Re: Tidal bulges

[David Dockstader <DRDOCK00@UKCC.UKY.EDU>]

I was questioning the multifrequency driving force that Jim Green wants us to
use.  My point was that there seem to be only two terms in the driving side
of the equation that can do the job.  Jim seems to suggest that any itsy bitsy
force can do the job if it is in sync. with resonances, but it still has to
over come friction in the basin.  My discussion here was only about what makes
the tides go, not how the tides actually respond.

On Wed, 3 Jul 1996 01:59:16 -0700 (PDT) James Mclean said:
> David Dockstader says:
> > Unlike the problem of pushing the girl on the swing where you can push as
> > hard as you want any time that you want, the tides are stuck with something
> > like NOAA's 63 term equation, where as Dan and Dave B have pointed out only
> > two terms have sufficient amplitude contribute significantly to the tides.
> > ...
> You are assuming that the 63 terms represent celestial bodies.  It seems
> more likely that many (most) of them represent the effect of the
> continents, ocean depths, etc.  These are likely to 'contribute
> significantly', although they do not appear on the driving force side of
> the equation.
>
> > Things do not have to be in synchronization to be related.
> > ...
> But the moon and tides *would* have to be in synchronization if you want to
> believe that the tidal bulge is a good description of what's going on.
>
> --
> --James McLean
> jmclean@chem.ucsd.edu
> post doc
> UCSD