[JessePex]

Yeah, shit, that's tough. If it was where you think it is, then Ursa Major would be center and low, but I think we would see a portion of it.
If it was where I originally thought it was, Ursa mjor would be to the high right, off screen, so shit: I don't know.

Biggest problem for me is that the one you highlighted, the top star looks too far away, and on an open angle indtead of a sharp one.
The one that I originally thought was it, is inverted and facing the other way, but the bottom star (Which is at the top because it's inverted with respect to yours) is too close.

Dammit, I'm going to have to delete my account if this humiliation continues! lol. Anyways, I will look tomorrow with a fresh set of eyes, if we're not all dead from some FF nuke attack courtesy of Obama. (In reference to the "Sept27Denverundergroundbunkerrumour")

[eljugadordepoquer]

I agree, I think I'm wrong. Cassiopeia has 3 sections with pretty close lengths.

[eljugadordepoquer]

Also, to answer the original question - to figure out if a pole shift occurred, you must have some solid reference of north on the ground, like the alignment of a couple big stones, or a mountain peak that you can align to. Then find the north star. If its not where it supposed to be, you know a pole shift occurred.

The other method would be careful tracking of the sun. Perhaps knowing how a shadow is supposed to look at a certain time of the year, and checking to see if it is still right.

In a pinch you could probably find buildings or airports that were aligned in the cardinal directions, and see if they're still aligned north.

Of course all the megaliths are conveniently the perfect tools to determine if a pole shift occured. They won't be destroyed during the shift itself or ensuing cataclysm, and they're aligned with the starts.

[JessePex]

Also, to answer the original question - to figure out if a pole shift occurred, you must have some solid reference of north on the ground, like the alignment of a couple big stones, or a mountain peak that you can align to. Then find the north star. If its not where it supposed to be, you know a pole shift occurred.

I don't get it. If we experienced a polar shift, we would be rotating on a different axis, so the North star would no longer be "The center of the record player", so why would you need a ground reference if you were taking long-exposure photos or film? You would see it when you looked at the exposure.

[Blaxastij]

When your satellite tv receiver doesn't work because it's not pointed at the satellite correctly anymore and you are not the only one. When GPS systems fail to work, then it could possibly be a pole shift. It could also be solar flares, though.

[eljugadordepoquer]

I don't get it. If we experienced a polar shift, we would be rotating on a different axis, so the North star would no longer be "The center of the record player", so why would you need a ground reference if you were taking long-exposure photos or film? You would see it when you looked at the exposure.

I guess I was assuming there wouldn't be any technology available.

But regardless, my idea of a pole shift is that the crust of the earth slips over the mantle. I don't think the axis of rotation with respect to the stars can change because of the conservation of angular momentum. We would just be translated on the surface. In other words, you may be in canada but you now occupy the place china currently occupies. So it would be as if you look up at the sky in china. The stars wouldn't change, but your reference on the earth's surface will tell you that the land you're on is now pointing in a different direction than it used to point.

[eljugadordepoquer]

When your satellite tv receiver doesn't work because it's not pointed at the satellite correctly anymore and you are not the only one. When GPS systems fail to work, then it could possibly be a pole shift. It could also be solar flares, though.

Thats an excellent point. Satellite dishes only have a couple degrees of beam-width to connect to the satellite. So while your satellite not working doesn't necessarily mean a pole shift has occurred, you can say that if you're getting satellite, a pole shift has not occurred.

[JessePex]

I guess I was assuming there wouldn't be any technology available.

But regardless, my idea of a pole shift is that the crust of the earth slips over the mantle. I don't think the axis of rotation with respect to the stars can change because of the conservation of angular momentum. We would just be translated on the surface. In other words, you may be in canada but you now occupy the place china currently occupies. So it would be as if you look up at the sky in china. The stars wouldn't change, but your reference on the earth's surface will tell you that the land you're on is now pointing in a different direction than it used to point.

Interesting. In that case, it if wasn't catastrophic somehow, and somehow went unnoticed, the day would be shortened or lengthened accordingly, depending which way the mantle rotated.

[ycMC0PLg]

A geographical pole shift - where the 2 "stationary" points (corresponding to the ends of the axis of rotation) move to different geographical points on the Earth, due to the surface (crust) slipping with respect to the liquid interior.

This by itself would not cause a change in the geographic locations of the poles, since the crust slippage presumably would be along the same direction as the tangential vector. However, if you really do mean that there was a geographic change in the two poles around which the earth is rotating, the most obvious verification would be to wait until morning to see if the sun rises somewhere other than where it did the day before.

[ycMC0PLg]

Interesting. In that case, it if wasn't catastrophic somehow, and somehow went unnoticed, the day would be shortened or lengthened accordingly, depending which way the mantle rotated.

No, the day wouldn't be shortened at all in this case. You'd be at the same longitude, but just a different latitude. Your clocks would be off compared to where the sun angle is during the day. It would no longer be at its zenith at noon the next day.

Of course, this makes vacuum's assumption that angular momentum was conserved. If not, then the length of day/night would change at your location, but not the day length (which would still be 24 hours, unless the rotation speed also changed).

[JessePex]

What are you talking about?

Our day is 24 hours because that's how long it takes to make a full rotation.

If it's midnight here, it's noon hour in China (Loosely put). If the mantle slips and suddenly North america is on the other side of the world, we'd be facing the sun at high noon all of a sudden, and China would be suddenly sitting in the darkness of midnight.

[ycMC0PLg]

What are you talking about?

Our day is 24 hours because that's how long it takes to make a full rotation.

If it's midnight here, it's noon hour in China (Loosely put). If the mantle slips and suddenly North america is on the other side of the world, we'd be facing the sun at high noon all of a sudden, and China would be suddenly sitting in the darkness of midnight.

We're saying the same thing, with different semantics. I'm talking about clock time. If my clock says midnight, and this shift occurs, it will be bright sunshine outside my window, but my clock will still say midnight. That's how I'll know something happened.

Also, when you said the "day is shortened", I guess you meant that one day. I thought you were claiming that a day would no longer be 24 hours long.

[JessePex]

Oh yeah, OK. I understand what you're saying now. Yeah, I meant at the time of the occurance, the day would shorten or lengthen.

When I visualize a pole shift, for some reason I always assume that the world will change hemispherically, meaning the poles will not be north/south, but the world will suddenly tilt onto a new axis, spreading oceans, mountains and destruction across the entire face of the earth.

I can't imagine it not being catastophic.

[SantaClaus]

Oh yeah, OK. I understand what you're saying now. Yeah, I meant at the time of the occurance, the day would shorten or lengthen.

When I visualize a pole shift, for some reason I always assume that the world will change hemispherically, meaning the poles will not be north/south, but the world will suddenly tilt onto a new axis, spreading oceans, mountains and destruction across the entire face of the earth.

I can't imagine it not being catastophic.

From my researches, that's almost EXACTLY what happens... in fact it appears that the shift has been approx. 30 Degrees each time. The previous 2 poles were located at what is presently the Hudson Bay, and Yukon areas, according to the non-mainstream researchers who consider pole-shift to be a valid theory.

Essentially, the interior of the earth continues to "spin" on the same axis it always has, but the crust "displaces" (slips) with respect to the interior - making every spot on the surface now exist at a different latitude/longitude with respect to the rotational axis (and consequently, the new poles) of the planet.

[eljugadordepoquer]

Right Gaillo, a pole shift should always occur where what used to be the north pole moves towards the equator in one direction, and the south pole moves towards the equator in the other direction. The slippage in the direction of the Earth's rotation will be little if any.

The reason is because of the cause of the pole shift. A pole shift is caused by an opposing magnetic field from another celestial body. Imagine our magnetic field, in alignment with the Sun, is going strait up and down. Then another body comes between Earth and the Sun. It's magnetic field is left to right, which is 90º out of alignment with our magnetic field. This causes a torque on the Earth's crust, because the locked-in magnetic field within the solid crust is in opposition to the foreign magnetic field. The inside is liquid so it doesn't have a problem rotating the molecules.

However, you couldn't have a shift around our axis of rotation, because our field is symmetrical around that axis. Imagine you have 2 vertical bar magnets. You can spin one on its north-south axis and it won't move the other (especially round bar magnets). But if you then make one horizontal, the vertical one will want to also be horizontal.

[SantaClaus]

vacuum,
Interesting. I've always given more credibility to the "ice buildup at the poles" leading to a mechanical imbalance (causing a mechanical "re-balancing" - a pole shift) as being more likely than the magnetic field theory... although I do see what you are talking about as a definite possibility.

[ycMC0PLg]

Of course, none of this has the impact of Guam capsizing from too many inhabitants.

Click to view

[eljugadordepoquer]

vacuum,
Interesting. I've always given more credibility to the "ice buildup at the poles" leading to a mechanical imbalance (causing a mechanical "re-balancing" - a pole shift) as being more likely than the magnetic field theory... although I do see what you are talking about as a definite possibility.

That one is possible too, though a little more complicated to understand. Either one could be periodic.....either periodic from the ice buildup, or periodic from a body in elongated orbit with the sun.