Secular deceleration the Earth's rotation - angular momentum transfer

or pirouette effect?
Volkmar Müller

Abstract
The author and the standard theory are based on the assumption of cosmological expansion of space.
We see when we look into the past, formerly smaller spatial units. These correspond at numeric
constant speed of light shorter time units. We continue to assume that the cosmological expansion in all
gravitational dominated areas acts. There are examples of the effect of the Hubble parameter shown in
small areas. One finds the earlier shorter time units when the time difference of the SI-time scale and
time scale UT is calculated for previous time points. The secular deceleration rate of the UT-time is in
18 (!) orders of magnitude with the Hubble parameter unanimously. This could be a rare coincidence of
tidal friction and cosmological expansion rate. But there are several rare coincidences in this area. It is
shown that the UTscale is also relevant to periods of time, during which the Earth did not exist. The SI
second leads in gravitational dominant areas to physical contradictions or unexplained phenomena.
Conclusions on the basis of UT-scale match the observations in part better than when using the SI-time
scale.

Keywords : UT-scale; deceleration-rate; expansion-rate; Hubble-parameter

1. Introduction
The Earth's rotation is subject to fluctuations beside a secular delay. The tidal friction is generally
assumed as the cause. The length of day (LOD) is growing (expands) secular in 1 Julian century by
about 1.6 ms [1]. This value is published differentially. The tidal friction according to Huber [2] is not the
sole reason for delay. He gives the recent value 1,780 ± 0.56 ms / cy. In geological past evidently also a
delay of the Earth's rotation or enlargement of the LOD was present. The constancy and accuracy of
the delay amount is questioned for large, geologically relevant periods. But there were found fossil
organisms from the geological eras from the Cretaceous to the Cambrian, as showed by annual growth
rings and this imposed daily growth rings (coral calendar). The accuracy of the delay value 1.6 ms / cy
shall be estimated. We form Dt = UT - ET for the period 380 * 10 6 years (120 * 1014 s). Coral of that age
show rings 396 days per year [20]. Assuming constant year-length, LOD was then 0.922 of today's
length. The UT second is defined as 1/86400 of a day. The length of the UT-second was 0.922 of
today's second. With variable UT-seconds, the time difference between UT-scale and SI-scale can be
calculated as follows:
Σ = 0,5 n (x1 + xn) (1)

= 0,5 * 120 * 1014 * ( 1 + 0,922 ) = 115,3 * 1014

(Σ = period of time in SI-seconds, n = period of time in UT-seconds, x 1 = Length recent second (1.0), xn = length of the

first second (0.922))

Over the past 120 * 1014 seconds went by 115.3 * 1014 seconds today size.
Δt =(ET - UT) =115,3 * 10 14- 119,9 * 1014= - 4,6 * 1014. With the value of N. Baer [1], one can write for
the time difference by delay:
Δt = 29,2208 * T2 (2)
(Δt = in seconds T = Number of centuries).

Obtained with (2) for 380*106 years a Δt = 29,2208 * (3,8*10 6) 2 = 4,2*1014. With relation (2) gives a ca
10% smaller value than the value found in coral. Relation (2) is thus applicable for this period. For the
unit of time (1 second) can be with (2) the rate of deceleration of the Earth's rotation a to calculate:
a = 29,22 * (1 / 31,56*108 s) 2 = 2,93* 10-18 s-1.

2. Causes of the rotational delay

2.1. Tidal friction
The generally accepted cause of the delay in rotation of the Earth is the tidal friction by the moon. From
astronomical observations the decrease in the rotational energy of the Earth is fairly accurately known
(- 3,6*1019 erg*s-1). The amount of the effect is so well known. The cause is apparently less accurate
numerically detectable. One tries to cover with vectors of the tidal current measurements in a close-
meshed grid oceans. With enormous effort values are obtained which correspond to tend a tidal friction.
However, a quantitative safeguard these values is not possible to the required extent.
Note also: Today's oceans were not present in significant periods of time. The deviation of the
deceleration rate from the current value is nonetheless only a few percent. This goes against the
general assumption: Changes to the Earth's surface can drastically affect the value of tida l friction.
Accepting the tidal friction as the cause of delay in rotation of the Earth, is totally pointless for some
phenomena. They include the in Table 1, row 2,3,4 ([3,4,5]) listed "coincidences". For this, there is no
spatial - temporal causality. A coincidence of two phenomena of size 2- 3 * 10 -18 s-1 is very rare. It is
however possible. However, when several phenomena have the same 18-digit rate, so the improbability
of random match potentiates (See Table 1). The author must assume therefore: Coincidentally common
expansion rates of the universe, lunar orbit, Earth's core and early galaxies are not real. In other words,
the phenomena mentioned have a common expansion rate and have a common cause. That may
not be tidal friction.

2.2. The cosmological Expansion (c.e.)

A further potential cause of delay in rotation of the earth is the c.e.. A prerequisite is that the earth is
expanding analogous to the universe. For c.e. and constant angular momentum of the Earth, a delay of
the rotation will occur (pirouette effect). First, it should be noted: Some supporters of the
hypothesis of the Earth expansion, see the Earth an expansion rate resp
deceleration rate which matches orders of magnitude with the Hubble
parameter in 18 (!).
Particular mention are L.Egyed [6] and H.G.Owen [7] . The Hubble parameter is according to
measurements by W.L.Freedman et al. [8] ca 72 ± 8 km / s per Mpc. This corresponds to an expansion
rate of the universe 2.33 ± 0.26 * 10 -18 s-1. Meanwhile, there are better values, but which are within the
aforementioned tolerance. For rotation delay or expansion of the Earth here accepted value is higher
slightly (2.93 *10-18 s-1). This amount of delay is generally accepted. This difference is probably caused
by tidal friction and / or by the local gravitational potential. The explanation of the delay in rotation of the
earth by c.e. is possible. However, this requires compliance with the following principles and results:

2.2.1. The Hubble constant is largely constant

In the standard theory, this is also provided. This is given by use as distance measure for not very long
range. Modern measurements for variability of Hubble's Law are not relevant here. These
measurements do not relate to the existence time of the earth. The constancy of the "Hubble constant"
is not secured for extreme values of the distance.

2.2.2. Cosmological expansion speed is no relative speed

According to the Copernican principle, both the observed object and the observer can be regarded as
dormant. The peculiar velocity is negligible. The interpretation of the cosmological
redshift as relative velocity is therefore excluded. By cosmological
expansion, a distant object is not moving matter in the sense of the Special
Relativity Theory (SRT), but the space and its units expand. These two
statements are widely recognized by the standard theory. Analog, the redshift of a white dwarf can not
be used to determine the relative speed. This means for the Hubble parameter: An object in 1 Mpc
distance does not go away with a relative speed of 72 km / s, but: The numerical distance of this
object is to any time exactly 1 Mpc or 3.1 * 10 19 km. Not the numerical distance, but
rather the gravitational dominated spatial and temporal units expand. (See
Fig.1). Each spatial unit expands with ~ 3 * 10 -18 per second. Earth's radius, Moon orbit and all other,
dominated by gravity distances expand this fraction per second. This fraction corresponds to the radius
of the Earth 6371*105 cm * 3*10-18 s-1= 1,91 *10-9 cm / s. Thats about 0.06 cm / a. ( In lunar orbit, there
are 3.8 cm / a.) This is not a relative velocity between Earth's center and surface ! The numerical
distance therefore remains constant. The distance is a constant number expanding light seconds. A
relative velocity was by Wu X et al [9], W B Shen et al [10] and others therefore not found ! This applies
to all distances, which expand with the Hubble parameter.

Fig. 1: The cosmological expansion

The numerical constant distance of an object is equal to 1.
lower scale: present distance at time t1 = World Age)
medium scale: distance at time t1 * 0.9 ( 1.37* 109 years ago )
upper scale: distance at time t1 * 0.2 (10.7* 109 years ago )
2.2.3. The lower limit of the cosmological expansion (c.e.)
A.Einstein and E.G.Strauss [11] postulated a lower limit of the c.e.. This is not accepted here. It is
contradicted, due to controversial theoretical point of view and because of a number of examples of the
violation of the postulated border. The phenomena listed in Table 1 are among the examples
mentioned. A theoretical deficiency is be equated cosmological expansion velocity with the relative
speed of moving matter according SRT. The standard theory forms the lower limit of c.e. by comparison
of two different phenomena. This is not allowed ! Thereby, the c.e. excluded for gravitationally bound
systems. This is not so as a result of the said examples. Gravitational potential and the potential of the
c.e. are equal at this limit. Both phenomena are present and effective. Near the boundary, the height of
the free fall and c.e. are of equal size.Let us assume a body at rest near the border had 1.37 * 10 9
years ago the distance x.The numerical distance dropped by free fall to today 0.9x. The units of the
distance are expanded in this time by c.e. in the same size. The apparent position is therefore
constant. The c.e., however, has no influence on the numerical distance corresponding to 2.2.2. The
situation is somewhat different with orbiting bodies within the boundary. The c.e. occurs alone. A
gravitational center does not produce a real relative velocity of orbiting bodies. The c.e. is not
compensated or reduced by any relative velocity (free fall). However, the c.e. is manifested in
gravitationally bound systems by the consistency of the examples given in Table 1. A real height of fall
does not occur to the center of gravity at orbiting bodies. The c.e. occurs alone. The lunar orbit showing
c.e. = 3.82 ± 0.07 cm / a [12]. By relation (3) we obtain an expansion rate 3.15 ± 0.06*10 -18 s -1.
a = D r * r -1 * t -1 (3)
(a =expansion rate (s -1), D r = expansion value (cm), r=radius of the Earth(cm), t = time (31.56*106s) ).

C.e. occurs also for Stars, which revolve around the Galactic Center. Objects in galaxies which travel
outward as a result of c.e. retain the original numerical radius and numerical orbital velocity. This orbital
velocity is too great for the apparent radius, according to the third Kepler law. The standard theory
assumes dark matter as the cause. The orbit in galaxies is numerically constant here and Kepler's third
law is respected. Dark matter is not necessary here. [13]. As long as no dark matter has been found,
one should assume c.e. in small areas.
The examples (moon, earth, sun and galaxy) refer to areas within the postulated lower limit of the c.e.
The c.e. is fully effective for the Earth. The c.e. is accordingly 2.2.2. no radial velocity in the sense of
SRT! The studies of Wu X et al, WB Shen et al and others consequently showed no radial velocity. But
one obtains a blur (uncertainty) of Earth's radius, called origin drift. One assumes: The number of
measuring points is insufficient. Our assumption is: This uncertainty is result of any change of scale
value of distances (the Earth's radius) within the measurement period. By c.e. grows a distance per
second ~ 3 * 10-18. This is on one year ca 31.56*10 6s * 3*10-18s -1 = 9,47*10-11. At the end of the year
are gravitationally dominated distances despite numerical constance by c.e. to 9,47 * 10 -11 expands.
This value is at radius of the Earth 9,47*10 -11*a-1 * 6371*106 mm = 0.6 mm*a-1. The by Wu et al
published values [9] of this unsharpness is also about 0.6 mm*a -1. This confirms our assumption: The
size of unsharpness and the size of length dimension to expand with the same magnitude. By c.e.
expands the space, not the numerical distance. For the expanding length dimension and temporally
extended measurement (t = 1 yr) one obtains a fuzziness as a result.
In [13], the author shows that the lower limit c.e. is not where the potentials of gravity and expansion
coincide, but there, where electromagnetic potential and the gravitational potential are comparable
sizes. Smaller areas are dominated by crystalline and molecular forces, so electromagnetism. The limit
of cosmological expansion is undershot. There gravity has no effect. Bridges, planetoids, continents
and the structure of the space are not dominated by the gravity, but of electromagnetism.

2.2.4.The angular momentum of the Earth is constant

A Mpc corresponds 3.26 * 10 6 light-years or about 3 * 10 19 km. The Earth's radius is approximately
6 * 103 km and 5 * 10 15 times smaller than 1 Mpc. Assuming the Hubble parameter applies to the Earth,
so the expansion velocity of the Earth's radius 5 * 10 15 times smaller than 72 km / s. After
transformation of the units, these are 0.06 cm / a. The size of the earth expansion is obtained with the
twist theorem according to (4).
 r = r [ (1 +  t / t) 0.5 -1 ] (4)
(Δr = radius difference (cm), r = earth radius (cm), t = period (s), Δt = time difference ET-UT)

Δr = 6371 * 105 [ ( 1+ 0.0016 / 86400 )0,5 -1 ] = 5.9 cm / cy = 0.059 cm / a.

By using the pirouette effect rotation delay corresponds to an expansion of the earth's radius of 5.9 cm
in 100 years. (The value Dt / t = 0.0016 / 86400 is based on the extension of the day in 100 years). By
c.e. of Earth and constant angular momentum we obtain the observed rotation delay. This is the
pirouette effect.

3. Discussion and conclusions

The author draws according to above explanations the following conclusions:
With c.e. it is possible to explain the secular delay of the Earth's rotation in other ways than by tidal
friction.
This does not apply for expansion in the sense of numerical distance enlargement. The lower limit of
the c.e., which is used here, is not the standard theory. All gravitationally dominated
objects expand with the space, not into the space, regardless of their
distance or radius. The units of space and time are expanding. The distances (radii), densities
and rotation times remain numerically constant in this system of measurement. The expansion rate or
delay rates are identical to the Hubble parameter. The universe, distant galaxies, the Milky Way, Earth
orbit, Moon orbit, Earth's radius and inner core of the Earth were smaller than today but numerically
constant [19].
An expansion value of the Earth's radius 5.9 cm / cy is no relative speed between the center of the
earth and surface ! Relative speed and numerical expansion of the Earth are not given. The same
applies to the lunar orbit. The angular momentum of the Earth and for the System Earth - Moon
therefore does not change. The expansion of the lunar orbit is not a result of angular momentum
transfer, but an expression of c.e..
If the Tidal friction delayed the rotation of the Earth, this delay is specific to the Earth. Mars has two very
tiny moons. The effect of tidal friction on the deceleration rate is negligible at Mars. But, if the delay in
rotation of the Earth is caused by c.e., this also applies to Mars. If both planets have the same
deceleration rate, then the cause is the c.e..
By the points 2.2.1. to 2.2.4. be touched cosmological relevant problems. A support by the cosmology is
therefore not to be expected.
The tidal friction is obviously not the cause of the delay in rotation of
the Earth. As the only other explanation, the author sees the cosmological
expansion and the pirouette effect.

Table 1
1 2 3 4 5
Row Example Rate Possible other causes References *
1 Expansion-rate of the universe 2.33 ± 0.26 * 10 -18s -1 ? [8]
2 Expansion of early galaxies 2.37* 10 -18s -1 ? [3]
3 Distribution of rotational delay of pulsars 2.7 ± 0.4 * 10 -18s -1 ? [4]
4 Pioneer anomaly 2.91± 0.44* 10 -18s -1 Thermal radiation pressure [5]
5 5-dimensional field theory 3.6 * 10 -18s -1 Scale effect [14]
6 Expansion of the Moon orbit 3.15± 0.06 * 10 -18s -1 Tidal friction [12]
7 Delay of the Earth's rotation 2.93 * 10 -18s -1 Tidal friction [1]
8 Polar diameter of Earth 2.5± 0,95 * 10 -18s -1 Post glacial uplift [15]
9 Origin drift CM ITRF 2008+GRACE+OMCT 2.5 ± 1.0 * 10 -18s -1 Network sparseness [9],[10]
10 Surface relation oceans / continents 3.0 * 10 -18s -1 ? [13],[16]
11 Expansion of the inner Earth's core 3.0 * 10 -18s -1 Growth by phase-conversion [17],[18]
*The values contained in column 3 were calculated by the author. Calculation bases are informations out of column 5.
4. Acknowledgements I thank Prof. Dr. Wei Chen and the organizers of the GAGER 2016 symposium for the
possibility of publication.

5. References
[1] Bär N.A. [Online] „Die Akzeleration“,(Dated:Apr 11,2013) http://www.nabkal.de/akzel.html (accessed Feb 12,2014)
[2] Huber, P. J., „Modeling the Length of Day and Extrapolating the Rotation of the Earth", Astronomical Amusements,
Edited by F. Bonoli, S. De Meis, & A. Panaino, Rome, (2000)
[3] P.v Dokkum, M.Franx, M.Kriek M, B.Holden, G.Illingworth, D.Magee, R.Bouwens, D.Marchesini, R.Quadri,G.Rudnick,
E.Taylor and S.Toft. (2008),„Confirmation of the remarkable compactness of massive quiescent galaxies at z~2.3“.
Astrophysical Journal, 677: L5-L8 (2008).
[4] Müller V. [Online], http://zeitexpansion.de/#p (accessed May 5, 2016)
[5] J.D.Anderson, P.A.Laing, E.L.Lau, A.S.Liu, M.M.Nieto, S.G.Turyshev. [Online],„Study of the anomalous acceleration
of Pioneer 10 and 11“. (Dated:11 April 2002) http://www.arXiv.org/PS_cache/grqc/pdf/0104/0104064v5.pdf (accessed
Feb 12, 2014)
[6] Egyed, L., 1969. Physik der festen Erde. (German translation of: A Föld Fizikája). Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.
[7] Owen H.G., „The Earth is expanding and we don't know why“, New Scientist. 22, (1983), p27-29.
[8] W.L. Freedman, B.F.Madore,B.Gibson, L.Ferrarese, D.D.Kelson, S.Sakai,J.R.Mould, R.C.Jr.Kennicutt, H.C.
Ford,J.Graham , J.Huchra, S.Hughes, G.D.Illingworth, L.Macri, P.B.Stetson.„Final Results from the Hubble Space
Telescope Key Project to Measure the Hubble Constant“. Astrophysical Journal. Band 553 (2001)p. 47
[9] Wu, X.; X.Collilieux, Z. Altamimi, B.L.A.Vermeersen, R.S.Gross, I.Fukumori,“Accuracy of the International Terrestrial
Reference Frame origin and Earth expansion“,Geophysical Research Letters,v 38,(2011)L13304.
[10] Shen W.B., Z.Shen, R.Sun, Y. Barkin [Online],”Evidences of the expanding Earth from space-geodetic data over
solid land and sea level rise in recent two decades “ (Dated: July 2015)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674984715000518 (accessed May 30.2016)
[11] Einstein A. and Straus E.G., „The Influence of the Expansion of Space on the Gravitation Fields Surrounding the
Individual Stars“, Rev. Mod. Phys. 17(1945), 120-124
[12] Dickey J.O. et al.,„Lunar laser ranging:A continuing legacy of the Apollo program“. Science,265, (1994) pp 482
[13] Müller V. „Earth expansion is cosmological expansion“ in Proceedings of the NPA: Volume 11: 21st Annual NPA
Conference – 2014
[14] E.Schmutzer, „ Approximate global treatment of the expansion of the cosmic objects induced by the cosmological
expansion”, Astron. Nachr., 321, p. 227 -233.(2000)
[15] H.Ruder,M.Schneider, M.Soffel,„Geodäsie und Physik“Physikalische Blätter Nr 46(1990)No.2,S.41-46
[16] V.Müller, „Does cosmological expansion exist in smaller scale?“ NCGT Newsletter No. 50 (2009)
[17] Runcorn S.K., "Towards a theory of continental drift." Nature, 193, 311–314 ( 1962). "Convection currents in the
Earth’s mantle." Nature, 195, 1248–1249 (1962).
[18] Denis C., K.R.Rybicki and P.Varga,"Secular changes of LOD associated with a growth of the inner core",
Astron.Nachr. 327, No.4, p 309-313 (2006)
[19] Müller V.,"The Cosmological Expansion of Small Regions and of the Earth"in : G.Scalera: Selected Contributions to
the Interdisciplinary Workshop THE EARTH EXPANSION EVIDENCE , Aracne editrice S.r.l. Roma (2012) pp 227-232
[20] Wells, J. W., Coral growth and geochronometry. Nature, 197, No. 4871. London 1963