Other than terrestrial water and tidal flex heating

In article ,
Alain Fournier wrote:

Timberwoof wrote:

In article ,
Alain Fournier wrote:

Landy wrote:

"Hagar" wrote in message
news:PvmdnY4fe52nSB3VnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d@giganews. com...

The tidal flexing, as you call it, only affects the Earth's oceans. It
is
far too puny to affect the landmass.

Perhaps you should look up earth tides. The effect isn't big, but it
exists. This doesn't occur on the moon of course, for the reasons you
correctly stated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_tide

It does happen on the moon also. It isn't exactly the same side of the
moon which is facing Earth because of lunar libration. Of course if you
don't have full rotation but only small librations your tides will be
small.
Also the radius of the moon is about 3.7 times smaller than Earths radius
and this leads to yet smaller tides. But Earth's mass being about 81 times
the mass of the moon, this increases the tidal effect on the moon. When
you take all this into account what you get is very small tides on the
moon, but they do exist.

They're "very" small. How do they compare to the rock tides on Earth?
Are they "a lot smaller than that"?

I just did a BoE calculation and I get that they are just a little
smaller than Earth's rock tides. When I wrote my previous post I
thought they would be more than one magnitude smaller than Earth's
rock tides but this doesn't seem to be the case. I will let others
write out the calculations, I must go out of town and away from an
internet link for the next 40 hours, after that, well Paul McCartney
gives an open air concert here sunday. So I won't be available until
after work on monday and even then I might have to recuperate from
sundays concert.

Have fun at the concert! Have no fear: Brad Guth will busily
misinterpret and distort your words while you're one.

Can the heating of the moon as a result of these teeny tiny tides be
measured?

I don't know how one would measure that. But it can it can be calculated.



--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

In article ,
Odysseus wrote:

In article
,
Timberwoof wrote:

snip

Once you've done that calculation, you can try it with just the Earth's
oceans as the repository of "all that" energy. That should be pretty
easy too. 3/4 of the Earth's surface is water, the water is a depth, on
average of a few kilometers, and the specific heat of water is 1.

The specific heat of seawater, although varying with salinity,
temperature, and pressure, is somewhat lower than that of pure H2O, more
like 0.95 cal/gC° (3.9 J/gK).

That is true, but that error will only make the answer 5% off. That's
negligible compared to the BoE figures I gave for calculating the volume
of Earth's water ... and those numbers would be incalculably more
accurate than Brad's.

--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

On Jul 19, 11:00 am, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article
,



BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 19, 4:57 am, Stuart wrote:
On Jul 18, 7:39 am, "Hagar" wrote:
The tidal flexing, as you call it, only affects the Earth's oceans. It is
far too puny to affect the landmass. The Earth has no tidal effect on the
Moon, since its rotational period coincides with its orbital period.. No
flexing there, Guthball

Technically speaking, the moon has a "static tide". Although some
might say that is an oxymoron. However, there is a still a tidal
potential that affects the moon and therefor a tide, static or not.

But indeed, since the tide is static there is no flexing, hence no
heating

Stuart

? "no heating" via tidal flex ?

Yes. What part of " there is no flexing, hence no heating" did you not
understand?

The perpetual naysay part that hasn't offered a stitch of physics or
even good science backing it up.

Does this mean you know why Io (without spin and hardly even
elliptical) is so geophysically and geothermally active?


In other damage-control words of your silly mindset, the laws of
physics simply do not apply off world, or even as to that of our
Selene/moon global warming Earth via tidal flex forces that can't
possibly avoid becoming thermal energy. Are you certain about that?

They're talking about the moon not being heated.

So, our Selene/moon is somehow the one and only such moon that's not
the least bit tidal flex heated?


Any way you¹d care to slice and dice it, it seems continually moving
and/or distorting the crust of Earth by 55 cm via tidal flexing is
going to create a little unavoidable geothermal heat via friction.

Sure. Maybe you could calculate it. One could use a slide rule. No
supercomputer needed.

Perhaps a "slide rule" with a few spare CPUs attached and a healthy
dose of complex physics software might do the trick. Are you going to
show us how simple that is?

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

On Jul 19, 9:27 am, Stuart wrote:
On Jul 19, 6:12 am, BradGuth wrote:



On Jul 19, 8:47 am, Stuart wrote:

On Jul 19, 4:41 am, BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 4:57 am, Stuart wrote:

On Jul 18, 7:39 am, "Hagar" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message

...
This topic is entirely Selene/moon related, such as the supposed
volcanic or lava fused as little and apparently not so little basalt
and silica combined spheres (�green glass spherules�) that researchers
claim to be of their NASA/Apollo moon rock samples, that which
supposedly their spendy (public owned) mass spectrometers as having
only recently detected as containing 260,000 ppb of good old h2o.
(that's not necessarily per given mass of common moon bedrock, but of
the given mass of each little portion of rock containing such lava
formulated geodes as solid glass spheres that could have been
contributed and/or contaminated by most any icy meteor encounter)

Water Discovered in Moon Rock Samples / By Jeremy Hsu of Space.com
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380148,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380148,00.html#

http://space.newscientist.com/articl...w-the-moon-rev...

snip Guthball drivel

The tidal flexing, as you call it, only affects the Earth's oceans. It is
far too puny to affect the landmass. The Earth has no tidal effect on the
Moon, since its rotational period coincides with its orbital period. No
flexing there, Guthball

Technically speaking, the moon has a "static tide". Although some
might say
that is an oxymoron. However, there is a still a tidal potential that
affects the moon and therefor a tide, static or not.

But indeed, since the tide is static there is no flexing, hence
no heating

Stuart

I've snipped stuff that doesn't make sense leaving one reasonable
question.

Isn't Earth a relatively small and extensively fluid planet for having
such a substantial moon that can measurably tidal flex the crust of
Earth by as much as 55 cm?

Indeed. I didn't say the moon isn't distorted by tides. It is.

By while the earth is rotating, the moon always shows the same face to
the
Earth; hence dissipation due to the lunar tide raised by the Earth
should be very small.

The lunar tide due to the Sun would probably cause more dissipation,
but
it will still be small.

Stuart

The tidal forced heating that I'm talking about is primarily that of
Earth being heated by that of our unusually large, nearby and fast
moving Selene/moon, and it's by no means as insignificant as you'd
care to suggest.

Sorry.. the discussion above was about the moon. And thats what I
was talking about.


btw, what else other than tidal flex derived energy has been heating
Io to such an extent?

beats me. I was talking about the moon.

Stuart

Fine and dandy. By how many terawatts per each and every hour is our
Selene/moon tidal flex heated by way of the solar gravity plus mainly
that of Earth's elliptical distance from the moon (similar to Io that
also has no spin and far less elliptical orbit)?

If we had that platform of science instruments situated within the
Selene/moon L1, as such we'd likely know this one down to the +/-
megawatt, if not better.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

In article
,
BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 11:00 am, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article
,



BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 19, 4:57 am, Stuart wrote:
On Jul 18, 7:39 am, "Hagar" wrote:
The tidal flexing, as you call it, only affects the Earth's
oceans. It is far too puny to affect the landmass. The
Earth has no tidal effect on the Moon, since its rotational
period coincides with its orbital period. No flexing there,
Guthball

Technically speaking, the moon has a "static tide". Although
some might say that is an oxymoron. However, there is a still a
tidal potential that affects the moon and therefor a tide,
static or not.

But indeed, since the tide is static there is no flexing, hence
no heating

Stuart

? "no heating" via tidal flex ?

Yes. What part of " there is no flexing, hence no heating" did you
not understand?

The perpetual naysay part that hasn't offered a stitch of physics or
even good science backing it up.

Our uneducated Brad wouldn't recognize good science if it bit you on the
toe.

Does this mean you know why Io (without spin and hardly even
elliptical) is so geophysically and geothermally active?

Because our gaseous multimooned and large Jupiter is large.

In other damage-control words of your silly mindset, the laws of
physics simply do not apply off world, or even as to that of our
Selene/moon global warming Earth via tidal flex forces that can't
possibly avoid becoming thermal energy. Are you certain about
that?

They're talking about the moon not being heated.

So, our Selene/moon is somehow the one and only such moon that's not
the least bit tidal flex heated?

Our intelligent Timberwoof stated that the insignificant tidal heating
of the earth is insignificant. The small size of our small earth and its
small effect on the moon make any tidal heating of our small moon small,
probably insignificant.

Any way you¹d care to slice and dice it, it seems continually
moving and/or distorting the crust of Earth by 55 cm via tidal
flexing is going to create a little unavoidable geothermal heat
via friction.

Sure. Maybe you could calculate it. One could use a slide rule. No
supercomputer needed.

Perhaps a "slide rule" with a few spare CPUs attached and a healthy
dose of complex physics software might do the trick. Are you going
to show us how simple that is?

Our uneducated Brad doesn't know enough about physics to do simple
calculations. Our befuddled Brad has never considered how our genius
physicists ever got any work done before the invention of complex
software to run on multiple-CPU supercomputers.

--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

In article
,
BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 9:27 am, Stuart wrote:
On Jul 19, 6:12 am, BradGuth wrote:



On Jul 19, 8:47 am, Stuart wrote:

On Jul 19, 4:41 am, BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 4:57 am, Stuart wrote:

On Jul 18, 7:39 am, "Hagar" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message

.
com...
This topic is entirely Selene/moon related, such as the supposed
volcanic or lava fused as little and apparently not so little
basalt
and silica combined spheres (?green glass spherules?) that
researchers
claim to be of their NASA/Apollo moon rock samples, that which
supposedly their spendy (public owned) mass spectrometers as
having
only recently detected as containing 260,000 ppb of good old h2o.
(that's not necessarily per given mass of common moon bedrock,
but of
the given mass of each little portion of rock containing such
lava
formulated geodes as solid glass spheres that could have been
contributed and/or contaminated by most any icy meteor encounter)

Water Discovered in Moon Rock Samples / By Jeremy Hsu of
Space.com
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380148,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380148,00.html#

http://space.newscientist.com/articl...now-the-moon-r
ev...

snip Guthball drivel

The tidal flexing, as you call it, only affects the Earth's
oceans. It is
far too puny to affect the landmass. The Earth has no tidal
effect on the
Moon, since its rotational period coincides with its orbital
period. No
flexing there, Guthball

Technically speaking, the moon has a "static tide". Although some
might say
that is an oxymoron. However, there is a still a tidal potential
that
affects the moon and therefor a tide, static or not.

But indeed, since the tide is static there is no flexing, hence
no heating

Stuart

I've snipped stuff that doesn't make sense leaving one reasonable
question.

Isn't Earth a relatively small and extensively fluid planet for
having
such a substantial moon that can measurably tidal flex the crust of
Earth by as much as 55 cm?

Indeed. I didn't say the moon isn't distorted by tides. It is.

By while the earth is rotating, the moon always shows the same face to
the
Earth; hence dissipation due to the lunar tide raised by the Earth
should be very small.

The lunar tide due to the Sun would probably cause more dissipation,
but
it will still be small.

Stuart

The tidal forced heating that I'm talking about is primarily that of
Earth being heated by that of our unusually large, nearby and fast
moving Selene/moon, and it's by no means as insignificant as you'd
care to suggest.

Sorry.. the discussion above was about the moon. And thats what I
was talking about.


btw, what else other than tidal flex derived energy has been heating
Io to such an extent?

beats me. I was talking about the moon.

Stuart

Fine and dandy. By how many terawatts per each and every hour is our
Selene/moon tidal flex heated by way of the solar gravity plus mainly
that of Earth's elliptical distance from the moon (similar to Io that
also has no spin and far less elliptical orbit)?

Our forgetful Brad has forgotten that he presented exactly those figures
a few days ago.

If we had that platform of science instruments situated within the
Selene/moon L1, as such we'd likely know this one down to the +/-
megawatt, if not better.

Our whiny Brad thinks that space probes can magically measure the tidal
heating of our moon simply by being on our moon, even though the vast
temperature differences between night and day on our month-long-day moon
are vast.

--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

On Jul 19, 12:46 pm, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article
,



BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 19, 9:27 am, Stuart wrote:
On Jul 19, 6:12 am, BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 8:47 am, Stuart wrote:

On Jul 19, 4:41 am, BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 4:57 am, Stuart wrote:

On Jul 18, 7:39 am, "Hagar" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message

.
com...
This topic is entirely Selene/moon related, such as the supposed
volcanic or lava fused as little and apparently not so little
basalt
and silica combined spheres (?green glass spherules?) that
researchers
claim to be of their NASA/Apollo moon rock samples, that which
supposedly their spendy (public owned) mass spectrometers as
having
only recently detected as containing 260,000 ppb of good old h2o.
(that's not necessarily per given mass of common moon bedrock,
but of
the given mass of each little portion of rock containing such
lava
formulated geodes as solid glass spheres that could have been
contributed and/or contaminated by most any icy meteor encounter)

Water Discovered in Moon Rock Samples / By Jeremy Hsu of
Space.com
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380148,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380148,00.html#

http://space.newscientist.com/articl...now-the-moon-r
ev...

snip Guthball drivel

The tidal flexing, as you call it, only affects the Earth's
oceans. It is
far too puny to affect the landmass. The Earth has no tidal
effect on the
Moon, since its rotational period coincides with its orbital
period. No
flexing there, Guthball

Technically speaking, the moon has a "static tide". Although some
might say
that is an oxymoron. However, there is a still a tidal potential
that
affects the moon and therefor a tide, static or not.

But indeed, since the tide is static there is no flexing, hence
no heating

Stuart

I've snipped stuff that doesn't make sense leaving one reasonable
question.

Isn't Earth a relatively small and extensively fluid planet for
having
such a substantial moon that can measurably tidal flex the crust of
Earth by as much as 55 cm?

Indeed. I didn't say the moon isn't distorted by tides. It is.

By while the earth is rotating, the moon always shows the same face to
the
Earth; hence dissipation due to the lunar tide raised by the Earth
should be very small.

The lunar tide due to the Sun would probably cause more dissipation,
but
it will still be small.

Stuart

The tidal forced heating that I'm talking about is primarily that of
Earth being heated by that of our unusually large, nearby and fast
moving Selene/moon, and it's by no means as insignificant as you'd
care to suggest.

Sorry.. the discussion above was about the moon. And thats what I
was talking about.

btw, what else other than tidal flex derived energy has been heating
Io to such an extent?

beats me. I was talking about the moon.

Stuart

Fine and dandy. By how many terawatts per each and every hour is our
Selene/moon tidal flex heated by way of the solar gravity plus mainly
that of Earth's elliptical distance from the moon (similar to Io that
also has no spin and far less elliptical orbit)?

Our forgetful Brad has forgotten that he presented exactly those figures
a few days ago.

I was speaking of Earth being tidal flex heated by our Selene/moon, by
at least .05% of the 2e20 N worth of tidal radius force that's
continually taking place. How much more or less were you thinking
it's worth?


If we had that platform of science instruments situated within the
Selene/moon L1, as such we'd likely know this one down to the +/-
megawatt, if not better.

Our whiny Brad thinks that space probes can magically measure the tidal
heating of our moon simply by being on our moon, even though the vast
temperature differences between night and day on our month-long-day moon
are vast.

Are you suggesting that our Selene/moon L1 is a total waste of space,
that which our science should continually ignore for their own good?

Are you suggesting that our Selene/moon and Earth somehow manage to
interactively exchange/cause nothing worth of tidal flex heating?

If so, do tell what's keeping the likes of Io and any number of other
moons so freaking active instead of being of solid dry-ice or that of
just about any kind of ice except water ice?

How about Titan, with its robust atmosphe What's keeping Titan
from freezing itself solid by night, if not via tidal flex heating?

Are Saturn and Jupiter all that IR worthy?

Are you suggesting that such active moons have a core of thorium?

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

On Jul 19, 12:43 pm, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article
,



BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 19, 11:00 am, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article
,

BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 19, 4:57 am, Stuart wrote:
On Jul 18, 7:39 am, "Hagar" wrote:
The tidal flexing, as you call it, only affects the Earth's
oceans. It is far too puny to affect the landmass. The
Earth has no tidal effect on the Moon, since its rotational
period coincides with its orbital period. No flexing there,
Guthball

Technically speaking, the moon has a "static tide". Although
some might say that is an oxymoron. However, there is a still a
tidal potential that affects the moon and therefor a tide,
static or not.

But indeed, since the tide is static there is no flexing, hence
no heating

Stuart

? "no heating" via tidal flex ?

Yes. What part of " there is no flexing, hence no heating" did you
not understand?

The perpetual naysay part that hasn't offered a stitch of physics or
even good science backing it up.

Our uneducated Brad wouldn't recognize good science if it bit you on the
toe.

Does this mean you know why Io (without spin and hardly even
elliptical) is so geophysically and geothermally active?

Because our gaseous multimooned and large Jupiter is large.

Is your "large Jupiter" a new kind of scientific statement as to the
specific size of the solid portion of Jupiter that's relatively
uniform?

Exactly how large is the solid portion or gravity made as a dense/
solid surface of Jupiter, and how nonuniform is its gravity or that of
its surface of mascons??

Are you saying that a "large Jupiter" of being such a gas giant planet
has unusually uneven gravity that's capable of tidal flexing its near
circular orbiting moons to death?

Are you saying that the very same kind of orbital mechanics and
physics doesn't apply to our Selene/moon or to that of Earth getting
tidal flex heated?


In other damage-control words of your silly mindset, the laws of
physics simply do not apply off world, or even as to that of our
Selene/moon global warming Earth via tidal flex forces that can't
possibly avoid becoming thermal energy. Are you certain about
that?

They're talking about the moon not being heated.

So, our Selene/moon is somehow the one and only such moon that's not
the least bit tidal flex heated?

Our intelligent Timberwoof stated that the insignificant tidal heating
of the earth is insignificant.

The hell you say, 0.05% of 2e20 N/sec is "insignificant"?


The small size of our small earth and its
small effect on the moon make any tidal heating of our small moon small,
probably insignificant.

And vise versa, like I'd specifically asked about how much our moon
tidal flexes Earth as becoming unavoidably hotter because of our 98.5%
fluid world having that Selene/moon to continually deal with, as well
as in its highly elliptical orbit adding additional factors of tidal
flex that by rights should go either way.


Any way you¹d care to slice and dice it, it seems continually
moving and/or distorting the crust of Earth by 55 cm via tidal
flexing is going to create a little unavoidable geothermal heat
via friction.

Sure. Maybe you could calculate it. One could use a slide rule. No
supercomputer needed.

Perhaps a "slide rule" with a few spare CPUs attached and a healthy
dose of complex physics software might do the trick. Are you going
to show us how simple that is?

Our uneducated Brad doesn't know enough about physics to do simple
calculations. Our befuddled Brad has never considered how our genius
physicists ever got any work done before the invention of complex
software to run on multiple-CPU supercomputers.

And you have no such intentions of ever knocking our socks off with
your superior expertise, or even that of offering your best swag
because????? (DARPA and most everyone else of their brown-nosed kind
would kick your butt)

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

In article
,
BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 12:46 pm, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article
,



BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 19, 9:27 am, Stuart wrote:
On Jul 19, 6:12 am, BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 8:47 am, Stuart wrote:

On Jul 19, 4:41 am, BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 4:57 am, Stuart wrote:

On Jul 18, 7:39 am, "Hagar" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message


ups.
com...
This topic is entirely Selene/moon related, such as the
supposed
volcanic or lava fused as little and apparently not so little
basalt
and silica combined spheres (?green glass spherules?) that
researchers
claim to be of their NASA/Apollo moon rock samples, that
which
supposedly their spendy (public owned) mass spectrometers as
having
only recently detected as containing 260,000 ppb of good old
h2o.
(that's not necessarily per given mass of common moon
bedrock,
but of
the given mass of each little portion of rock containing such
lava
formulated geodes as solid glass spheres that could have been
contributed and/or contaminated by most any icy meteor
encounter)

Water Discovered in Moon Rock Samples / By Jeremy Hsu of
Space.com
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380148,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380148,00.html#

http://space.newscientist.com/articl...200-now-the-mo
on-r
ev...

snip Guthball drivel

The tidal flexing, as you call it, only affects the Earth's
oceans. It is
far too puny to affect the landmass. The Earth has no tidal
effect on the
Moon, since its rotational period coincides with its orbital
period. No
flexing there, Guthball

Technically speaking, the moon has a "static tide". Although
some
might say
that is an oxymoron. However, there is a still a tidal
potential
that
affects the moon and therefor a tide, static or not.

But indeed, since the tide is static there is no flexing, hence
no heating

Stuart

I've snipped stuff that doesn't make sense leaving one reasonable
question.

Isn't Earth a relatively small and extensively fluid planet for
having
such a substantial moon that can measurably tidal flex the crust
of
Earth by as much as 55 cm?

Indeed. I didn't say the moon isn't distorted by tides. It is.

By while the earth is rotating, the moon always shows the same face
to
the
Earth; hence dissipation due to the lunar tide raised by the Earth
should be very small.

The lunar tide due to the Sun would probably cause more
dissipation,
but
it will still be small.

Stuart

The tidal forced heating that I'm talking about is primarily that of
Earth being heated by that of our unusually large, nearby and fast
moving Selene/moon, and it's by no means as insignificant as you'd
care to suggest.

Sorry.. the discussion above was about the moon. And thats what I
was talking about.

btw, what else other than tidal flex derived energy has been heating
Io to such an extent?

beats me. I was talking about the moon.

Stuart

Fine and dandy. By how many terawatts per each and every hour is our
Selene/moon tidal flex heated by way of the solar gravity plus mainly
that of Earth's elliptical distance from the moon (similar to Io that
also has no spin and far less elliptical orbit)?

Our forgetful Brad has forgotten that he presented exactly those figures
a few days ago.

I was speaking of Earth being tidal flex heated by our Selene/moon, by
at least .05% of the 2e20 N worth of tidal radius force that's
continually taking place. How much more or less were you thinking
it's worth?

Our clueless Brad thinks force directly creates heat and that the
insignificant work done by that force, when converted to heat, is
significant.

If we had that platform of science instruments situated within the
Selene/moon L1, as such we'd likely know this one down to the +/-
megawatt, if not better.

Our whiny Brad thinks that space probes can magically measure the tidal
heating of our moon simply by being on our moon, even though the vast
temperature differences between night and day on our month-long-day moon
are vast.

Are you suggesting that our Selene/moon L1 is a total waste of space,
that which our science should continually ignore for their own good?

Our preposterous Brad loves to leap to ludicrous delusions.

Are you suggesting that our Selene/moon and Earth somehow manage to
interactively exchange/cause nothing worth of tidal flex heating?

Our idiotic Brad expresses interest in egregious extremes.

If so, do tell what's keeping the likes of Io and any number of other
moons so freaking active instead of being of solid dry-ice or that of
just about any kind of ice except water ice?

Something having to to with our large Jupiter being large.

How about Titan, with its robust atmosphe What's keeping Titan
from freezing itself solid by night, if not via tidal flex heating?

Something having to to with our large Jupiter being large.

Are Saturn and Jupiter all that IR worthy?

Infrared?

Are you suggesting that such active moons have a core of thorium?

Our silly Brad is jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

In article
,
BradGuth wrote:

On Jul 19, 12:43 pm, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article
,



BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 19, 11:00 am, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article

m,

BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 19, 4:57 am, Stuart wrote:
On Jul 18, 7:39 am, "Hagar" wrote:
The tidal flexing, as you call it, only affects the
Earth's oceans. It is far too puny to affect the
landmass. The Earth has no tidal effect on the Moon,
since its rotational period coincides with its orbital
period. No flexing there, Guthball

Technically speaking, the moon has a "static tide".
Although some might say that is an oxymoron. However, there
is a still a tidal potential that affects the moon and
therefor a tide, static or not.

But indeed, since the tide is static there is no flexing,
hence no heating

Stuart

? "no heating" via tidal flex ?

Yes. What part of " there is no flexing, hence no heating" did
you not understand?

The perpetual naysay part that hasn't offered a stitch of physics
or even good science backing it up.

Our uneducated Brad wouldn't recognize good science if it bit you
on the toe.

Does this mean you know why Io (without spin and hardly even
elliptical) is so geophysically and geothermally active?

Because our gaseous multimooned and large Jupiter is large.

Is your "large Jupiter" a new kind of scientific statement as to the
specific size of the solid portion of Jupiter that's relatively
uniform?

No.

Exactly how large is the solid portion or gravity made as a dense/
solid surface of Jupiter,

What the hell does that mean?

and how nonuniform is its gravity or that
of its surface of mascons??

I don't know.

Are you saying that a "large Jupiter" of being such a gas giant
planet has unusually uneven gravity that's capable of tidal flexing
its near circular orbiting moons to death?

No.

Are you saying that the very same kind of orbital mechanics and
physics doesn't apply to our Selene/moon or to that of Earth getting
tidal flex heated?

No.

In other damage-control words of your silly mindset, the laws
of physics simply do not apply off world, or even as to that
of our Selene/moon global warming Earth via tidal flex forces
that can't possibly avoid becoming thermal energy. Are you
certain about that?

They're talking about the moon not being heated.

So, our Selene/moon is somehow the one and only such moon that's
not the least bit tidal flex heated?

Our intelligent Timberwoof stated that the insignificant tidal
heating of the earth is insignificant.

The hell you say, 0.05% of 2e20 N/sec is "insignificant"?

Yes. How much heat does it produce? What's the rate, in watts, of heat
production? Compare that to the rate, in watts, of heat production by
radioactive potassium, and to the rate, in watts, of the the earth's
heat loss to space.

The small size of our small earth and its small effect on the moon
make any tidal heating of our small moon small, probably
insignificant.

And vise versa, like I'd specifically asked about how much our moon
tidal flexes Earth as becoming unavoidably hotter because of our
98.5% fluid world having that Selene/moon to continually deal with,
as well as in its highly elliptical orbit adding additional factors
of tidal flex that by rights should go either way.

You're the one claiming that the heating is significant. You can do the
calculations, or look them up, and say how much heat is being generated
by that process.

Any way you¹d care to slice and dice it, it seems continually
moving and/or distorting the crust of Earth by 55 cm via
tidal flexing is going to create a little unavoidable
geothermal heat via friction.

Sure. Maybe you could calculate it. One could use a slide rule.
No supercomputer needed.

Perhaps a "slide rule" with a few spare CPUs attached and a
healthy dose of complex physics software might do the trick. Are
you going to show us how simple that is?

Our uneducated Brad doesn't know enough about physics to do simple
calculations. Our befuddled Brad has never considered how our
genius physicists ever got any work done before the invention of
complex software to run on multiple-CPU supercomputers.

And you have no such intentions of ever knocking our socks off with
your superior expertise, or even that of offering your best swag
because????? (DARPA and most everyone else of their brown-nosed kind
would kick your butt)

Because our ignorant and obstreporous Brad doesn't pay any attention
when anyone does try to tell him anything about real science. Our kooky
Brad always prefers his own pseudoscientific, nonnumeric,
adjective-laden, paranoia-based fairy-takes.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.