Consider the following statements : Statement I : Scientific studies suggest that a shift is taking place in the Earth's rotation and axis. Statement II : Solar flares and associated coronal mass ejections bombarded the Earth's outermost atmosphere with tremendous amount of energy. Statement III : As the Earth's polar ice melts, the water tends to move towards the equator. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

Gives the standard baseline that Earth completes one rotation in about 24 hours and defines the rotation axis through geographic poles.

A student could compare this textbook baseline to precise modern measurements (e.g., reported day length variations or leap-second records) to judge whether the rotation rate has measurably changed.

Defines 'polar wandering' as relative movement of Earth's crust/upper mantle with respect to the rotational poles—introducing the concept of poles moving relative to surface features.

One could use this definition to look up geodetic/tectonic studies (IERS or plate reconstructions) to see whether observed polar motion or true polar wander has been reported recently.

Explains that Earth's magnetic poles wander over time and that magnetic north is distinct from geographic (rotational) north; it notes that pole positions can shift slowly.

A student could use the analogy of magnetic pole wandering to distinguish magnetic-field changes from actual changes in the rotation axis, and then consult geodetic data to test which is occurring.

States the precise traditional rotation period (23:56:04) and that the axis is tilted—providing a concrete value and geometry to compare against high-precision modern determinations.

Use this canonical rotation period and axis orientation as a reference when checking recent high-precision geodetic or astronomical measurements for small deviations.

Describes observable effects (Coriolis deflection) that depend on Earth's rotation, implying that changes in rotation rate/orientation would have measurable physical consequences.

A student could reason that measurable changes in rotation should produce detectable changes in such dynamical phenomena and therefore seek measurements (meteorological/oceanographic records, inertial sensors) to test for them.

Describes how coronal mass ejections and solar wind drive geomagnetic storms and create large electric currents (ring current) around Earth.

A student could combine this with basic electromagnetism and torque concepts to ask whether magnetospheric currents interacting with Earth's magnetic field can apply a net torque to the solid Earth sufficient to change rotation or axis orientation.

Explains that external forces (tidal forces from Moon and Sun) cause measurable, long‑term slowing of Earth's rotation through frictional torques.

Use this as an example that external, persistent forces can change Earth's rotation and compare the magnitude/duration of tidal torques with transient solar‑storm‑related forces to judge plausibility.

States that most mass of the Solar System is in the Sun but that the Sun contributes only a small fraction of the system's angular momentum (Sun ~2% of angular momentum).

A student could combine this with conservation of angular momentum and scale arguments (mass and angular momentum budgets) to assess whether solar events could noticeably transfer angular momentum to Earth.

Defines solar flares as energetic, magnetically driven eruptions that heat coronal gas to very high temperatures.

Treat this as evidence that flares/CMEs are energetic transient inputs; compare typical CME energy scales (from outside knowledge) to the enormous rotational/angular momentum of Earth to estimate possible effects.

Specifies Earth's rotation characteristics and the tilted axis, highlighting that rotation rate and axis orientation are well‑defined quantities that can in principle change.

Combine this with observational capabilities (precision of length‑of‑day and polar motion measurements from outside knowledge) to assess whether any predicted CME‑induced changes would be detectable.

States that cold polar water is denser, sinks, and that cold-water currents occur when polar water sinks and slowly moves toward the equator as a subsurface flow.

A student could combine this with the idea that meltwater entering polar oceans changes local temperature/salinity to judge whether resulting water would join such equatorward subsurface flows.

Reiterates that cold polar water sinks and moves equatorward beneath the surface while warm equatorial water flows poleward at the surface to replace it (describes the cold-to-equator pattern).

Use this pattern plus a map of major currents to infer whether added polar water mass would follow existing subsurface equatorward pathways.

Explains that large‑scale atmospheric winds initiate large, slow-moving ocean currents and that atmosphere–ocean interactions set broad circulation patterns.

A student could consider how wind-driven circulation would steer redistributed polar water (surface vs subsurface) when assessing equatorward movement.

Gives the magnitude of stored ice (major ice in Greenland/Antarctica) and that complete melting would substantially increase ocean volume and sea level.

Knowing the volume and poleward source, a student could reason about the spatial redistribution needed (and whether mass transport mechanisms would carry that added water equatorward).

Describes iceberg buoyancy and that most iceberg mass is submerged, implying that meltwater and released debris originate at/near the sea surface and subsurface around polar margins.

A student might combine iceberg buoyancy with density/current rules to assess whether meltwater released near the surface would stay at high latitudes or be transported equatorward beneath/within currents.

States that daily flexing (tidal bulges) and related mass redistribution cause loss of rotational energy and a measurable slowing of Earth's rotation (0.002 s per century).

A student could analogously consider polar ice mass moving to the oceans as a change in mass distribution and ask whether that would alter Earth's rotation rate by changing its moment of inertia.

Explains that Earth's rotation produces differences in density and an equatorial bulge — showing rotation and mass distribution are linked to shape and gravity.

Use the idea that changing mass distribution (e.g., ice loss at poles) would modify Earth's shape/density distribution and thus could influence rotational properties.

Mentions isostasy and mass movements (gravitational equilibrium between crust and mantle) as processes responding to mass changes.

Apply this rule to polar ice melt: the crust and mantle response to mass loss/gain could redistribute mass internally or at the surface, potentially affecting Earth's rotational balance or axis orientation.

Notes that most system properties depend on mass and angular momentum (example: Sun holds mass but not proportionate angular momentum).

Combine this with basic angular-momentum reasoning: redistributing Earth's surface mass (ice → ocean) can change the moment of inertia and thus rotation rate/orientation if angular momentum is conserved.

Defines Earth's axis and rotation (tilted axis, daily rotation) — the basic framework for considering changes in rotation rate or axis orientation.

Use these basic definitions with a world map and mass-shift scenarios (polar-to-equator transfer) to evaluate how moving mass relative to the axis might affect day length or pole position.