A recent unprecedented rocket engine testing at a nearby Pratt & Whitney facility inspired me to look up P&W on the net. I found that they tested some big honkin’ engines - they looked like space shuttle engines - and this got me to thinking. Could mankind, if we built enough giant engines and jammed them into the ground so that they thrust outwards into space, actually move the earth into a larger or smaller orbit? Who knows, just like the puppeteers, we may find it expedient someday to alter our orbit. Could we, huh?
The technical answer is yes. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Could we fire all the nuclear warheads off into low space on one side of the earth have them explode at the same time creating a pressure wave that could move and change the earths orbit slightly,again probably yes. Technically if we fastened our largest engine to earth and pointed it toward space and fired it for as long as we could supply fuel to it we would absolutely change earth’s orbit,maybe very,very ,very… little but physics and natural laws demand that it would have some effect.
But, the size and the scope of that type of power,along with how to transfer it directly to the earth in a way that would effect change on the earth’s orbit, is at this point probably to small to make a sizable difference.
Although there are studies on how to apply the same type of science to near earth meteors and such,to knock them out of there course to avoid hitting earth. In the event that one ever zeroed in on us.Cool Huh?
All you need is a really long lever.
The following explain the above^^^^^^
Newton’s three laws of motion are:
-
Every body continues in a state of uniform motion in a straight line unless acted upon by some external force. This is normally taken as the definition of inertia. Essentially, if there is no net force resulting from unbalanced forces acting on an object (if all the external forces cancel each other out), then the object will maintain a constant velocity. If that velocity is zero, then the object remains at rest. And if an additional external force is applied, the velocity will change because of the force.
-
The time rate of change of momentum (mass x velocity) is proportional to the impressed force. In the usual case where the mass does not change, this law can be expressed in the familiar form:
Force = mass x acceleration or F = ma.
A force will cause a change in velocity; and likewise, a change in velocity will generate a force.
- To every force or action, there is always an equal and opposite reaction. If object A exerts a force on object B, then object B also exerts an equal and opposite force on object A.
It probably wouldn’t be a good idea. I don’t think that we should.
The engines would have to expell reaction mass (or at least light) into space and not jsut into air.
Also the current theory to extend ski season would be a solar shield or using an asteriod (by atttaching rockets to it) to orbit the earth and jupiter in such a way that it would pull earth to a different orbit.
This is, ultimately, the plot to Jules Verne’s little-known second sequel to From the Earth to the Moon. t’s a book called The Sale of the North Pole, and in it the Baltimore Gun Club seeks the North ole because, like Lex Luthor in the Superman movie, they hope to make it into desirable property. IIRC, they only want to change the tilt of the Earth in ts orbit, not shift the orbit itself. (They want to use a giant “gun” like the one used in FTETTM)Even that, however, proves to be beyond their capabilities, so they are forced to abandon the scheme.
Move the earth? Not likely. And the wear and tear on the earth while attempting it would be disastrous, even if it were possible. I now that this idea showed up as the premise in some SF movies from the 1950s ([BThe Day the Earth Caught Fire**, for one), but un;less an interction with another planet or something is responsible, it ain’t gonna hapen.
Planet Earth on the move (BBC)
As Squink’s link says, one day moving the earth’s orbit will be highly desirable, in order to extend the life of the planet.
Not really. What you need is a fulcrum and then any lever or no lever will do. A point to push against is what you would need.
Well…you’d need both a lever and a fulcrum. 
Alessan I think was being historically clever.
Archimedes and all…
Soprry to bring Science Fiction into this discussion,
heh heh
but Larry Niven moves the Earth in the book A World out of Time;
wthout applying any force to the Earth directly…
andhow does he do that, you may ask?
why by moving Uranus instead!
Uranus is a massive ball of fusionable hydrogen; using it’s own material this middlesized gas giant could be propelled so that it drags the earth into a new orbit with it’s gravity.
Probably a similar effect could be achieved by using a massive artificial black hole, or a neutron star; but at least Uranus is an object in our own solar system.
SF worldbuilding at
http://www.orionsarm.com/main.html
Actually I was referring to Sailor, “What you need is a fulcrum and then any lever or no lever will do.”
I think that sentence was just a bit confusingly worded.