Re: [Phys-L] field of an ellipsoidal distribution

["A. John Mallinckrodt" <ajm@cpp.edu>]

I'd still have to quibble:

1) You might be able to balance a molecule of water at a pole for an arbitrarily long amount of time, but it certainly wouldn't be "confined"!

2) You can have a "lake" of arbitrary size (one that covers an arbitrarily large fraction of the planetary surface around the equator.  Indeed, because of that fact,at  most places on the surface of this lake there will actually be a non-zero "horizontal" component of the centrifugal force.

I suppose (since we are quibbling!) that you could object that this isn't really a "lake," but an "ocean" since it creates two water-bound "continents."

John Mallinckrodt

Bob Sciamanda wrote:

> The equator is but a line and the pole is but a dot.  Each can have a lake confined to its geometry.  :)
>
> -----Original Message----- From: A. John Mallinckrodt
>
> > That's a necessary, but not sufficient condition.  There's no "horizontal" component at the poles either, but you can't have "lakes" there.
> >
> > John Mallinckrodt
> >
> > Bob Sciamanda wrote:
> >
> > > That's cuz the centrifugal force has no (bothersome) "horizontal" component at the equator.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message----- From: A. John Mallinckrodt
> > >
> > > > Now let's consider a different case, namely a rigid, strictly
> > > > spherical, spinning earth.  You can't ask what happens to a
> > > > table floating in a lake, because there can't be any lakes.
> > >
> > > Nitpick (without significant consequence, but interesting to consider): Technically, you actually can have a "lake" encircling the globe about the equator.
> > >
> > > John Mallinckrodt