Shortest day in history set for TOMORROW as Earth's rotation mysteriously gets even faster
That's because Earth's rotation has continued to pick up speed, and is expected to spin even faster than it did on July 9, when everyone on the plant experienced a day that was 1.3 milliseconds shorter than normal.
New data has revealed that the Earth appeared to have spun even faster a day later on July 10, making the day 1.36 milliseconds shorter than usual.
A millisecond equals one thousandth of a second, which is so impossibly difficult to measure that takes an atomic clock to track the numbers, measuring what's called 'Length of Day,' or LOD.
LOD marks the time it takes Earth to rotate once, down to the millisecond. Normally, that process takes exactly 86,400 seconds, or 24 hours, to complete.
However, Earth's rotation has been speeding up in recent years. While the cause is still a mystery, new research from NASA has suggested it may be connected to the moon's gravitational pull.
The major uptick in speed this summer has led to the possibility that scientists will have to add a negative leap second to the calendar by 2029, meaning one second will be taken away from our clocks to keep them in sync.
While the tiny change may seem insignificant, researchers have found that the shorter day can affect everything from satellite systems and GPS accuracy to how we measure time itself.
Earth's rotation is affected by a number of different factors, both on the planet and out in space.
Some of the potential reasons include changes in the atmosphere, the melting of glaciers worldwide shifting water volume, a change in motion inside the Earth's metal core, and a weakening magnetic field.
NASA researchers have also suggested that this year's acceleration is actually a result of Earth hitting the moon's 'orbital sweet spot,' causing the planet to receive a tiny speed boost.
Before this recent acceleration in Earth's spin, the planet was actually slowing down, due to the moon's gravitational pull, which has been stretching our days into the 24-hour cycle we now live by in modern times.
Geoscientist Stephen Meyers, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, found that as the moon moves further away, its changing gravitational impact on Earth would slowly make days incrementally longer.
However, scientists recently observed variations in the planet's rotation, causing the planet to speed up in 2020, 2022, and 2024.
On July 9 and now again on July 22, the moon will be at its furthest point from Earth's equator, which alters its gravitational pull on our planet's axis.
In simpler terms, the moon has been spinning the Earth like a top, holding on to the planet at the midpoint, which is usually closer to the moon than the north or south poles.
On July 22, and again on August 5, the moon's gravity will exert more of a pull on the Earth's poles, essentially spinning our planet at its top, which naturally makes it rotate faster.
The fastest day recorded so far was just over one year ago on July 5, 2024, when Earth spun 1.66 milliseconds faster than the standard 24 hours.
Although scientists have been recording Earth's rotation since the 1970s, they only started noticing record-breaking changes on a regular basis in 2020.
That year, July 19 came in 1.47 milliseconds short. On July 9, 2021, there was another 1.47 millisecond drop.
In 2022, Earth recorded its shortest day on June 30, shaving off 1.59 milliseconds from the usual 24 hours.
In 2023, the planet's rotation slowed again, and no new records were set. In 2024, however, the speed picked up. Several days broke the previous records, making it the year with the most consistently shorter days on record.
These estimates are based on past observations and computer models, and include systematic corrections and smoothing to account for natural fluctuations.
Right now, the world has kept time using Coordinated Universal Time, or UTC. Sometimes we've added a leap second to stay in sync with Earth's slow shifts.
Due to these ongoing spikes in our rotation, however, the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service (IERS) has already announced that no leap second will be added in 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
Hundreds set to graduate from University of Wolverhampton
The University of Wolverhampton is gearing up to celebrate its class of 2025, with more than 2,600 students being recognised for their university's eight graduation ceremonies take place at the University of Wolverhampton at The Halls from Monday until Thursday. The students will join a community of more than 155,000 graduates in 130 countries across the world, becoming part of the university's global alumni individuals have also been nominated for an honorary award for exceptional contributions to their fields. This year's list includes astronaut Jannicke Mikkelsen, a graduate from the university, who has been awarded an Honorary Doctor of Mikkelsen made history earlier this year by launching into space aboard the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon capsule from NASA's Kennedy Space served as the vehicle commander for the four-crew mission, which was a first-of-its-kind astronaut flight over Earth's poles. The space explorer has also worked in virtual reality filmmaking and extreme expedition a severe childhood accident that left her temporarily quadriplegic, she channelled her passion for technology and exploration into a thriving career in film and cinematography. Ms Mikkelsen directed the first live-concert film in virtual reality for Queen and produced documentaries with Sir David Attenborough. She also contributed to NASA projects, including a VR exhibit commemorating the Apollo 11 50th anniversary, and led a Guinness record-breaking circumnavigation of the Earth in under 48 gained a BA Hons Video and Film Production at the University of Wolverhampton. Another honorary award will go to Jai Herbert, a Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) fighter born in fighter, known as The Black Country Banger, will be awarded an Honorary Fellowship. Professor Ebrahim Adia, vice chancellor at the university, said: "We are an ambitious university that is proudly rooted in our communities. "We offer opportunity to all, regardless of background and that spirit of social mobility and aspiration to equip people with the skills they need to succeed in life and work runs through the heart of what we do." Follow BBC Wolverhampton & Black Country on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
The Guardian
6 hours ago
- The Guardian
Science could enable a fascist future. Especially if we don't learn from the past
Science is in crisis. Funding infrastructures for both basic and applied research are being systematically decimated, while in places of great power, science's influence on decision making is waning. Long-term and far-reaching studies are being shuttered, and thousands of scientists' livelihoods are uncertain, to say nothing of the incalculable casualties resulting from the abrupt removal of life-saving medical and environmental interventions. Understandably, the scientific community is working hard to weather this storm and restore funding to whatever extent possible. In times like these, it may be tempting to settle for the status quo of six months ago, wanting everything simply to go back to what it was (no doubt an improvement for science, compared to the present). But equally, such moments of crisis offer an opportunity to rebuild differently. As Arundhati Roy wrote about Covid-19 in April 2020, 'Historically, pandemics have forced humans to break with the past and imagine their world anew. This one is no different. It is a portal, a gateway between one world and the next.' What could science look like, and what good could science bring, if we moved through the portal of the present moment into a different world? At worst, science will play its part in accelerating us toward a tech-obsessed end-times-fascist future. At best, science will broaden its power as a positive force, serving the wellbeing of humans and nature alike. Imagining this latter vision in exquisite detail is essential, and we argue here that to first envision and then work towards the best version of science, we need to reckon honestly with science's past and present. Most crucially, we need to confront the commonplace claim that science is – or ought to be – objective and apolitical, uninfluenced by human culture, norms, or values. The current moment has rudely awakened many scientists to the fact that research is indeed political, and further makes clear that scientists' attempts to distance themselves from politics will backfire. Denying the inherent entanglements of science and politics leaves scientists lacking the capacity and tools to mount effective defenses against bad-faith political attacks. This denial also allows science to go unquestioned when it undermines the needs and rights of marginalized beings and places. As much as scientists might wish for science to be cleanly separable from politics, decades of research demonstrates that this has never been true, and never could be. The field of science studies examines the inherently human processes of science – who defines what science is, who gets to conduct scientific research, who pays for it, who benefits from it, who is harmed by it – and how these human dynamics shape scientific knowledge. Feminist science studies in particular documents how power and oppression shape scientific findings and applications, demonstrating that even 'science at its most basic' is in fact inextricable from politics. Some of the most compelling, and consequential, examples of such entanglement can be found in human and animal biology. Consider an analysis of 19th-century science on human race and sex from Sally Markowitz, which clearly reveals the influence of white supremacism on basic biology. Markowitz shows how 19th-century scientists not only asserted that human races are biological categories, but also that the so-called white race is evolutionarily superior. To 'prove' this politically-motivated claim, these scientists first decided that the degree of distinction between men's and women's bodies (or 'sexual dimorphism') was proof of evolutionary superiority, and then claimed, on the basis of selective measurements, that sexual dimorphism is supposedly greater in Europeans than in Africans. Women of African descent were thus mismeasured as both less female and less human than their white counterparts – rendering all people of African descent more 'animal-like'. This 19th-century research has had far-reaching consequences, from justifying enslavement, to supporting eugenic sterilization practices well into the 20th century, to contemporary controversy around the 'femaleness' of elite Black and brown female athletes, among other examples. It may be tempting to relegate such blatant instances to the past, and claim that scientists have since corrected such mistakes. But in fact these ghosts continue to haunt us. In our new book, Feminism in the Wild, we – an evolutionary biologist and a science studies scholar – dive deep into how contemporary scientists describe and understand animal behavior, and find the dominant political perspectives of the last 200 years reflected back to us. Scientific research on mating behavior in species ranging from fruit flies to primates is entangled with patriarchal expectations of masculinity and femininity. Scientists' understanding of animals' foraging behavior mirrors a capitalist theory of economics, based upon assumptions of scarcity and optimization, and expectations of individualism are pervasive throughout scientific research on how animals behave in groups. Contemporary researchers express surprise, for instance, at elephants who alter their eating habits to accommodate a fellow herd member disabled by poachers, at ravens who alert one another to the presence of food in the dead of winter, or at female dolphins who begin lactating without having given birth in order to nurse calves whose mothers have died. Dominant evolutionary theories do not explain such instances of care on their own terms, but instead insist that these behaviors must ultimately be self-interested. Not coincidentally, these theories rooted in individualism only rose to dominance in the last 50 years or so, alongside the rise of neoliberalism. Meanwhile, eugenic perspectives, rooted in racism, classism, and ableism, constrain how scientists understand sex, intelligence, performance and more, in humans and animals alike. For example, today's scientists are still somewhat shocked by lizards who successfully navigate tree trunks and branches with missing limbs, as these agile lizards undermine the presumed correlation between an animal's appearance, performance, and survival that's captured in the phrase 'survival of the fittest'. Other scientists continue to argue that peahens (for instance) choose to mate with the most beautiful peacock, despite his expansive tail's costly impediments, because beauty is a 'favorable' trait even if it doesn't promote survival. Such arguments about female mate choice are rooted in a theory developed decades ago by mathematician and evolutionary biologist Ronald A Fisher, a vocal advocate of 'positive eugenics', which means encouraging only people with 'favorable' traits to reproduce. Leonard Darwin (son of Charles Darwin), in his 1923 presidential address to the Eugenics Education Society, made this connection between Fisher's theories and eugenics explicit, stating: 'Wonderful results have been produced…by the action of sexual selection in all kinds of organisms…and if this be so, ought we not to enquire whether this same agency cannot be utilized in our efforts to improve the human race?' Leonard Darwin then went on to deliver an astoundingly modern-sounding description of sexual selection before considering its implications for effective eugenics propaganda. We offer these examples (and many more, in our book), to show that scientific research on the evolution of animal behavior remains thoroughly and undeniably political. But the moral of our story is not that scientists must root out all politics and strive for pure neutrality. Rather, feminist science studies illustrates how science has always been shaped by politics, and always will be. It is therefore incumbent upon scientists to confront this reality rather than deny it. Thankfully, for as long as science has been aligned with systems of oppression, there have been scientists and other scholars resisting this alignment, both explicitly and implicitly. In Feminism in the Wild, we detail the work of scientists developing new mathematical models about female mating behavior that discard old assumptions aligned with patriarchy and eugenics, instead demonstrating that it's possible and even likely that female animals are not necessarily concerned with mating with the 'best' males and that mate choice can be a more flexible and variable affair. We discuss a rich history of theories about animals' behavior in groups that take both individual and collective well-being seriously. And we explore alternatives rooted in queer, Indigenous, and Marxist standpoints, which counter the dominant view that animal behavior is all about maximizing survival and reproduction. Ultimately, we show that it is possible—and even desirable—to fold political analysis into scientific inquiry in a way that makes science more multifaceted and more honest, bringing us closer to the truth than a science which denies its politics ever could. In this historical moment scientists must embrace, rather than avoid, the political underpinnings and implications of scientific inquiry. As Science's editor-in-chief Holden Thorp put it in 2020, 'science thrives when its advocates are shrewd politicians but suffers when its opponents are better at politics.' We agree, and further insist: scientists must reckon honestly and explicitly with the ways in which the knowledge they produce, and the processes by which they produce it, are already and unavoidably political. In doing so, scientists may lose the shallow authority they have harbored by pretending to be above the political fray. They will instead have to grapple with their own political perspectives constantly, as part of the scientific process—a rougher road, no doubt, but one that will lead us to a stronger science, both more empirically rigorous and more politically resilient. Imagine if scientists seized this moment to remake science even while fighting for it. As MacArthur Genius and feminist science studies scholar Ruha Benjamin recently stated: imagination is '[not] an ephemeral afterthought that we have the luxury to dismiss or romanticize, but a resource, a battleground.' And, she continues: 'most people are forced to live inside someone else's imagination.' United in the goal of building a stronger science, we call upon scientists to put our imaginations to work differently, in ways that move us through this nightmare portal into a dreamier world, where justice is not cropped out of scientific endeavors but rather centered and celebrated. Ambika Kamath is trained as a behavioral ecologist and evolutionary biologist. She lives, works, and grows community in Oakland, California, on Ohlone land Melina Packer is Assistant Professor of Race, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at the University of Wisconsin, La Crosse, on Ho-Chunk Nation land. She is the author of Toxic Sexual Politics: Economic Poisons and Endocrine Disruptions
Scottish Sun
a day ago
- Scottish Sun
Stunning space snap hides rare ‘one-in-a-thousand' secret – and it may be the first time it has ever been seen by humans
The phenomenon could help prove a popular theory IN THE STARS Stunning space snap hides rare 'one-in-a-thousand' secret – and it may be the first time it has ever been seen by humans Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) A STUNNING photo has captured a rare secret among the stars - and it could be the first time the phenomenon has ever been seen. Astronomers believe they have photographed the first ever birth of a supermassive black hole. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up While experts have gained an understanding of what these supersized giants are, they previously didn't know how they were created. A supermassive black hole weighs millions, to tens of billions, of Suns, and form the centre of almost every galaxy. It forms the gravitational centre for everything else - including stars and planets - to revolve around. However, scientists now believe they have seen a supermassive black hole being formed for the first time ever. 1 Three supermassive black holes can be seen in a newfound discovery Credit: NASA This could provide valuable insight into the space wonder. The process was captured in a pair of galaxies whose light has travelled for 8.3 million years according to Science Alert. The discovery was made by a Yale-led astronomy team, in a galaxy they've called "Infinity". Its name comes from its figure-eight shape, as three supermassive black holes can be seen as the galaxies collide. Within each galaxy a supermassive black hole can be seen at its nucleus, with a third glowing at their overlap. The team used a James Webb Space Telescope to observe the two recently-collided galaxies. CLOSE CALL 'It was a sign' - Clare girl, 10, spots surprise comet that 'shines brighter than Venus' Within the cloud of gas at its centre, they identified a supermassive black hole. Unusually, the black hole was not located at the nucleus of the vast galaxy, but rather in the middle of where they were colliding. This gave them an indication that they might be witnessing an unprecedented event. Yale astonomer Pieter van Dokkum said: "We think we're witnessing the birth of a supermassive black hole - something that has never been seen before." There are currently a number of theories regarding the formation of black holes. This includes the "light seeds" theory, in which small black holes are believed to have been formed when stars' cores collapsed and exploded. These smaller black holes are believed to have then merged into the supermassive versions. However, this theory has been somewhat debunked by research that found supermassive black holes that were born too early for this long-term merging to have taken place. Instead, the "heavy seeds" theory has been favoured by some astronomers. This argues that larger black holes can form when large clouds of gas collapse, although typically this is known to form stars. The Infinity galaxy could support the "heavy seeds" theory by showing how, in extreme conditions, a gas collapse could create a black hole. The team is pursuing ongoing research to confirm the findings.
