What is the difference in acceleration due to gravity between the North and the South Poles?

Gravity is practically the same at the North and South poles, 9.832m/s^2. The south pole is about 3km above sea level while the north pole is at sea level so there would be a negligible change.

You don't look like Claire.

Well maybe if you dropped him from a really high tower and he fell... in accordance to the laws of gravity of course... he might look like Claire. If she fell from a really high tower as well.

 

Not that I'd want her to.

 

*shrugs* I'm just saying.

have always heard that the rate at which an object falls will not change not matter the size of the object ...  or something like that. *whistles*

 

 

ofcourse seeing as the southpole is at the bottom of the earth, one would typically think the object would fall dow into space and not back to earth.  pesky gravity always getting in the way of the real fun

 

 

 

I say we hog tie Al Jenn Mael for answering for Claire. I mean Mother should be able to speak for herself.

 

*Gets rope and whip ready*

The answer is zero.

 

Browns know everything.

The answer's ALWAYS zero. It's like when people ask you what kind of liquid removes what kind of stain. The answers is ALWAYS club soda.

 

Even when they're asking you "HOW DO I REMOVE ALL THIS BLOOD FROM MY WINDOWS AND WALLS AND BED AND TOILET AND ROOF AND *endless rattling for half an hour*???"

 

Reply, calmly, "Club soda."

 

*nods*

How did they know it was me with my inverted illusion as Claire... And they know about Club Soda!

 

*Opens a gateway and flees*

Well maybe if you dropped him from a really high tower and he fell... in accordance to the laws of gravity of course... he might look like Claire. If she fell from a really high tower as well.

 

Not that I'd want her to.

 

*shrugs* I'm just saying.

 

Why would you want me to?  :(

 

Gravity is practically the same at the North and South poles, 9.832m/s^2. The south pole is about 3km above sea level while the north pole is at sea level so there would be a negligible change.

 

So 3 km makes no difference, eh?

 

And is the fact that the earth is not completely spherical relevant at all here?

 

So 3 km makes no difference, eh?

 

And is the fact that the earth is not completely spherical relevant at all here?

 

I'll leave it for Claire ;p I'm going to hide, I've heard that falling from high places isn't good for your health

The falling part is fine for your health. Its the landing part you want to avoid.

Alas, I cannot stay hidden for it is dark and lonely. Though I do rightfully fear the fate of landing and going from a humanoid shape to a pancakoidial shape would be regrettable though I might be tasty! Do you think women would prefer that, they are strange creature you know. Falling I can't believe is that beneficial to my health either with all the screaming and whatnot. I must then endeavor to never go to any heights. We'll see if my patience can await Claire's knowledgeable answer.

*Straps on Parachute*

 

Well I couldn't resist. 3km makes little difference for a few reasons. You're completely right that the earth isn't spherical but in fact an oblate spheroid. The Earths equatorial radius is 6378km and polar radius is 6357km a difference of 21km. Going from sea level to the top of mount Everest 8.8km yields a change of around 0.3%.  The biggest difference between the equator and the poles is centrifugal force. As the Earth spins object are 'thrown outwards' and so again the force of gravity isn't as strong. Additionally the earth isn't uniformly dense due to composition and magma flows. Gravity at the equator is around 9.78 vs the poles of 9.83.

 

Getting back to the point though, the south poles gravitational force is very similar to the north poles. 

 

*Adds duct tape to parachute*

*sends Al Jenn off a tall tower and into a pool of boiling lava*

 

I'm kidding. I'm still not sure of the point of this thread, and why Claire isn't responding. *shrugs*

Gravity is practically the same at the North and South poles, 9.832m/s^2. The south pole is about 3km above sea level while the north pole is at sea level so there would be a negligible change.

 

For all practical purposes, yes, they're pretty much the same.  Al Jenn, great job!

 

The value of g changes from place to place due to the elliptical shape of the Earth and the rotation of the Earth. Due to the shape of the Earth:

 

g= GM/R^2

Hence, it is inversely proportional to the square of the radius.

 

The elliptical shape makes for the difference in g between the equator and the poles.  There should not be much difference between the poles themselves, although a study in 2001 done with a Foucault pendulum measured a "g" at the South Pole of 9.85 ms^2.  (compared to 9.83 as the accepted value) Granted, this was not a perfect Foucault and had to be restarted regularly by the experimenters, so that could account for deviation.

 

 

<3's for Pandy (sorry for making you wait; been busy all this week!)

 

 

  I think I understood that.  However, I now want to use Foucault as a curse word.

 

  "What the Foucault Pendulum do you think you're doing here?"

"What the Foucault Pendulum do you think you're doing here?"

 

New sig quote, right thar.

*giggles*  That is priceless Ireond!

Eh, it happens from time to time.