Odd cycles in Length-of-Day (LOD) variations

Two papers on the analysis of >1 year periods in the LOD time series measured since 1962.

The consistency of interdecadal changes in the Earth’s rotation variations

On the ~ 7 year periodic signal in length of day from a frequency domain stepwise regression method

These cycles may be related to aliased tidal periods with the annual cycle, as in modeling ENSO.


A paper describing new satellite measurements for precision LOD measurements.

BeiDou satellite radiation force models for precise orbit
determination and geodetic applications
” from TechRxiv

Note the detail on the 13.6 day fortnightly tidal period

3 thoughts on “Odd cycles in Length-of-Day (LOD) variations

  1. “Paul, turns out, when you make an inaccurate claim on peakoilbarrel, I can’t even respond to it. Convenient for groupthink, but hardly condusive to a conversation. So here is the quote from you:
    “Overall Rulz is upset that we are digging through the available data and taking responsibility by putting our names to our analyses, while he is not.”

    And here is my response.

    Says who? 🙂”

    Who is this idiot?

    sincerely,
    Paul Pukite

    Liked by 1 person

  2. You made a statement about me, quoted above. While you do use your name on an obscure peak oil blog formed from the remnants of another failed peak oil blog, and I do not, whatever in the world makes you think my name isn’t on every publication, analysis, estimate, forecast, projection or estimate I’ve ever made?

    Moderator: Does anybody know who this dude is? Peak oil theory has to be one of the most successful geophysical models in recent years. The transition of USA conventional crude oil to unconventional fracked crude oil is essentially validation of the idea. So that the only way that the peak oil rise-and-decline curve could be FALSIFIED is if the conventional crude oil production went through some sort of miraculous recovery and reached a peak greater than it did before. How could this possibly happen when all the peak oil model assumes is that crude oil is a finite and non-renewable resource that occupies a finite volume that has been explored to its limits.

    I will happily hold the title of the idiot that knew the Shock Model couldn’t predict peak oil back in 2008 any better than it can today. And told you so back then. Better luck next clock cycle?

    Moderator: The shock model did work because it explains well the flow of oil from a finite and non-renewable volume of exploration. How can it not “work”? Perhaps if the oil was abiotic and appeared magically out of nothing?

    Liked by 1 person

    • “How can it not “work”?”

      By comparing it to reality, obviously.

      WebHubbleTelescope on June 11, 2011

      Better luck next clock cycle?

      Moderator’s note: It did work given the uncertainty of the provided input data. Apparently he must believe that oil is regenerated beneath the earth’s crust via an abiotic mechanism, as that is the only way that the model would fail

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s