Once upon a time on usenet Mike S wrote:
On 4/21/2018 5:19 PM, wrote:
"Interesting. I remember reading that ocean water is higher near
underwater mountain tops due to increased gravitational attraction
and measurable from satellites,"

The would be one hell of a dense mountain to do that, I would think
it more likely to be because of a decreased gravitational pull being
forced away from the center of mass of the planet, due to its
inverse square relationship. But that is not my field of expertise.
(is anything ? the more I learn the less I know, if it weren't for
learning from mistakes I would be a babbling idiot - NO COMMENTS
FROM THE PEANUT GALLERY HERE !)
"I wonder if tanks could be designed with non-flat bottoms to
counteract what you mentioned"

Pretty sure that would not work because gravity is the leveling
force. As such the shape of the bottom should not matter. Perhaps at a
high altitude with a very large mass (dense, not
voluminous) placed under the center of the tank it could be
compensated. But then that makes splitting hairs look like hitting
the broad side of a barn with a planet.

I don't know the correct physics, just read a bit...

Satellite observations
The alternative is an indirect method that uses satellites fitted with
radar altimeters.
These spacecraft can infer the shape of the ocean bottom from the
shape of the water surface above.
Because water follows gravity, it is pulled into highs above the mass
of tall seamounts, and slumps into depressions over deep trenches.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29465446

The Hidden Earth: Undersea Mountains by the Thousands
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astro...satellite.html

Interesting, thanks.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)