Did The Earth Move?

[Feo Amante]

Something is out of whack with earthmove.info aka "Did The Earth Move For You?"

In reponse to my location
Los Angeles, CA

And time in duration
1 minute

It tells me that the earth moved a distance of
11,018,000

Correct me if I'm wrong, but rounding off the figure, light moves a distance of
11,176,920 miles a minute.

Am I supposed to believe that the earth is moving through space at nearly the speed of light? And even faster than our sun which moves through space at 9320.52 miles per minute (I'm counting miles and not kilometers because that's what the site does).

I know they aren't accounting for rotational distance on the earth's axis - earth moving faster around its pole at the equator than, say, Canada - because the answer is the same regardless of the city.

So maybe there is a gag in all of this that I'm missing?

[quixotecoyote]

It counts:
The Earth's rotation around the axis
Earth's orbit around the sun
Solar System's (including Earth's) orbit around the center of the Milky Way
Movement of the Milky Way (including Earth) and Andromeda towards each other
The local group of galaxies' (including Earth's) movement towards Hydra
Plus Earth's share of the expansion of the universe.

[JSMaxwell]

1 Minute? May I have your girl's address to send a letter of condolence? Do they make a Hallmark card for this sort of thing?

Just messing with you.

[tkingdoll]

Why don't you email the site's creators and ask them?

[Lisa Simpson]

Terry answered that here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2695216#post2695216).

[JoeTheJuggler]

It counts:
The Earth's rotation around the axis
Earth's orbit around the sun
Solar System's (including Earth's) orbit around the center of the Milky Way
Movement of the Milky Way (including Earth) and Andromeda towards each other
The local group of galaxies' (including Earth's) movement towards Hydra
Plus Earth's share of the expansion of the universe.
But what would all these velocities be relative to?

I think the figure they're giving is pretty meaningless.

[JSMaxwell]

But what would all these velocities be relative to?

I think the figure they're giving is pretty meaningless.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they are giving velocities. Isn't velocity a vector that contains rate of change and direction such as "25 kilometers per hour East?" Compared with speed, a scalar, that contains only rate of displacement "25 kilometers per hour." Seems to me they are not giving velocity or speed, only distance traveled.

On to the question asked...

Relative to the starting point at the time the measurement starts being taken? Is it necessary to have an outside reference point, or can one measure from a point of origin? I'm genuinely curious about this answer myself.

[strathmeyer]

But what would all these velocities be relative to?

I think the figure they're giving is pretty meaningless.

Meaningless, but correct. I look forward to your meaningful velocities webpage.

[tkingdoll]

But what would all these velocities be relative to?

I think the figure they're giving is pretty meaningless.

Some people find meaning in 'fun'. It's not necessarily everyone's cup of tea, but as someone (Phil Plait I think) pointed out, it's a good way of helping people conceptualise vast distances by tying them to an everyday, ordinary occurance like sex.

Everyday meaning commonplace, not daily. Unless you are luckier than me.

[rehn]

Is it necessary to have an outside reference point, or can one measure from a point of origin? I'm genuinely curious about this answer myself.
What we have today is a absolute frame of reference, kind of. It is the cosmic background radiation. Due to the doppler effect this radiation is slightly "hotter" when we measure it in our direction of travel, than in the opposite direction. From his difference we can compute a speed.