Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

Precession & the North Pole?

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Wednesday, 9th December 2009

  Apologies, this may not really be a question of history; but I don't know who else to ask & it is for historical reasons that I ask it. We have many people from various backgrounds on this forum, so someone might know the answer.
  
  Precession is the circular motion over c25,000 yrs of the alignment of the Earth's North Pole with the Stars. Polaris is our present Pole Star, Vega was the Pole Star of 13,000 yrs ago & will be again in 12,000 yrs time.
  
  This is all well known: however from my very basic understanding of physics (equal & opposite forces, & the spinning top) this should mean that the Earth will have it's own North Pole Precessionary Circle that will move the location of the North Pole over the same 25,000 year cycle.
  
  To clarify: The definition of the North Pole I'm using is the spot on Earth that has the theoretical shortest distance between it & the current position of True North on the processional circle. True North is the closest point to Absolute North that the North Pole ever points. Absolute North lies in the direction of the Cat's Nebula in Draco, but due to the Earth's wobble the North Pole never points to it. Please do not get confused with the magnetic N. Pole that moves in a much shorter cycle as is wild;y inaccurate for indicating true North.
  
  I set up my science lab to test the theory - a star chart, Google Earth, 2 dirty marks on my ceiling & a toy snooker ball. I used Polaris & Vega as my reference points as they are virtually opposite on the circle; Vega lies outside the circle & never was/will be as good an indicator of True North as Polaris can be.
  
  There is a considerable arc difference between the 2 stars & I think that a similar arc should be reflected in the movement of the North Pole on Earth. If I have got my reckoning anywhere near right It would place the North Pole 13,000 yrs ago considerably closer to Britain than it is now. (I may have my rotations wrong & then the N. Pole would have been near Alaska).
  
  I am probably talking rubbish & the Pole does not move, I've never heard of it moving except by tiny amounts; but multiply that by 15,000 & maybe... The world looks very different with St. Kilda on the top but somehow it makes sense with our knowledge of people movements in very ancient times.
  
  If anyone has any more exact & scientific information on this subject I'd love to hear from them. Thank you.

  Link to this forum: Precession & the North Pole?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Stoggler (U1647829) on Wednesday, 9th December 2009

  Hi MendipTim
  
  Just wondering if your post might get some informed answers on this Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ messageboard:
  
  
  
  It's the Radio 4 Science messageboard.
  

  Link to this forum: Precession & the North Pole?

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Wednesday, 9th December 2009

  Thank you Stoggler. I have done as you suggested.

  Link to this forum: Precession & the North Pole?

  Report message3

Back to top