On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Olin Lathrop wrote:

> Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
>> Not necessarily. It could be that the energy would get transformed from
>> kinetic energy into other forms (heat?) anyway -- float or no float.
>> Maybe the float just redirects a small part of the energy flow that
>> goes from kinetic to thermal into electric instead; in that case, the
>> float wouldn't introduce an additional slowing, but would cause a
>> certain ever so slight cooling.
>
> My point was where the energy was coming from in the first place.  I say it
> comes from the kinetic energy stored in the rotation of the planet.  You
> seemed to disagree so I wanted to hear where you think it does come from.

I think that one must realise that the most people can do is *redirect* 
some of the existing energy on earth. wave->mechanical (via heat 
losses), chemical->thermodynamic->mechanical (via heat losses), 
nuclear->heat->thermodynamics->mechanical->electrical etc. So it's a 
scale thing. Should we ever get to do this on a real large scale it may 
mean that we will be in a position to *control* climate on earth, at 
least locally. *Eventually* all energy becomes heat (entropy) and some 
of that is radiated out into space (blackbody radiation). So on the 
larger scale of things it is not relevant if we burn down a forest or if 
it decays by itself in 1000 years. However, on the personal, immediate, 
human scale, it is very relevant that the forest not be burned down.

Whether the earth will slow down because of human activity, I strongly 
doubt.

Peter
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist