Since nobody has, I'll cover the European consequences.
Japan launched many simultaneous attacks that day, but the only other one against the US was in the Philippines and this happened seven hours after Pearl Harbor. There was time to call it off. If the attack went off as planned the US would be dragged into war with Japan. But if it didn't, if the attack on the Philippines was cancelled, the US entry into war with Japan would be delayed.
Either way, the US entry into the European War would have been delayed at a critical point in the war in Europe.
On Dec 11th, 1941 Hitler went against the advice of his staff (something he would do again and again) and declared war on the United States. It's one of Hitler's greatest blunders and one of the war's greatest mysteries why he decided to do it. Without a smashing Japanse victory at Pearl Harbor this would not have happened.
War between Germany and the US was by no means inevitable. The US was still neutral, and it was still building up its military. An attack by Japan gave the US even less incentive to start a two-front war. As for Germany, they were mired in a battle with the Soviet Union and the Battle of the Atlantic. Military logic said opening an new front was madness.
Without the spectacular victory of Pearl Harbor to excite Hitler's imagination, it's likely cooler heads would have prevailed. Instead, the Germans would have waited for the outcome of the inevitable massive naval battle in the Philippines planned for by both the Japanese (Kantai Kessen) and the US (War Plan Orange). They would have negotiated with Japan to guarantee Japan declares war on the Soviets.
Without the US as a belligerent in Europe, supplies from the US to the Allies would be reduced. The US would need to keep the veneer of neutrality and continue the awkward lend-lease arrangement which restricted the volume, speed, and types of material they could send to the Allies. As a neutral the US could not conduct any combat operations against the European Axis. Lacking a "Germany First" agreement with the Allies it's probable the US would have held back more of their material to fight the Japanese rather than lease them to the British and Soviets.
The impact of the Tizard Mission would be reduced. In Sept 1940, in order to circumvent US neutrality provisions, Britain simply handed the US many fantastic new technologies such as the cavity magnetron necessary to produce compact radar sets, the variable-timed fuse for air burst artillery shells, a jet engine, rockets, superchargers, gyroscopic gunsights, submarine detection devices, self-sealing fuel tanks, and plastic explosives. They hoped the US would develop these, build them with their massive industrial capability, and then Britain could buy them back. In our alternative timeline there would be no US aircraft equipped with these wonder weapons to fight the Germans, particularly U-Boats. The US would have been more interested in putting them to good use against the Japanese rather than lease their best weapons to the British.
In North Africa this means no US tanks to resupply the British Army. No great victory at El Alamein where US tanks made up half the British army's force (M3 Grants, M4 Shermans, and M3 Honeys). No Operation Torch to simultaneously open a second front in North Africa. Without the US in the war the British will be very hard pressed to hold on to Egypt and the Middle East.
Over the skies of Germany this means no US strategic bombing of Germany. The US contributed about half the total damage to Germany, now Britain would have to go it alone. Furthermore, the "round the clock" bombing campaign would not have happened, Britain preferred to reduce losses by bombing at night, allowing the Germans to freely rebuild and move material around during the day. German industry would take less of a beating, and less of its military would be required in the defense of the Reich allowing them to throw more at the Soviets at a critical moment of the Eastern Campaign.
In the Battle Of The Atlantic, the US is spared the slaughter of the Second Happy Time, but the British have to go it alone. Without US aircraft and destroyers bolstering the escorts, the Germans would have continued to successfully exploit the GIUK air gap. Without US industrial help, new British invented anti-submarine technologies would have been slower to come online and less would be available. Even with full US support the battle was nearly lost. Without it, it's likely Britain would have been strangled in May 1943.
On the Eastern Front, US supplies to the Soviet Union will also be reduced. While US tanks and airplanes were generally considered inferior by the Soviets, they were still better than nothing and could be used by rear and training units to free up better equipment for front line units. What would be sorely missed is US logistical support in the form of trucks, trains, industrial machines, and raw material to rebuild the Soviet industrial base. Here is an exhaustive list. Without this support the Soviets would have less capacity to rebound again and again from crushing defeats in the field.
1942 was already a bad year for the British and Soviets, without the German declaration of war against the US it would have been much worse.