Does the earth weigh more than it did 100,000 years ago?  The Same?  Less?
463105
Earth gains about 40,000 tons of mass each year from infalling cometary debris and meteorites.\n\nGod should be spelled B-I-G B-A-N-G\nPBrax@netscape.com
446224
The basic idea is that the earth's land mass was unified hundreds of millions of years ago, but has been gradually pulling apart since then.\nAnd large land masses are resting on huge plates. The plates bump against each other, and when one of them shifts,\nyou have an earthquake.\nThink of it like a jigsaw puzzle, but with continent-sized pieces.\n\nFor lots of pictures of plates, and faults, visit here:\nhttp://www.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100/plate-tectonics.html
156410
Yes, it is likely that we are experiencing a reversal at this time. \n\nThe earth's magnetic field has been decreasing in field strength by about 5% per century in recent times. This is one of the fastest decreases of the magnetic field that has ever been verified. Around 700 AD the earth's magnetic field was about 50% higher than it is now. At this rate, it is estimated that the earth could reach a zero-strength magnetic field in about 2000 years. Magnetic reversals are usually triggered when the field strength approaches zero.  Another indication that some geologists and geophysicists believe may be pointing to a reversal is that the poles have been wandering at a faster rate than is commonly seen in the rock record. This instability of the magnetic field suggests we may be close to a reversal. \n\nAlso consider that since we have never experienced a reversal this is hardly a certainty. The earth's magnetic field fluctuates quite widely during what are known as 'excursions', and these are as frequent as every 50,000 years. Our current changes in the magnetic field may result in nothing more than an excursion, which is not a reversal of the field. There have been at least 11 of these excursions since the last reversal at 730,000 years before present. \n\nI've done magnetostratigraphic work.
135108
It will pretty much look the same. Normal plate techtonics\nmoves continents very very slowly and you need more then a\nthousand year window to see any real difference. Just look\nat maps from the year 1006 if you don't believe me.
503328
The mass of the earth is increasing, but not\nby very much... the only way mass could leave\nthe earth is for example by rockets that are\nsent out into space (like the Voyager missions,\nwhich are on a no-return trajectory).  The\nway mass is added to the earth is meteorites\nwhich fall from time to time, but are rarely\nlarge enough to make a significant impact\n(although the one that fell creating Hudson's\nBay millions of years ago, for example, would\nhave definitely been measurable!)
44204
No, living things 're'turn to dust, meaning that the net weight gain is 0.  The Earth's mass does increase slightly (relative to the size of the Earth) from all of the space dust and meteors that constantly burn up in the atmosphere and fall to the ground.
29637
Scientists are now saying the Earth is a little lighter than we thought. The calculated weight is 5.978 sextillion metric tons, or 5,978 followed by 18 zeros. But the latest measurements show the true weight is actually 5.972 sextillion metric tons. So, does this mean the Earth is losing weight? \n\nActually, the answer is no. The truth is, one of the constants used to calculate the weight of the Earth was off. The force of gravity, shown as the capital letter G, is a little tricky to measure. Scientists have come up with many different numbers, and each one gives us a different number for the Earth's weight. \n\nScientists at the University of Washington found a more precise way to measure G. And now that they have this more exact measurement, they have found the real weight of the Earth - they think. They warn that their findings may still change, so don't use the new weight in your science homework just yet. \n\nWho knows, maybe the Earth is losing weight!
406724
I think you are interested in the earth's mass.  If you wanted to earth's weight ( with respect to the sun) you would need the earth's mass and the sun's gravitation pull.\n\nIt doesn't really make sense to find the earth's weight relative to the earth's gravitation pull.
1172003
No.  In fact, gravity is not even the same everywhere on earth now, because earth is not a perfect sphere of uniform density.  Local variations in the earth's mass and topography produce local differences in gravity (so you might expect to weigh slightly differently atop Mount Whitney than you would at the bottom of Death Valley).  Also, the earth's gravitational field has not been constant over time due to changes and redistributions of the earth's mass and shape.  The polar ice caps have pushed down the earth beneath them, flattening the poles compared with a perfect sphere.  Even the tides alter the earth's shape and mass distribution on a daily basis.  To the extent that the earth has accumulated meteorites and particles from space, its total mass has also changed over time.  Since gravity is the attraction between two masses and a function of their relative distances, things which change the masses and their respective distances will result in corresponding changes in the measurement of gravity.
1081992
What you are saying is possible, yet the weight or gas would have to be escaping from earths atmospere or else the mass is still there.  It is a very intetresting idea, though.  \n\n If the weight of the earth dropped then the distance between the earth and sun would increase since the mass is directly proportional to the force between them.
462582
the missisippi doesnt normally but it has before. sometime in the early 1900's (i cant remember when) a large earthquake, i think in the mossouri region, actually shifted the earths crust enough for it to run backwards for a short time. this was isolated however and has only happened once in recorded history
514076
It's true - gravity pulls harder (i.e. more force) on a more massive (i.e. heavier) object. BUT that object is harder to accelerate - it has more interia. The two effects cancel each other out.\n\nClearly you don't like equations, but putting it in numbers can help:\n\nIf a 1kg object is pulled towards the earth, what will be the force, and what will be the acceleration?\nForce = mass * earth's gravitational field strength\nso Force = 1kg * 9.81N/kg\nForce = 9.81N (or 10N, roughly)\n\nAcceleration = Force / Mass\nSo Acc'n = 9.81N / 1kg = 9.81 m/s^2\n\nNow consider the same for a 10kg object:\n\nForce is now 98.1N (or 100N, roughly)\nSo Acc'n = 98.1N / 10kg = 9.81 m/s^2\n\nSo the acceleration is the same.
343251
Yes the earth would move but not that anyone would notice.\n\nEvery time you push off from the earth, the earth moves \nat a velocity equity to -your_velocity* your_mass/earth_mass.\n\n6 billion people would be less than 600  tons while the earth is about 5,972,000,000,000,000,000,000 tons
1126698
Matter and energy is constant in the Universe.  The fact that more people are born doesn't necessarily mean that the total mass of all compounds on the Earth has increased.  The compounds have simply been redistributed.  Therefore there would be no increase in weight
401449
The earth's rotation does slow down, but not\ndue to the reason you are stating... gravitational\npull of the moon and sun causes more mass to move\ncloser to the surface over time. When an ice-skater\ntwirls around, if the pull in their arms to their\nsides they spin faster, when they push their arms\nout they slow down - in the same way, the earth\nis slowing down, but only by about 1 second per\nseveral years, which is adjusted for by adding\na leap-second from time to time to the atomic \nclock.\n\nThe earthquake in Sumatra on 26-Dec-04 resulted\nin a massive chunk of the ocean floor collapsing\ndown (closer to the earth's center), which caused\na measurable speeding up of the earth's rotation.\nThis was, however, not sufficient to compensate\nfor the otherwise slowing down trend, and only\nmade the adding of a leap-second get delayed...
1063756
I think its not that earth is bearing any weight.When you put something like a block on the earth,earth exerts a force on the block.BUT the block also exerts the SAME force on the earth.So \nthe earth and the block are attracting each other,or are pulling each other with the same force.Therefore, no matter how much wieght you put on the earth,that thing will also attract the earth with same force.(So Earth wont ever fall!).I hope this helps.
425701
No. You can understand the difference by going back to its source: the Newton's Second Law.\n\nF = ma\n\nThe weight of an object is the attractive force (F) exercised by the Earth on that object.\n\nAs the above equation shows, the mass (m) of an object is the constant of proportionality that links any force exercised on the object with the consequent acceleration (a).\n\nSo you see that the weight is a special case of force, that you have when a is the Earth's gravity acceleration. \n\nNow suppose you bring the same object on another planet, say Mars, where the gravity acceleration is different. Its mass doesn't change, but the weight does!\n\nThe weight of an object is an Earth accident, while its mass is a more fundamental concept because its value remains constant (at least within the non-relativistic limit, but this is another story).