Ah yes I know the formula. I remember sitting in electrical engineering prereq classes asking the professor if they understood the similarities in the two equations. Thanks for the reminder I have practiced much EE recently. But that’s something I’m gonna rabbit hole.

Well…. I’m sorry but this comment is wrong lol. The wrong part in bullet two is assuming centrifugal force increases with radius vs the inverse. Gravity is absolutely working as a centripetal force just by the very definition of centripetal force.

Centrifugal force increases with decreasing radius therefore at the poles or near them centrifugal force is greatest. But here’s the catch, the vector of centrifugal force becomes more perpendicular to the gravitational force and that’s actually the answer to bullet 3. Now the question becomes…. What counteracts the near perpendicular centrifugal force at the poles? That’s angular momentum driven and is so low that it’s not worth asking the question.

Thanks for the reply and great info.

One thing I was not accounting for is that centrifugal force actually increases with decreasing radius from axis. Meaning the closer to the poles, the more centrifugal force.