简而言之:没有。我们把牛顿力学教学的原因,是因为它是一个非常精确的近似一个更一般的理论(广义相对论)政权内的速度和重力加速度在日常生活中发现。因此,所有的相对论修正牛顿力学在地球系统中可以忽略不计。,内部操作的气候和演化的轨道参数。也许最重要的贡献,将拱点的旋进的次要角色的变化分布的太阳能所描述的[Milankovic周期][1]。但这也可以说是微不足道的。最先进的地球的轨道运动的长期解决方案[La2010][2],用相对论修正,但是他们很小。修正的方式包括在模型中被[萨哈&屈里曼(1994)][3],他们指出:> General行星运动的相对论效应分数>振幅的美元\压裂{k ^ 2} {c ^ 2 r} \ sim 10 ^ {8} $ $ r = 1 \ \ textbf{盟}$。这意味着校正的影响出现在第八小数位置的轨道参数。毫无疑问,即使如此小的修正有累积效应在数百万年时间尺度,但他们仍然很小,也许已经被其他失踪效果,克服大陨石撞击或飞行一样,太阳风暴等。(记得模型返回50)。 So, I would still argue that relativistic corrections are almost negligible. However, in a chaotic system like Earth's climate, you can never rule out that a negligible forcing could have had an important effect. Of course the answer would be different (and the relative importance higher) if we consider a planet orbiting extremely close to a super-massive star. But, I'm assuming you are mostly considering planets similar to Earth in that regard. There are however some claims (the [Damhsa Theory][5]) that gravitational waves might have play a role in the very long term climate evolution of Earth. However, I'm not capable to really assess the validity of such theory, but I have to admit I'm skeptical about it. I've posted [a question about that][6] in Physics SE, an there seem to be wide consensus that such effect would be exceedingly small to ever deserve any kind of consideration. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles#Orbital_shape_(eccentricity) [2]: https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf/2011/08/aa16836-11.pdf [3]: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1994AJ....108.1962S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf [4]: //www.hoelymoley.com/questions/1023/how-does-the-precession-of-the-earths-apses-affect-climate [5]: http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/news/2008ScienceMeeting/posters/P4_01_Lynch_Poster.pdf [6]: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/394552/damhsa-theory-can-gravitational-waves-really-affect-the-long-term-climatic-evo