Variation in tides

According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height of
tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic
variation.
If there is indeed such an influence , would any one know what it is -
earth's precession ?

It's not the earth's precession, that has a cycle of about 26000 years. (I
think)

Regards

Colin Dawson
www.cjdawson.com

"n cook" <diverse8@gazeta.pl> wrote in message
news:e8i8e8$n6k$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height
> of
> tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic
> variation.
> If there is indeed such an influence , would any one know what it is -
> earth's precession ?
>
>

Hello
This has prompted a question I have not worked out the answer but is
probably a very easy one and everybody else probably knows the answer.
If the moon goes round the earth once about 25 hours and is the main effect
on the tides why do we get 2 high tides in 25 hours and not one
regards Paul
"n cook" <diverse8@gazeta.pl> wrote in message
news:e8i8e8$n6k$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height
> of
> tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic
> variation.
> If there is indeed such an influence , would any one know what it is -
> earth's precession ?
>
>

"n cook" <diverse8@gazeta.pl> wrote in message
news:e8i8e8$n6k$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height
of
> tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic
> variation.
> If there is indeed such an influence , would any one know what it is -
> earth's precession ?
>
>

A good reference::

http://home.hiwaay.net/~krcool/Astro/moon/moontides/

n cook wrote:
>
> http://geography.berkeley.edu/people...am/2%20Literat
> ure.pdf
>
File Not Found. The file you have requested does not exist on this
server.
The Berkeley Geography Website was moved to a new server on February 4,
2006. Some personal accounts have not yet been moved, and some will be
closed.

Weatherlawyer <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1152293516.915337.256380@b28g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>
> n cook wrote:
> >
> >
http://geography.berkeley.edu/people...am/2%20Literat
> > ure.pdf
> >
> File Not Found. The file you have requested does not exist on this
> server.
> The Berkeley Geography Website was moved to a new server on February 4,
> 2006. Some personal accounts have not yet been moved, and some will be
> closed.
>

The usenet 80 column limit perhaps.

I just downloaded and pdf-text converted the relevant page with mamgled
maths

page 42
reference to the phenomenon of "Perigean Spring Tides" (Wood 1976).
As noted before, tidal amplitude (and therefore range) is relatively large
during syzygy (period = ½ synodical month = 14.765294... MSD) and during
lunar perigee (period = 1 nodical month = 27.212220... MSD).
As is often the case with natural phenomena with independent origins, the
ratio of these periods (and hence their frequencies and angular speeds) is
an irrational number (T /T = 1.842985...).
Therefore, syzygy and lunar perigee will periodically approach and converge
(i.e. "beat"), but will literally never exactly coincide.
Their closest convergence during a beat will vary, and the strength of the
perigean spring tides will therefore also vary.
Wood, after an exhaustive historical and theoretical review of the
phenomenon (1976), classified perigean spring tides as 1) perigean (closest
coincidence is 6.5-23° geocentric longitude = moderately large amplitude);
2) proxigean (3.25-6.5°); and 3) extreme proxigean (< 3.25° coincidence =
greatest amplitude).
He also calculated the primary frequency sets that govern the closeness of
convergence during beats, based on the !! recognition that beats will occur
when n T (n+1) T , where n is an integer and T and T !! 1 2 1 2 are the
periods of the interacting waves.
When T T is irrational, there is no integer n 1/ 2 satisfying this
equation, but there will be sets of integers that satisfy the approximation
to any desired coincidence.
Using this method, Wood recognized major frequencies at multiples of about
31 years as well as shorter and longer frequencies and beats.
Wood and others researching extreme tides have noted that other cycles, at
other irrational period ratios, also generate beats and/or modulate the
magnitude of the beats generated by the syzygy and lunar perigee cycles
(Pugh 1987).
This means that the temporal structure of tidal beats, and therefore the
temporal patterns of the high tides that most influence marshes, is quite
complex.

Roger Hamlett wrote:

> It is wrong to think of the tides as being caused by the Moon 'pulling'.
> The key is that the whole 'Earth-Moon' system, is orbiting around their
> common mass centre (actually inside the Earth). In it's simplest form, the
> bit of the Earth closest to the Moon, gets pulled more, and bulges upwards
> towards the Moon, but at the same time, the part furthest away, gets
> pulled less, and with the centripetal effect, bulges up in the opposite
> direction. Worse, the actual 'tides', lag the pull, and can get
> accelerated/decelerated by the local geography, so (for example), there
> are places that actually get four tides (or more!) a day, as the water
> takes different routes round the local land masses.

Where can I see a page or two on this non Newtonian physics that shows
how a mass 1/4 of a million miles away can have more effect on tiny
particulates than a mass 81 times greater and no distance at all? Got a
link?

JRS: In article <e8lfrg$gbk$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, dated Fri, 7 Jul 2006
12:17:04 remote, seen in news:uk.sci.astronomy, n cook
<diverse8@gazeta.pl> posted :
>Dr John Stockton <jrs@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:k+HVjHCZ1XrEFwlz@merlyn.demon.co.uk...
>> JRS: In article <e8i8e8$n6k$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, dated Thu, 6 Jul 2006
>> 06:44:04 remote, seen in news:uk.sci.astronomy, n cook
>> <diverse8@gazeta.pl> posted :
>> >According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height
>of
>> >tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic
>> >variation.

>http://geography.berkeley.edu/people...am/2%20Literat
>ure.pdf

URLs that may line-wrap should be quoted as in sig below, though just
<...> generally suffices. Please read the newsgroup FAQ on formatting
of News replies, and/or the UK hierarchy's guidance in news:uk.answers.

>has mention of a 31 year cycle on top of the perigean cycles but the maths
>is all rather daunting, nice to see reference to one of my favourite words ,
>as a word that is, syzygy unfortunately not even any use in Scrabble- too
>many "y"s 3 not 2.

But is there any reference to the cycle having been noticed by tidal
observers?

What's the biggest-scoring legal move in Scrabble?

To another article :

There is no Usenet 80-column limit in the sense you mention. There is a
convention on ordinary text having a 72-character margin, but longer
lines can be transmitted if required. Writers/readers may need to
adjust their settings or get better software.

This paragraph will be transmitted as one very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very long line, but nowhere near the limit, if any, of this software; I set the right margin at one fathom.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

n cook wrote:
>
> I just downloaded and pdf-text converted the relevant page with mamgled
> maths
>
> page 42
> reference to the phenomenon of "Perigean Spring Tides" (Wood 1976).
> As noted before, tidal amplitude (and therefore range) is relatively large
> during syzygy (period = ½ synodical month = 14.765294... MSD) and during
> lunar perigee (period = 1 nodical month = 27.212220... MSD).
> As is often the case with natural phenomena with independent origins, the
> ratio of these periods (and hence their frequencies and angular speeds) is
> an irrational number (T /T = 1.842985...).
> Therefore, syzygy and lunar perigee will periodically approach and converge
> (i.e. "beat"), but will literally never exactly coincide.
> Their closest convergence during a beat will vary, and the strength of the
> perigean spring tides will therefore also vary.
> Wood, after an exhaustive historical and theoretical review of the
> phenomenon (1976), classified perigean spring tides as 1) perigean (closest
> coincidence is 6.5-23° geocentric longitude = moderately large amplitude);
> 2) proxigean (3.25-6.5°); and 3) extreme proxigean (< 3.25° coincidence =
> greatest amplitude).
> He also calculated the primary frequency sets that govern the closeness of
> convergence during beats, based on the !! recognition that beats will occur
> when n T (n+1) T , where n is an integer and T and T !! 1 2 1 2 are the
> periods of the interacting waves.
> When T T is irrational, there is no integer n 1/ 2 satisfying this
> equation, but there will be sets of integers that satisfy the approximation
> to any desired coincidence.
> Using this method, Wood recognized major frequencies at multiples of about
> 31 years as well as shorter and longer frequencies and beats.
> Wood and others researching extreme tides have noted that other cycles, at
> other irrational period ratios, also generate beats and/or modulate the
> magnitude of the beats generated by the syzygy and lunar perigee cycles
> (Pugh 1987).
> This means that the temporal structure of tidal beats, and therefore the
> temporal patterns of the high tides that most influence marshes, is quitecomplex.

I have been working on the time of the phase and its influence on the
weather for quite some time now and consider myself to be a bit of an
expert on the influence

Whatever the coincidentae are for all the proceeding posts (and it is
useful and interesting work) the fact remains that "pull" is not the
way that the moon affects the hydrology of this planet at all.

All we have, since the days of Kelvin and Doogeson, are the factors
that are involved. So far, the theory and laws concerning tides are
elusive.

While there is a repeatable pattern (and every port is different, some
being so closely related that one can be (as they are) used as a datum
for others) there is a stage in the function of gravity on tides, that
has yet to be discovered.

Until tidal theory is addressed in light of the fundamental laws of
mechanics, that stage never will be.

In message <1152342793.290627.265110@35g2000cwc.googlegroups. com>,
Weatherlawyer <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> writes
>
>I have been working on the time of the phase and its influence on the
>weather for quite some time now and consider myself to be a bit of an
>expert on the influence
>
>Whatever the coincidentae are for all the proceeding posts (and it is
>useful and interesting work) the fact remains that "pull" is not the
>way that the moon affects the hydrology of this planet at all.
>
>All we have, since the days of Kelvin and Doogeson, are the factors
>that are involved. So far, the theory and laws concerning tides are
>elusive.
>
>While there is a repeatable pattern (and every port is different, some
>being so closely related that one can be (as they are) used as a datum
>for others) there is a stage in the function of gravity on tides, that
>has yet to be discovered.
>
>Until tidal theory is addressed in light of the fundamental laws of
>mechanics, that stage never will be.
>

And your evidence for any of the above is... ?

It's been known for years (centuries ?) that there are all sorts of
resonance effects governing ocean tides, not to mention the fact that
they are caused by two bodies dragging water around a body with various
irregularly shaped land masses.
One of the most entertaining accounts of this I know of is Fritz
Lieber's novel "The Wanderer", where the situation is complicated by the
appearance of an Earth-mass body near the Moon prompting one character
to exclaim "At last, a really challenging example of the three-body
problem" :-)

Jonathan Silverlight wrote:

> they are caused by two bodies dragging water around a body with various
> irregularly shaped land masses.
> One of the most entertaining accounts of this I know of is Fritz
> Lieber's novel "The Wanderer", where the situation is complicated by the
> appearance of an Earth-mass body near the Moon prompting one character
> to exclaim "At last, a really challenging example of the three-body
> problem"

When you use emoticons it means the joke needs explaining. When the
joke needs...
Ah never mind. Never mind the drivel, can you have a stab at explaining
the mechanics?

I want to know how the moon can drag a particle up from the earth
considering the masses and distances involved. And why if it works on
volumes with very little gravity of their own, it doesn't have the same
effect on more imposing particulate.

Besides which, if the three body problem is in a constant state of flux
as one planet invokes movement on another, how does the distant planet
affect subdivisions of the other.

And another thing: If the moon can raise water on the earth, why can't
the earth raise sand on the moon? IIRC a crystal of silicon dioxide or
whatever sand is, is some 3 times more dense than water but the moon's
gravity is 1/6th.

I would have thought that on the theory most here are defending
(without the benefit of a schoolboy's primer may I add) the moon would
have tidal mountains and hills.

Weatherlawyer wrote:

> And another thing: If the moon can raise water on the earth, why can't
> the earth raise sand on the moon?

It does, or else how is the moon's rotation locked to the earth ?

Steve

In message <1152640331.292966.213590@35g2000cwc.googlegroups. com>,
Weatherlawyer <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> writes
>
>Jonathan Silverlight wrote:
>
>> they are caused by two bodies dragging water around a body with various
>> irregularly shaped land masses.
>> One of the most entertaining accounts of this I know of is Fritz
>> Lieber's novel "The Wanderer", where the situation is complicated by the
>> appearance of an Earth-mass body near the Moon prompting one character
>> to exclaim "At last, a really challenging example of the three-body
>> problem"
>
>When you use emoticons it means the joke needs explaining. When the
>joke needs...
>Ah never mind. Never mind the drivel,

You're one post away from my kill file, and I'm being generous. You're
just another troll with a fake hotmail address posting via Google. Or a
complete idiot. Or both.

>I want to know how the moon can drag a particle up from the earth
>considering the masses and distances involved.

Gravity. Works over infinite distance, though it obeys an inverse square
law (tides obey an inverse cube law).

>And why if it works on
>volumes with very little gravity of their own, it doesn't have the same
>effect on more imposing particulate.

Could you translate that into standard English?

>
>Besides which, if the three body problem is in a constant state of flux
>as one planet invokes movement on another, how does the distant planet
>affect subdivisions of the other.
>
>And another thing: If the moon can raise water on the earth, why can't
>the earth raise sand on the moon? IIRC a crystal of silicon dioxide or
>whatever sand is, is some 3 times more dense than water but the moon's
>gravity is 1/6th.
>I would have thought that on the theory most here are defending
>(without the benefit of a schoolboy's primer may I add) the moon would
>have tidal mountains and hills.
>

That's an odd way of putting it, but it does. If you took the trouble to
learn anything at all about the subject, you would find that the Moon's
shape is permanently deformed from a spherical shape. Look at
<http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q277.html> for instance. Because the
Earth has 81 times the mass of the Moon it has not yet stopped rotating
relative to the Moon, so the bulge moves round the planet.

Steve Taylor wrote:
> Weatherlawyer wrote:
>
> > And another thing: If the moon can raise water on the earth, why can't
> > the earth raise sand on the moon?
>
> It does, or else how is the moon's rotation locked to the earth ?

So the entire product of earths gravity is given the attention of the
satellite.

A point I agree with. As is the obverse. The entire attraction of the
earth for the moon is occupied in centralising it in the position it
maintains in the two body problem. So how come there is enough left
over for playng around with its puddles?

Physics in the reply might not come amiss.

Jonathan Silverlight wrote:

> >I would have thought that on the theory most here are defending
> >(without the benefit of a schoolboy's primer may I add) the moon would
> >have tidal mountains and hills.
>
> That's an odd way of putting it, but it does. If you took the trouble to
> learn anything at all about the subject, you would find that the Moon's
> shape is permanently deformed from a spherical shape. Look at
> <http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q277.html> for instance. Because the
> Earth has 81 times the mass of the Moon it has not yet stopped rotating
> relative to the Moon, so the bulge moves round the planet.

And pray tell why they are not quadurnal. They are not even diurnal. If
the moon can raise the tides twice a day, surely the earth can do one
better?

Do you understand the laws of physics by any chance? What does the word
physics mean to you?

Weatherlawyer wrote:
> Jonathan Silverlight wrote:
>
> > >I would have thought that on the theory most here are defending
> > >(without the benefit of a schoolboy's primer may I add) the moon would
> > >have tidal mountains and hills.
> >
> > That's an odd way of putting it, but it does. If you took the trouble to
> > learn anything at all about the subject, you would find that the Moon's
> > shape is permanently deformed from a spherical shape. Look at
> > <http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q277.html> for instance. Because the
> > Earth has 81 times the mass of the Moon it has not yet stopped rotating
> > relative to the Moon, so the bulge moves round the planet.
>
> And pray tell why they are not quadurnal. They are not even diurnal. If
> the moon can raise the tides twice a day, surely the earth can do one
> better?

Why should it be? Do you have any idea how long a lunar "day" actually
is???

The moon has already become gravitationally locked in synchronous
rotation with its orbital period because of tidal drag. Hint: that is
why it always shows roughly the same side to the Earth (ignoring for
the perturbations and its elliptical orbit) Or hadn't you noticed?

If you want to better understand physics in a rotating frame of
reference try moving your arm in one of those centrifugal spinning
fairground rides. And be careful that you do not knock out your
neighbour...
>
> Do you understand the laws of physics by any chance? What does the word
> physics mean to you?

Several of us not only understand the laws of physics but can derive
the equations that govern the raising of tides on a planet by a
satellite. It isn't all that difficult to compute from first principles
for a uniform sea on a spherical planet...

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/time/tides.html

Is a reasonable description of the basic mechanism.

NB Real detailed tidal calculations have to include friction,
irregular coastlines, continents and varying depths of ocean. For some
strange reason this subject attracts net kooks.

Regards,
Martin Brown

Weatherlawyer wrote:
>The entire attraction of the
> earth for the moon is occupied in centralising it in the position it
> maintains in the two body problem. So how come there is enough left
> over for playng around with its puddles?
>
> Physics in the reply might not come amiss.
>
What mechanism do you propose, other than mass, and distance for this
"apportioning of the gravity" ?

Steve

Martin Brown wrote:
> Weatherlawyer wrote:
> > Jonathan Silverlight wrote:
> >
> > > >I would have thought that on the theory most here are defending
> > > >(without the benefit of a schoolboy's primer may I add) the moon would
> > > >have tidal mountains and hills.
> > >
> > > That's an odd way of putting it, but it does. If you took the trouble to
> > > learn anything at all about the subject, you would find that the Moon's
> > > shape is permanently deformed from a spherical shape. Look at
> > > <http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q277.html> for instance. Because the
> > > Earth has 81 times the mass of the Moon it has not yet stopped rotating
> > > relative to the Moon, so the bulge moves round the planet.
> >
> > And pray tell why they are not quadurnal. They are not even diurnal. If
> > the moon can raise the tides twice a day, surely the earth can do one
> > better?
>
> Why should it be? Do you have any idea how long a lunar "day" actually
> is???
>
> The moon has already become gravitationally locked in synchronous
> rotation with its orbital period because of tidal drag. Hint: that is
> why it always shows roughly the same side to the Earth (ignoring for
> the perturbations and its elliptical orbit) Or hadn't you noticed?

Librations of the moon aside, the fact that the mountains on the moon
are not crawling toward the equator tends to disprove the facts as you
describe them does it not?

> > Do you understand the laws of physics by any chance? What does the word
> > physics mean to you?
>
> Several of us not only understand the laws of physics but can derive
> the equations that govern the raising of tides on a planet by a
> satellite. It isn't all that difficult to compute from first principles
> for a uniform sea on a spherical planet...
>
> http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/time/tides.html
>
> Is a reasonable description of the basic mechanism.
>
> NB Real detailed tidal calculations have to include friction,

Ah the get out clause. Quite so. And the fact remains that even with
all the superduper computers available this problem defies resolution:

> irregular coastlines, continents and varying depths of ocean.

> For some strange reason this subject attracts net kooks.

Perhaps it is the weather?

The amount of spare energy or whatever left over from the two body
problem leaves little power for the moon to directly raise tides.
Otherwise the Gulf Of Mexico and a few other regions would have massive
tides friction or not. And they would continue to have them one tidal
day at a time.

Even allowing for the fact that water is a prety near perfect fluid, it
has to answer to physics when it reaches inlets such as tha Bay of
Fundy and Avonmouth.

Once it overcomes a restriction and allowing for the fact that the moon
has often passed the zenith for the region involved:

Simple schoolboy physics demands that there is only one high tide and
one low tide per tidal day. And for restricted bays the power should be
muted not enhanced.

Is that good enough for you? Or would you rather I let you sleep,
dozey?

Et tu tute.

Needless to say Dozey II completely ignored the real problem. Making me
the scapegoat evidently works in his world.

Either the moon is part of the two body problem or it is free to play
with loose particulate floating on or near the surface on the earth.
And in some way -as yet to be properly defined, on the other side of
it.

Not only that but rather than serve to neutralise the effect of the sun
at full moon, it enhances the effect. The enhancement is exactly the
same as at new.

You are all a bunch of somnambulists obviously. Not that I am sorry to
have disturbed you.

"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1152839100.358364.160910@35g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
> Et tu tute.
>
> Needless to say Dozey II completely ignored the real problem. Making me
> the scapegoat evidently works in his world.
>
> Either the moon is part of the two body problem or it is free to play
> with loose particulate floating on or near the surface on the earth.
> And in some way -as yet to be properly defined, on the other side of
> it.
>

Oddly perhaps, Galileo seems to have had the same problem in understanding
the issues. However, he felt that he had to make the case that a
heliocentric system supported the 'two tides' phenomenon whereas a true
geocentric system would tend to imply a 'one tide' outcome.

It has been argued that his inability to prove it to his own satisfaction
meant he tried to bluster and bully his position rather than being able to
put forward a strong intellectual argument that could stand on its own
merit.

This meant that despite the initial support of many in the church hierarchy,
he actually lost the argument because he could not marshall his arguments.

Is this relevant in this thread ? I think so.

OG wrote:
> "Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1152839100.358364.160910@35g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
> > Et tu tute.
> >
> > Needless to say Dozey II completely ignored the real problem. Making me
> > the scapegoat evidently works in his world.
> >
> > Either the moon is part of the two body problem or it is free to play
> > with loose particulate floating on or near the surface on the earth.
> > And in some way -as yet to be properly defined, on the other side of it.
> >
>
> Oddly perhaps, Galileo seems to have had the same problem in understanding
> the issues. However, he felt that he had to make the case that a
> heliocentric system supported the 'two tides' phenomenon whereas a true
> geocentric system would tend to imply a 'one tide' outcome.
>
> It has been argued that his inability to prove it to his own satisfaction
> meant he tried to bluster and bully his position rather than being able to
> put forward a strong intellectual argument that could stand on its own
> merit.
>
> This meant that despite the initial support of many in the church hierarchy,
> he actually lost the argument because he could not marshall his arguments.
>
> Is this relevant in this thread ? I think so.

I don't see Gallileo as a dozey plonker. He did (so I have heard) argue
with Keppler on the subject. I just assumed that Galileo was more
familiar with Mediteranean tides than Keppler and less familiar with
Atlantic ones.

It is a problem that even Newton sidestepped, referring to the
Aethiopian Sea as the one where the lunar theory held true. Obviating
the obvious though.

Dr John Stockton wrote:

> What's the biggest-scoring legal move in Scrabble?

I suspect that the answer is not known for certain. Here are some
excerpts from Gyles Brandreth, _The Complete Book of Scrabble_, Robert
Hale, London, 1980:

"The highest known score achieved at a single move in a real game is 374
points. This was achieved by playing the word QUETZALS across two
triple-word-score squares, and getting Z on a double-letter-score
square. This score was made by Darryl Francis, of Wandsworth, London,
on 12th September 1973.

....

In a idealized game, the highest score yet discovered for _one single
move_ is 1961. This idealised move was devised by Ron Jerome, of
Bracknell, Berkshire, in May 1974. The move involved playing all seven
tiles, combing them with eight already on the board, to form a 15-letter
word, which stretched across three triple-word-score squares. As well
as making this 15-letter word, the move also created seven words
perpendicular to it, three of them stretching across triple-word-score
squares.

The 15-letter word that was played was BENZOXYCAMPHORS. The seven other
words were DAFFODILLY, GULLISH, JINNYRICKSHAWS, PROVERB, SQUANDERMANIAC,
VAGABONDAGER and WERTUZ. (The words DAFFODILL, GULLIS, JINNYRICKSHAW,
PROVER, SQUANDERMANIA, VAGABONDAGE, and WERTU were already on the
board.)

BENZOXYCAMPHORS - Webster's New International Dictionary, Second edition
DAFFODILL - Oxford English Dictionary
DAFFODILLY - Chambers
GULLIS - Oxford English Dictionary
GULLISH - Chambers
JINNYRICKSHAW(S) - Oxford English Dictionary
PROVER - Chambers
PROVERB - Chambers
SQUANDERMANIA - Chambers
SQUANDERMANIAC - Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition
VAGABONDAGE - Chambers
VAGABONDAGER - Oxford English Dictionary
WERTU - Oxford English Dictionary
WERTUZ - Oxford English Dictionary"

--
Remove "antispam" and ".invalid" for e-mail address.
"He that giveth to the poor lendeth to the Lord, and shall be repaid,"
said Mrs Fairchild, hastily slipping a shilling into the poor woman's
hand.

Dr John Stockton wrote:

> What's the biggest-scoring legal move in Scrabble?

I suspect that the answer is not known for certain. Here are some
excerpts from Gyles Brandreth, _The Complete Book of Scrabble_, Robert
Hale, London, 1980:

"The highest known score achieved at a single move in a real game is 374
points. This was achieved by playing the word QUETZALS across two
triple-word-score squares, and getting Z on a double-letter-score
square. This score was made by Darryl Francis, of Wandsworth, London,
on 12th September 1973.

....

In a idealized game, the highest score yet discovered for _one single
move_ is 1961. This idealised move was devised by Ron Jerome, of
Bracknell, Berkshire, in May 1974. The move involved playing all seven
tiles, combing them with eight already on the board, to form a 15-letter
word, which stretched across three triple-word-score squares. As well
as making this 15-letter word, the move also created seven words
perpendicular to it, three of them stretching across triple-word-score
squares.

The 15-letter word that was played was BENZOXYCAMPHORS. The seven other
words were DAFFODILLY, GULLISH, JINNYRICKSHAWS, PROVERB, SQUANDERMANIAC,
VAGABONDAGER and WERTUZ. (The words DAFFODILL, GULLIS, JINNYRICKSHAW,
PROVER, SQUANDERMANIA, VAGABONDAGE, and WERTU were already on the
board.)

BENZOXYCAMPHORS - Webster's New International Dictionary, Second edition
DAFFODILL - Oxford English Dictionary
DAFFODILLY - Chambers
GULLIS - Oxford English Dictionary
GULLISH - Chambers
JINNYRICKSHAW(S) - Oxford English Dictionary
PROVER - Chambers
PROVERB - Chambers
SQUANDERMANIA - Chambers
SQUANDERMANIAC - Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition
VAGABONDAGE - Chambers
VAGABONDAGER - Oxford English Dictionary
WERTU - Oxford English Dictionary
WERTUZ - Oxford English Dictionary"

--
Remove "antispam" and ".invalid" for e-mail address.
"He that giveth to the poor lendeth to the Lord, and shall be repaid,"
said Mrs Fairchild, hastily slipping a shilling into the poor woman's
hand.

	#1
n cook	Variation in tides According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height of tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic variation. If there is indeed such an influence , would any one know what it is - earth's precession ?

	#2
Colin Dawson	Re: Variation in tides It's not the earth's precession, that has a cycle of about 26000 years. (I think) Regards Colin Dawson www.cjdawson.com "n cook" <diverse8@gazeta.pl> wrote in message news:e8i8e8$n6k$1@inews.gazeta.pl... > According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height > of > tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic > variation. > If there is indeed such an influence , would any one know what it is - > earth's precession ? > >

	#3
p forsdick	Re: Variation in tides Hello This has prompted a question I have not worked out the answer but is probably a very easy one and everybody else probably knows the answer. If the moon goes round the earth once about 25 hours and is the main effect on the tides why do we get 2 high tides in 25 hours and not one regards Paul "n cook" <diverse8@gazeta.pl> wrote in message news:e8i8e8$n6k$1@inews.gazeta.pl... > According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height > of > tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic > variation. > If there is indeed such an influence , would any one know what it is - > earth's precession ? > >

	#4
Robert Geake	Re: Variation in tides "n cook" <diverse8@gazeta.pl> wrote in message news:e8i8e8$n6k$1@inews.gazeta.pl... > According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height of > tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic > variation. > If there is indeed such an influence , would any one know what it is - > earth's precession ? > > A good reference:: http://home.hiwaay.net/~krcool/Astro/moon/moontides/

	#5
Weatherlawyer	Re: Variation in tides n cook wrote: > > http://geography.berkeley.edu/people...am/2%20Literat > ure.pdf > File Not Found. The file you have requested does not exist on this server. The Berkeley Geography Website was moved to a new server on February 4, 2006. Some personal accounts have not yet been moved, and some will be closed.

	#6
n cook	Re: Variation in tides Weatherlawyer <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1152293516.915337.256380@b28g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com... > > n cook wrote: > > > > http://geography.berkeley.edu/people...am/2%20Literat > > ure.pdf > > > File Not Found. The file you have requested does not exist on this > server. > The Berkeley Geography Website was moved to a new server on February 4, > 2006. Some personal accounts have not yet been moved, and some will be > closed. > The usenet 80 column limit perhaps. I just downloaded and pdf-text converted the relevant page with mamgled maths page 42 reference to the phenomenon of "Perigean Spring Tides" (Wood 1976). As noted before, tidal amplitude (and therefore range) is relatively large during syzygy (period = ½ synodical month = 14.765294... MSD) and during lunar perigee (period = 1 nodical month = 27.212220... MSD). As is often the case with natural phenomena with independent origins, the ratio of these periods (and hence their frequencies and angular speeds) is an irrational number (T /T = 1.842985...). Therefore, syzygy and lunar perigee will periodically approach and converge (i.e. "beat"), but will literally never exactly coincide. Their closest convergence during a beat will vary, and the strength of the perigean spring tides will therefore also vary. Wood, after an exhaustive historical and theoretical review of the phenomenon (1976), classified perigean spring tides as 1) perigean (closest coincidence is 6.5-23° geocentric longitude = moderately large amplitude); 2) proxigean (3.25-6.5°); and 3) extreme proxigean (< 3.25° coincidence = greatest amplitude). He also calculated the primary frequency sets that govern the closeness of convergence during beats, based on the !! recognition that beats will occur when n T (n+1) T , where n is an integer and T and T !! 1 2 1 2 are the periods of the interacting waves. When T T is irrational, there is no integer n 1/ 2 satisfying this equation, but there will be sets of integers that satisfy the approximation to any desired coincidence. Using this method, Wood recognized major frequencies at multiples of about 31 years as well as shorter and longer frequencies and beats. Wood and others researching extreme tides have noted that other cycles, at other irrational period ratios, also generate beats and/or modulate the magnitude of the beats generated by the syzygy and lunar perigee cycles (Pugh 1987). This means that the temporal structure of tidal beats, and therefore the temporal patterns of the high tides that most influence marshes, is quite complex.

	#7
Weatherlawyer	Re: Variation in tides Roger Hamlett wrote: > It is wrong to think of the tides as being caused by the Moon 'pulling'. > The key is that the whole 'Earth-Moon' system, is orbiting around their > common mass centre (actually inside the Earth). In it's simplest form, the > bit of the Earth closest to the Moon, gets pulled more, and bulges upwards > towards the Moon, but at the same time, the part furthest away, gets > pulled less, and with the centripetal effect, bulges up in the opposite > direction. Worse, the actual 'tides', lag the pull, and can get > accelerated/decelerated by the local geography, so (for example), there > are places that actually get four tides (or more!) a day, as the water > takes different routes round the local land masses. Where can I see a page or two on this non Newtonian physics that shows how a mass 1/4 of a million miles away can have more effect on tiny particulates than a mass 81 times greater and no distance at all? Got a link?

	#8
Dr John Stockton	Re: Variation in tides JRS: In article <e8lfrg$gbk$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, dated Fri, 7 Jul 2006 12:17:04 remote, seen in news:uk.sci.astronomy, n cook <diverse8@gazeta.pl> posted : >Dr John Stockton <jrs@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote in message >news:k+HVjHCZ1XrEFwlz@merlyn.demon.co.uk... >> JRS: In article <e8i8e8$n6k$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, dated Thu, 6 Jul 2006 >> 06:44:04 remote, seen in news:uk.sci.astronomy, n cook >> <diverse8@gazeta.pl> posted : >> >According to a local old sea dog, there is a 50 year cycle to the height >of >> >tides superimposed on the usual new/full moon / sun distance, cyclic >> >variation. >http://geography.berkeley.edu/people...am/2%20Literat >ure.pdf URLs that may line-wrap should be quoted as in sig below, though just <...> generally suffices. Please read the newsgroup FAQ on formatting of News replies, and/or the UK hierarchy's guidance in news:uk.answers. >has mention of a 31 year cycle on top of the perigean cycles but the maths >is all rather daunting, nice to see reference to one of my favourite words , >as a word that is, syzygy unfortunately not even any use in Scrabble- too >many "y"s 3 not 2. But is there any reference to the cycle having been noticed by tidal observers? What's the biggest-scoring legal move in Scrabble? To another article : There is no Usenet 80-column limit in the sense you mention. There is a convention on ordinary text having a 72-character margin, but longer lines can be transmitted if required. Writers/readers may need to adjust their settings or get better software. This paragraph will be transmitted as one very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very long line, but nowhere near the limit, if any, of this software; I set the right margin at one fathom. -- © John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. © Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links; Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc. No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

	#10
Jonathan Silverlight	Re: Variation in tides In message <1152342793.290627.265110@35g2000cwc.googlegroups. com>, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> writes > >I have been working on the time of the phase and its influence on the >weather for quite some time now and consider myself to be a bit of an >expert on the influence > >Whatever the coincidentae are for all the proceeding posts (and it is >useful and interesting work) the fact remains that "pull" is not the >way that the moon affects the hydrology of this planet at all. > >All we have, since the days of Kelvin and Doogeson, are the factors >that are involved. So far, the theory and laws concerning tides are >elusive. > >While there is a repeatable pattern (and every port is different, some >being so closely related that one can be (as they are) used as a datum >for others) there is a stage in the function of gravity on tides, that >has yet to be discovered. > >Until tidal theory is addressed in light of the fundamental laws of >mechanics, that stage never will be. > And your evidence for any of the above is... ? It's been known for years (centuries ?) that there are all sorts of resonance effects governing ocean tides, not to mention the fact that they are caused by two bodies dragging water around a body with various irregularly shaped land masses. One of the most entertaining accounts of this I know of is Fritz Lieber's novel "The Wanderer", where the situation is complicated by the appearance of an Earth-mass body near the Moon prompting one character to exclaim "At last, a really challenging example of the three-body problem" :-)

	#11
Weatherlawyer	Re: Variation in tides Jonathan Silverlight wrote: > they are caused by two bodies dragging water around a body with various > irregularly shaped land masses. > One of the most entertaining accounts of this I know of is Fritz > Lieber's novel "The Wanderer", where the situation is complicated by the > appearance of an Earth-mass body near the Moon prompting one character > to exclaim "At last, a really challenging example of the three-body > problem" When you use emoticons it means the joke needs explaining. When the joke needs... Ah never mind. Never mind the drivel, can you have a stab at explaining the mechanics? I want to know how the moon can drag a particle up from the earth considering the masses and distances involved. And why if it works on volumes with very little gravity of their own, it doesn't have the same effect on more imposing particulate. Besides which, if the three body problem is in a constant state of flux as one planet invokes movement on another, how does the distant planet affect subdivisions of the other. And another thing: If the moon can raise water on the earth, why can't the earth raise sand on the moon? IIRC a crystal of silicon dioxide or whatever sand is, is some 3 times more dense than water but the moon's gravity is 1/6th. I would have thought that on the theory most here are defending (without the benefit of a schoolboy's primer may I add) the moon would have tidal mountains and hills.

	#12
Steve Taylor	Re: Variation in tides Weatherlawyer wrote: > And another thing: If the moon can raise water on the earth, why can't > the earth raise sand on the moon? It does, or else how is the moon's rotation locked to the earth ? Steve

	#14
Weatherlawyer	Re: Variation in tides Steve Taylor wrote: > Weatherlawyer wrote: > > > And another thing: If the moon can raise water on the earth, why can't > > the earth raise sand on the moon? > > It does, or else how is the moon's rotation locked to the earth ? So the entire product of earths gravity is given the attention of the satellite. A point I agree with. As is the obverse. The entire attraction of the earth for the moon is occupied in centralising it in the position it maintains in the two body problem. So how come there is enough left over for playng around with its puddles? Physics in the reply might not come amiss.

	#16
Martin Brown	Re: Variation in tides Weatherlawyer wrote: > Jonathan Silverlight wrote: > > > >I would have thought that on the theory most here are defending > > >(without the benefit of a schoolboy's primer may I add) the moon would > > >have tidal mountains and hills. > > > > That's an odd way of putting it, but it does. If you took the trouble to > > learn anything at all about the subject, you would find that the Moon's > > shape is permanently deformed from a spherical shape. Look at > > <http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q277.html> for instance. Because the > > Earth has 81 times the mass of the Moon it has not yet stopped rotating > > relative to the Moon, so the bulge moves round the planet. > > And pray tell why they are not quadurnal. They are not even diurnal. If > the moon can raise the tides twice a day, surely the earth can do one > better? Why should it be? Do you have any idea how long a lunar "day" actually is??? The moon has already become gravitationally locked in synchronous rotation with its orbital period because of tidal drag. Hint: that is why it always shows roughly the same side to the Earth (ignoring for the perturbations and its elliptical orbit) Or hadn't you noticed? If you want to better understand physics in a rotating frame of reference try moving your arm in one of those centrifugal spinning fairground rides. And be careful that you do not knock out your neighbour... > > Do you understand the laws of physics by any chance? What does the word > physics mean to you? Several of us not only understand the laws of physics but can derive the equations that govern the raising of tides on a planet by a satellite. It isn't all that difficult to compute from first principles for a uniform sea on a spherical planet... http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/time/tides.html Is a reasonable description of the basic mechanism. NB Real detailed tidal calculations have to include friction, irregular coastlines, continents and varying depths of ocean. For some strange reason this subject attracts net kooks. Regards, Martin Brown

	#18
Weatherlawyer	Re: Variation in tides Martin Brown wrote: > Weatherlawyer wrote: > > Jonathan Silverlight wrote: > > > > > >I would have thought that on the theory most here are defending > > > >(without the benefit of a schoolboy's primer may I add) the moon would > > > >have tidal mountains and hills. > > > > > > That's an odd way of putting it, but it does. If you took the trouble to > > > learn anything at all about the subject, you would find that the Moon's > > > shape is permanently deformed from a spherical shape. Look at > > > <http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q277.html> for instance. Because the > > > Earth has 81 times the mass of the Moon it has not yet stopped rotating > > > relative to the Moon, so the bulge moves round the planet. > > > > And pray tell why they are not quadurnal. They are not even diurnal. If > > the moon can raise the tides twice a day, surely the earth can do one > > better? > > Why should it be? Do you have any idea how long a lunar "day" actually > is??? > > The moon has already become gravitationally locked in synchronous > rotation with its orbital period because of tidal drag. Hint: that is > why it always shows roughly the same side to the Earth (ignoring for > the perturbations and its elliptical orbit) Or hadn't you noticed? Librations of the moon aside, the fact that the mountains on the moon are not crawling toward the equator tends to disprove the facts as you describe them does it not? > > Do you understand the laws of physics by any chance? What does the word > > physics mean to you? > > Several of us not only understand the laws of physics but can derive > the equations that govern the raising of tides on a planet by a > satellite. It isn't all that difficult to compute from first principles > for a uniform sea on a spherical planet... > > http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/time/tides.html > > Is a reasonable description of the basic mechanism. > > NB Real detailed tidal calculations have to include friction, Ah the get out clause. Quite so. And the fact remains that even with all the superduper computers available this problem defies resolution: > irregular coastlines, continents and varying depths of ocean. > For some strange reason this subject attracts net kooks. Perhaps it is the weather? The amount of spare energy or whatever left over from the two body problem leaves little power for the moon to directly raise tides. Otherwise the Gulf Of Mexico and a few other regions would have massive tides friction or not. And they would continue to have them one tidal day at a time. Even allowing for the fact that water is a prety near perfect fluid, it has to answer to physics when it reaches inlets such as tha Bay of Fundy and Avonmouth. Once it overcomes a restriction and allowing for the fact that the moon has often passed the zenith for the region involved: Simple schoolboy physics demands that there is only one high tide and one low tide per tidal day. And for restricted bays the power should be muted not enhanced. Is that good enough for you? Or would you rather I let you sleep, dozey?

	#19
Weatherlawyer	Re: Variation in tides Et tu tute. Needless to say Dozey II completely ignored the real problem. Making me the scapegoat evidently works in his world. Either the moon is part of the two body problem or it is free to play with loose particulate floating on or near the surface on the earth. And in some way -as yet to be properly defined, on the other side of it. Not only that but rather than serve to neutralise the effect of the sun at full moon, it enhances the effect. The enhancement is exactly the same as at new. You are all a bunch of somnambulists obviously. Not that I am sorry to have disturbed you.

	#20
OG	Re: Variation in tides "Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1152839100.358364.160910@35g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com... > Et tu tute. > > Needless to say Dozey II completely ignored the real problem. Making me > the scapegoat evidently works in his world. > > Either the moon is part of the two body problem or it is free to play > with loose particulate floating on or near the surface on the earth. > And in some way -as yet to be properly defined, on the other side of > it. > Oddly perhaps, Galileo seems to have had the same problem in understanding the issues. However, he felt that he had to make the case that a heliocentric system supported the 'two tides' phenomenon whereas a true geocentric system would tend to imply a 'one tide' outcome. It has been argued that his inability to prove it to his own satisfaction meant he tried to bluster and bully his position rather than being able to put forward a strong intellectual argument that could stand on its own merit. This meant that despite the initial support of many in the church hierarchy, he actually lost the argument because he could not marshall his arguments. Is this relevant in this thread ? I think so.

	#21
Weatherlawyer	Re: Variation in tides OG wrote: > "Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:1152839100.358364.160910@35g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com... > > Et tu tute. > > > > Needless to say Dozey II completely ignored the real problem. Making me > > the scapegoat evidently works in his world. > > > > Either the moon is part of the two body problem or it is free to play > > with loose particulate floating on or near the surface on the earth. > > And in some way -as yet to be properly defined, on the other side of it. > > > > Oddly perhaps, Galileo seems to have had the same problem in understanding > the issues. However, he felt that he had to make the case that a > heliocentric system supported the 'two tides' phenomenon whereas a true > geocentric system would tend to imply a 'one tide' outcome. > > It has been argued that his inability to prove it to his own satisfaction > meant he tried to bluster and bully his position rather than being able to > put forward a strong intellectual argument that could stand on its own > merit. > > This meant that despite the initial support of many in the church hierarchy, > he actually lost the argument because he could not marshall his arguments. > > Is this relevant in this thread ? I think so. I don't see Gallileo as a dozey plonker. He did (so I have heard) argue with Keppler on the subject. I just assumed that Galileo was more familiar with Mediteranean tides than Keppler and less familiar with Atlantic ones. It is a problem that even Newton sidestepped, referring to the Aethiopian Sea as the one where the lunar theory held true. Obviating the obvious though.

	#22
Frederick Williams	Re: Variation in tides Dr John Stockton wrote: > What's the biggest-scoring legal move in Scrabble? I suspect that the answer is not known for certain. Here are some excerpts from Gyles Brandreth, _The Complete Book of Scrabble_, Robert Hale, London, 1980: "The highest known score achieved at a single move in a real game is 374 points. This was achieved by playing the word QUETZALS across two triple-word-score squares, and getting Z on a double-letter-score square. This score was made by Darryl Francis, of Wandsworth, London, on 12th September 1973. .... In a idealized game, the highest score yet discovered for _one single move_ is 1961. This idealised move was devised by Ron Jerome, of Bracknell, Berkshire, in May 1974. The move involved playing all seven tiles, combing them with eight already on the board, to form a 15-letter word, which stretched across three triple-word-score squares. As well as making this 15-letter word, the move also created seven words perpendicular to it, three of them stretching across triple-word-score squares. The 15-letter word that was played was BENZOXYCAMPHORS. The seven other words were DAFFODILLY, GULLISH, JINNYRICKSHAWS, PROVERB, SQUANDERMANIAC, VAGABONDAGER and WERTUZ. (The words DAFFODILL, GULLIS, JINNYRICKSHAW, PROVER, SQUANDERMANIA, VAGABONDAGE, and WERTU were already on the board.) BENZOXYCAMPHORS - Webster's New International Dictionary, Second edition DAFFODILL - Oxford English Dictionary DAFFODILLY - Chambers GULLIS - Oxford English Dictionary GULLISH - Chambers JINNYRICKSHAW(S) - Oxford English Dictionary PROVER - Chambers PROVERB - Chambers SQUANDERMANIA - Chambers SQUANDERMANIAC - Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition VAGABONDAGE - Chambers VAGABONDAGER - Oxford English Dictionary WERTU - Oxford English Dictionary WERTUZ - Oxford English Dictionary" -- Remove "antispam" and ".invalid" for e-mail address. "He that giveth to the poor lendeth to the Lord, and shall be repaid," said Mrs Fairchild, hastily slipping a shilling into the poor woman's hand.