re: #18 Dragon_Lady

I read the article and I think the key word is “Probably”. I would honestly love to see the actual proof that this shortening of our day is true. NASA is one of the best science institutes out there but the word “probably” has me shaking my head in confusion. Am I alone in this observation an confusion?

The explanation given by the Discover article is shoddy, at best. The earth’s axis may well have moved, but that doesn’t lead to a change in rotational speed. What they seem to be losing in translation is that the earth’s mass distribution changed - the earth effectively got a tiny bit smaller. Like a spinning skater pulling in her arms, this would cause the planet to spin a bit faster. Sounds like the shrinkage involved was on the order of 3 inches or so, but here the article becomes so ambiguous, it’s difficult to say what’s meant.

This doesn’t seem unreasonable. If I cared, I could calculate it, but I don’t, and I’m willing to take NASA’s word. My gut tells me it’s about right.

It should also be easily measurable, especially over a period of a few weeks. Microsecond timing accuracy is very easy to achieve, and the stars provide an excellent, “fixed” reference.