antarctica never drifted?

When Antarctica was somewhere else there probably wasn't a hole in Mars. The hole is now, so references should be now

 

[EEPhil]

I thought it was Labour that had the magic money tree

I thought that too. I let it go because I thought the Coalition of Chaos trumped it. (Oh dear, trump alert).

As to the DUP, well, if you thought the country had voted for a car crash last year, this one is more of a motorway in fog job

I'm sure some of us had the fog lights on.

 

[Trev]

I thought it was Labour that had the magic money tree

You are right, it is. And as for JC claiming he won? What planet is he on? He lost, and can't even 'win' with the help of the rest of the tree huggers and other parties.

 

[Deleted member 473]

The money tree.

 

[Deleted member 473]

Nobody won, they all lost.

But what makes you think the money tree is exclusively Labour's in view of the massive public sector borrowing, massive national debt and money printing that has gone on under both main parties?

The FT says the money tree is quantitative easing, but what do you think it is? I would say a mixture of QE and borrowing.

Since 2010, the Tory magic money tree has increased national debt by £800,000,000,000. That's money we have spent but don't have. Quantitative easing has inflated the wealth of the assets of the richest at the expense of the poorest over this period.

 

[Trev]

It's the one growing in the bottom of my garden that JC wants to tax to the hilt.

 

[Deleted member 473]

It's the one growing in the bottom of my garden that JC wants to tax to the hilt.

We used to pay a basic tax of 33%, now 20% seems too much for everyone, and we let the rich, the Sir Philips, Google, Apple, Amazon, pay no or very little tax.