Time keeps on slipping - literally. Why today might have been the shortest day you ever experience
While the change won't be noticeable, Wednesday might technically be the shortest day you'll ever experience. That's because Earth completed its rotation approximately 1.3 to 1.6 milliseconds faster than the average 86,400 seconds.
"In other words, we're not traveling back toward the Mesozoic in terms of rotation," Popular Mechanics reports. "The planet will eventually continue its steady deceleration — this is, of course, its natural tendency, but surface changes like polar ice melt can also contribute to the Earth's rotation slowing down."
This phenomenon is invisible to daily life but of significant importance to high-precision timekeeping systems such as atomic clocks, GPS, and satellite networks.
Scientists at the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service attribute the acceleration to a subtle shift in the Moon 's orbital alignment, which, orbiting farther from Earth's equator this summer, has reduced the 'tidal braking' effect that normally slows our planet's spin.
Others, such as Moscow State University astronomer Leonid Zotov, said the cause of this acceleration is unexplained.
"Most scientists believe it is something inside the Earth," he told Timeanddate.com. "Ocean and atmospheric models don't explain this huge acceleration."
This spike in rotational speed marks the sixth occurrence of unusually fast days since 2020, with similar events expected to occur on July 22 and August 5.
In response to the slight change, the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service is now considering implementing a negative leap second, a rare adjustment that subtracts time from Coordinated Universal Time to resynchronize clocks with Earth's rotation.
Such a correction has never been made before, but the growing trend may require one around 2029.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
2 days ago
- BBC News
The handshake in orbit that made the International Space Station possible
In 1975, a meet-up between American and Soviet spacefarers in orbit showed that the superpowers could work together. Its positive effects eventually led to the International Space Station (ISS). At just 33, Glynn Lunney was one of Nasa's most experienced flight directors. By 1970, he had been at the heart of the action for everything from the Apollo capsule's first orbit to Neil Armstrong's first footsteps on the Moon. Months after helping to lead efforts to save the crew of Apollo 13 when their spacecraft exploded, Lunney was preparing for his next lunar mission. Then he got a phone call from his boss, head of mission control, Chris Kraft. "He said 'Glynn, start getting ready to go to Moscow, you're going to be there in a couple of weeks'," said Lunney. "It was an out-of-the-blue complete surprise, a stunner to me." Having devoted his career to winning the space race against the Soviet Union, Lunney was now expected to lead a team to work alongside his Cold War opponents on a joint mission: the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project. The aim was to dock a US Apollo capsule and Soviet Soyuz spacecraft in orbit. Realising that plan would take Lunney the next five years. Lunney died in 2021, but I was fortunate enough to interview him in 2012 for a BBC radio programme on the Moon landings. We met in Houston's famous Apollo Mission Control Room. The retired flight director sat beside me in his old chair – looking down over dark consoles and the blank main display screens. At the time (it has since been restored), the room felt neglected, the missions a distant memory. Our conversation was meant to be about the challenge of landing on the Moon, questions he had answered numerous times before. But once Lunney got talking about Apollo-Soyuz, it was clear that this rarely discussed mission was a career highlight. "I viewed myself as having gone from a Cold War warrior, in terms of getting our programme to the Moon first, to one who was sent to try to see what we could do to cooperate [in space]," he said. "I was just 33 years old when I went to Moscow for the first time, representing the United States and I was thinking, 'Wow!'" The Soviet Union and United States had been competing in space since the launch of Sputnik-1 in 1957. But the idea of the world's two superpowers working together did not come completely out of the blue. "There were efforts for many years to find collaborative programmes between the United States and the Soviet Union in space," says Teasel Muir-Harmony, curator for Apollo and Apollo-Soyuz exhibitions at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC. "There was an agreement [about exchanging meteorological data] signed between the US and the Soviet Union in October of 1962, and if you know about October of 1962, it was also the Cuban Missile Crisis when we came closer to nuclear war than ever before in history," says Muir-Harmony. "The space race was always this combination of cooperation and competition." By the 1970s, the Nixon White House was keen to reduce international tensions with the Soviet Union led by Leonid Brezhnev (the administration also opened-up dialogue with communist China) so Apollo-Soyuz was important diplomatically. But the endeavour had a very practical purpose – if spacecraft from different nations could dock with each other, they might be used to save stranded astronauts. "The question was, how do you rescue each other's crews in space?" says Kenneth Phillips, curator for aerospace science at the California Science Center. "It was a noble idea that space exploration and collaboration bind us together." When it came to astronauts assigned to the mission, the symbolism of the selection was also significant. The three-man US crew would include Deke Slayton, one of the original Mercury 7 astronauts. Grounded since 1962 because of a suspected heart condition, Slayton had finally been cleared to fly after watching from the sidelines as the other astronauts pioneered spaceflight and flew to the Moon. The two-man Soviet crew, meanwhile, would be led by Alexei Leonov, the first man to walk in space. If Russia's giant N1 Moon rocket had been successful, Leonov was slated to become the first man to walk on the Moon. The technical challenge of joining the two spacecraft was considerable. In appearance the spherical Soyuz and conical Apollo spacecraft are very different. Soyuz was only ever designed to operate in low Earth orbit, whereas the Apollo capsule was originally built to fly to the Moon (this particular capsule would have been Apollo 18). Soyuz was mostly operated from the ground, whereas the Apollo astronauts were able to pilot their craft using a state-of-the-art digital computer. Even the air mixture each country's crews breathed in orbit was different. But perhaps the greater challenge was overcoming the cultural divide and the suspicions that had built up since World War Two between the two Cold War enemies. As the US team headed to Moscow, they were not sure what to expect. "We soon found out that the people that we were working with were not ogres, they were human beings," command module pilot for the mission, Vance Brand, told my podcast during an interview in 2019. "I had a lot of Russian people that I liked, though the KGB was very active and monitored the cosmonauts closely." In fact, the rooms the US delegation were staying in at Moscow's Star City were all bugged – Brand's young son even walked in on a KGB listening room – but soon both sides found they were making friends. "Ultimately many of the people who worked on the programme were surprised by the interest, willingness to compromise and the professionalism of their colleagues," says Muir-Harmony. "The relationship between Alexei Leonov and [Apollo commander] Tom Stafford is a great example – they became really close friends and maintained that friendship throughout their lives." "Pilots have a lot in common no matter whether they've flown Sabre jets or MiGs," said Brand. "Engineers in the same field can also relate very easily… what we did not talk about was politics and religion." While the US delegation struggled with learning Russian and getting to grips with drab 1970s-era Moscow, the Soviets cosmonauts had their own culture shock when they visited the States. "When Alexei Leonov came to the United States, he looked at the highway and saw all these cars with different colours and he wanted to know why the cars come in all different colours," says Muir-Harmony. On 15 July 1975, the Soyuz with Leonov and flight engineer Valery Kubasov launched from Baikonur in what is now Kazakhstan, followed seven hours later by Stafford, Brand and Slayton in their Apollo from Cape Canaveral. The Apollo carried the specially designed docking adapter that would link the two spacecraft. After orbiting the Earth for two days, on 17 July the spacecraft approached each other. "I first saw them about 400 nautical miles (740km) out," Brand explained. "I aimed the telescope and saw a bright dot in the sky and finally we got very close to them – we could see the solar panels on their spacecraft which looked like wings and so gave it an almost bug-like appearance." It was a perfect docking. "Then the Americans knocked on the hatch," says Muir-Harmony, "and the Soviets opened it, and they said, 'Who's there?'…which I think is a great joke." Handshakes and an exchange of gifts followed before US President Ford addressed the crew (Nixon had resigned in August 1974 after the Watergate scandal), expressing his "very great admiration for your hard work your total dedication in preparing for this first joint flight". After two days together, the spacecraft undocked to return to their homelands. But that wasn't the end of the story. "Apollo-Soyuz represented a big breakthrough in US-Soviet collaboration," says Svetla Ben-Itzhak, assistant professor of international relations and space security at Johns Hopkins University in Washington DC. "It set the precedent for peaceful cooperation in orbit – this is the moment where space diplomacy really started." The idea of space diplomacy is that space exploration unites nations with a – mutually beneficial – common goal and that collaboration can then extend back to Earth. "Science and engineering objectives can bring people together who did not think they necessarily could collaborate productively," says Phillips. "The notion of exploration is something that we can all understand." Apollo-Soyuz led to further cooperation between the superpowers and, with the fall of the Soviet Union, that relationship became closer still. In the 1990s, Space Shuttle missions flew to the Russian space station Mir – with crews from both countries living and working together for months on end. It was followed by the International Space Station (ISS), a collaborative effort between 14 countries with the US and Russia at its heart. Even since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Russians, Americans and Western allies continue to work together in orbit on the ISS. "It is absolutely amazing that this cooperation in space aboard the International Space Station continues, even when tensions on the ground have intensified and sanctions imposed against Russia, including in the space sector," says Ben-Itzhak. "Yet 450km (280 miles) above the Earth, we are still collaborating and working together." To some extent Russia and the US have no choice but to work together. The ISS is designed so the various national segments are interdependent. If one partner pulls the plug, then the station will fail. The ISS partners are essentially trapped in a toxic marriage, although on the station itself all the astronauts reportedly get along fine. Ben-Itzhak studies what she has termed "space blocs" – the emerging groupings of space nations. Right now, as countries plan a return to the Moon, it looks like the US and Russians will soon go their separate ways. Russia will likely side with China, and Western nations – including Europe and Canada – will coalesce around the US. But there are also other blocs emerging, including Arab, African and Asian nations (India, for example, is fast becoming a significant space power). So, could the lessons learnt from the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project one day apply to the Moon? Both sides of this new space race are eyeing-up establishing bases at the lunar South Pole, even at the same crater. So, can Ben-Itzhak imagine handshakes and knock-knock jokes on the lunar surface? "Right now, I'm sorry to say it is very unlikely," she says. "It's actually worse than that… the Artemis Accords is an international agreement establishing norms of behaviour on the lunar surface, including peaceful exploration, transparency, emergency assistance and preserving the common heritage including the footprints left by the astronauts." "It's been accepted by 55 countries but not by China or Russia." More like this:• What happens when astronauts get stuck in space• Voyager: Inside the world's greatest space mission• Would you stay in a space hotel? As for Apollo-Soyuz, when I have mentioned to people that I'm writing this article, few – even in the space business – seem to have heard of it. The two sides of the mission are once again a world apart – both politically and literally. The Soyuz spacecraft is in the private Energia museum near Moscow and the Apollo capsule is now looked after by Phillips at the California Science Center in Los Angeles. He is, however, optimistic for the cooperative future of space exploration. "There is an international community that is waiting to collaborate in space," Phillips says. "If government structures permit that, then I think we can do some really incredible work together." As for Lunney, he went on to head up the Space Shuttle programme – America's next great space adventure. But, 50 years on, his leadership of Apollo-Soyuz deserves to be remembered for changing forever the way rival nations can learn to live and work together in space. -- For more science, technology, environment and health stories from the BBC, follow us on Facebook, X and Instagram.
Daily Mail
11-07-2025
- Daily Mail
What would happen if the Earth continues to spin faster? Stronger hurricanes, disastrous earthquakes and catastrophic flooding, expert says
Scientists have warned that this summer could include some of the shortest days of your entire life. On July 22 and August 5, experts predict the day will be 1.38 and 1.51 milliseconds shorter than average, respectively. This is because the planet's rotation has entered an unexpected period of acceleration, shaving a millisecond or so off the length of a solar day. But what would happen if the world just kept getting faster? Given that a blink takes 100 milliseconds, you are unlikely to notice any big changes for a long time. However, scientists say that unchecked acceleration would eventually lead to disastrous consequences. If Earth were spinning just 100 miles per hour faster than it does now, the world would be hit by stronger hurricanes, catastrophic flooding, and the collapse of satellite networks. And, if the world were to double its speed, it would likely be the end of life as we know it. One mile per hour faster On average, it takes the planet 24 hours, or 86,400 seconds, to complete one full rotation, which is called a solar day. Small fluctuations like the location of the moon or volcanic eruptions can shift this around a millisecond in either direction, but the rotation is generally fairly stable. Because the Earth is a sphere, its circumference is smaller near the poles than at the equator, so the planet's surface moves faster the further you get from the poles. Someone standing at the equator is rotating in space at around 1,037 mph (1,668 kmph) while somebody in London is only moving at about 646 mph (1,041 kmph). Compared to these speeds, an increase of just one mile per hour might not seem like a big difference. The days would be about a minute and a half shorter overall, which our body clocks probably wouldn't notice right away. Witold Fraczek, an analyst at ESRI, a mapping software firm, told Popular Science: 'It might take a few years to notice it.' However, an unexpected effect is that satellites in orbit would soon be knocked out of sync. Some satellites are 'geosynchronous', meaning they move at the same speed as Earth's rotation to stay over the same location. If the Earth speeds up, those satellites will lose their position and navigation, communication, and weather monitoring services would start to fail. However, some satellites carry fuel to adjust their orbit, and others could be replaced, so the results should not be disastrous. Mr Fraczek says: 'These could disturb the life and comfort of some people, but should not be catastrophic to anybody. The bigger impact is that water would start to move from the poles to the equator due to the increased centrifugal forces. Even at just one mile per hour, this would cause sea levels to rise by a few inches around the equator. For cities already at or very near sea level, this could lead to devastating flooding. 100 miles per hour faster If the Earth kept accelerating until it was moving 100 miles per hour faster at the equator, this would start to trigger seriously dangerous consequences. Rather than rising by a few inches, these speeds would start to drown the equator as water rushed down from the poles. Mr Fraczek says: 'I think the Amazon Basin, Northern Australia, and not to mention the islands in the equatorial region, they would all go under water. 'How deep underwater, I'm not sure, but I'd estimate about 30 to 65 feet.' For anyone who survived the flooding, the world would start to become a much more hostile place. The solar day would now only last 22 hours, knocking our circadian rhythms out of their natural balance. The effect would be like setting your body clock back two hours every day without being given a chance to adjust. Could the world keep getting faster? It is extremely unlikely that the world will start to spin faster. In fact, the world is actually slowing down over time. About 4.4 billion years ago, the planet was spinning so fast that days lasted four minutes. But this slowed down after a large object hit Earth and created the moon. The only way Earth could speed up is if a large object hits at just the right angle. But this would likely liquify the planet's crust, so no humans would survive to see the results. Studies have shown that changes like daylight saving lead to increased rates of heart attacks, strokes, and driving accidents - this would be even more severe. Additionally, Earth's weather would start to become more extreme. NASA astronomer Dr Sten Odenwald says: 'Temperature difference is still going to be the main driver of winds. However, at these speeds, Dr Odenwald says that 'hurricanes will spin faster, and there will be more energy in them.' This is due to something called the Coriolis effect, which gives hurricanes their rotational energy. If the Earth didn't spin, winds would blow down from the North Pole to the equator in a straight line. But as the Earth rotates, the wind becomes deflected eastward, and this is what gives a hurricane its spin. If the world starts to spin faster, the winds would be deflected more, and the Coriolis effect would become stronger. Dr Odenwald says: 'That effectively makes the rotation more severe.' 1,000 miles per hour faster or more At 1,000 miles per hour faster, Earth would be rotating roughly twice as fast as it does today, with disastrous consequences. Mr Fraczek says: 'It would clearly be a disaster.' The centrifugal forces would pull hundreds of feet of water towards the equator. 'Except for the highest mountains, such as Kilimanjaro or the highest summits of the Andes, I think everything in the equatorial region would be covered with water,' says Mr Fraczek. At 1,000 miles per hour faster, the centrifugal forces generated by spinning would also be much stronger. This would make it easier for water to escape the force of gravity and evaporate up into the atmosphere. The already flooded regions of the equator would experience near-constant rain and would be constantly shrouded in fog and mist. At really extreme speeds of around 17,000 miles per hour (27,350 kmph), 17 times faster than normal, the centrifugal forces would be powerful enough to overwhelm gravity. Anyone at the equator would become weightless as centrifugal force counteracted gravity, and you might even start to get 'reverse rain' as water falls up into the atmosphere. However, it is unlikely that there would be anyone around to see this since the equator would have long since become uninhabitable. Mr Franczek says: 'If those few miserable humans would still be alive after most of Earth's water had been transferred to the atmosphere and beyond, they would clearly want to run out of the equator area as soon as possible.' Finally, once the planet started to reach speeds of about 24,000 miles per hour (38,600 kmph) at the equator, life as we know it would pretty much be over. The centrifugal forces would now be so strong that they would start to flatten out the Earth like a spinning ball of clay. The tectonic plates would shift and the Earth's crust would crack, leading to catastrophic results. Mr Franczek says: 'We would have enormous earthquakes. The tectonic plates would move quickly and that would be disastrous to life on the globe.'
The Guardian
10-07-2025
- The Guardian
Orbital by Samantha Harvey audiobook review – lyrical, hypnotic reading of otherworldly tale
Tracking the movements of six astronauts on the International Space Station, Samantha Harvey's Orbital – the winner of last year's Booker prize – imagines the day-to-day lives of those who have chosen to be 'shot into the sky on a kerosene bomb and then through the atmosphere in a burning capsule with the equivalent weight of two black bears upon them'. Only basic information is provided about the crew, who are from Russia, the United States, Japan, Italy and the UK. Harvey is more interested in the tasks undertaken to keep themselves healthy and their lodgings shipshape. Simultaneously expansive and intimate, Orbital reveals how the usual routines of eating, sleeping and exercising are fraught with challenges when you are weightless: toothpaste foam must be swallowed rather than spat out and cutlery adhered to the table using magnets. Harvey is also alert to the isolation of the astronauts, even though they can't get away from one another: 'They are so together, and so alone, that even their thoughts, their internal mythologies, at times convene.' Yet their capsule proves a utopia of sorts where earthbound quarrels and borders cease to exist. Cooperation is vital as they go about their work while breathing the same recycled air. Actor Sarah Naudi is the narrator, providing a lyrical and hypnotic reading that is in keeping with the otherworldly setting. As the team hurtles through space, orbiting the Earth 16 times a day, they debate the existence of God and reflect on the wonder and fragility of human life. From their rare vantage point, 'the earth … is like heaven. It flows with colour. A burst of hopeful colour.' Available via Penguin Audio, 5hr 7min Death at the Sign of the Rook Kate Atkinson, Penguin Audio, 9hr 31min The sixth book in Atkinson's Jackson Brodie series begins with the theft of a valuable painting. Read by Jason Isaacs. Sign up to Inside Saturday The only way to get a look behind the scenes of the Saturday magazine. Sign up to get the inside story from our top writers as well as all the must-read articles and columns, delivered to your inbox every weekend. after newsletter promotion Who Wants Normal? Frances Ryan, Penguin Audio, 8hr 34min Drawing from her experience and those of other prominent Britons with health conditions, the Guardian columnist reflects on what it means to be disabled in the 21st century.
