Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

The Keplerian elements for the planets provides all of the information needed to define the orbit and where the planet is currently along it. Approximate elements are available from JPL and can be found here: http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/txt/p_elem_t1.txt If you don't want to do the math, you can just ask JPL Horizons to do it for you and calculate an ephemeris ...


1

When material is shed from a comet, it mostly continues to follow the same orbit as the comet, but drifts out ahead or behind the comet in a complex way due to interactions with solar wind and the gravity of other objects. If you imagine the elliptical orbit of 55P/Tempel-Tuttle, it will have patches of denser dust in clumps spaced out around the ellipse ...


3

You know, the first time someone told me this, I was absolutely certain they were confused, ignorant, or otherwise mistaken, and I told him he had his facts wrong. To be precise, we were talking about an observer on the equator. I maintained that the Sun would rise due east and set due west, all year round. He said no. What gave me pause, though, is that ...


4

It's pretty simple, actually. The Moon creates tides. Due to tides, the water bulges out towards the Moon (and also on the opposite side). But the Earth also rotates pretty fast (once a day), faster than the Moon orbits the Earth (once a month). There's friction between the rotating Earth, and the watery bulge created by tides. The rotation of the Earth ...


0

RE: Always seeing the same side of the moon. It may also be attributed to a difference in density of the moon. It was established recently that there are gravitational variations around the moon that would support the possibility that there is a higher density of material on one side of the moon. The higher density area of moon would then always face the ...


1

To start with, such two orbits are extremely unlikely. First of all, any object orbiting a star and deviating strongly from a circular orbit has a high risk of crashing into something. As you notice, there are very few planets in our solar system, and all of them except Pluto have a very regular orbit. Planets which have intercrossing orbits would have ...


3

If you project the orbits onto a plane, for example the plane of the ecliptic, the projections will cross. But that's only because you're looking at a 3D problem in 2D. If you look at the orbits in 3D, you'll see that Pluto's orbit is highly inclined (17º) from the ecliptic, so it never actually passes through Neptune's orbit. Each time it seems to cross (in ...


3

For those who haven't seen it: Some human explorers land on a planet orbiting a black hole. The black hole is surrounded by a large accretion disk. The planet orbits at a distance such that going any closer to the black hole will mean that your odds of getting out are slim; it's also composed of water. Finally, time dilation from the black hole means that ...


2

How do scientists and astronomers recognize the perfect path or orbit (if it's orbiting an object) of an asteroid or a comet? They don't, and they can't. The best they can do is estimate the object's trajectory based on observations and based on techniques used to propagate the object (and other objects in the solar system) over time. These estimates ...


1

As a hint: a force directed inward does not change the angular momentum, and therefore does not change the semi-major axis nor the period. It's not clear which angle you're talking about, but knowing that the semi-major axis did not change should let you set the problem up as a simple geometry problem.


2

Lets Keep things simple. Below is a picture of the orbit of the Earth. I take the question to mean why the axis doesn't point toward the Sun all the time. The answer comparing the Earth to a Gyroscope is the easiest to use. The spinning effect on the axis does cause a force that helps keep the Earth's axis at a 23.5° angle (Approx) there is a slight wobble ...


1

Because the Sun's gravitational pull on Earth is (nearly) uniform, it doesn't tilt the Earth, it only pulls it as a whole, without affecting the Earth's spinning around its own axis. The Earth's radius is ~ 6,400 km, the distance to the Sun is ~ 150,000,000 km, and the gravitational force diminishes as a square of a distance, so the ratio in the pull on ...


10

My understanding is that the Earth's axis points in the same direction in space during its entire orbit around the sun. And this is what causes our seasons. The second statement is correct. The axial tilt is the primary driver of the seasons. The first statement is not exactly correct. There is a small but persistent change in the orientation of the ...


2

The Earth acts like a massive gyroscope. A tremendous force would be required to change the orientation of the axis. While forces are certainly exerted, they are not large enough to cause appreciable change in the orientation of the axis as the Earth falls/orbits about the Sun. As you indicate, the orientation of the axis is responsible for the change in ...


4

The changing angle between sun and moon does cause some slight nutation in the earth's axis of rotation over an 18.6 year period. In the case of the Earth, the principal sources of tidal force are the Sun and Moon, which continuously change location relative to each other and thus cause nutation in Earth's axis. The largest component of Earth's nutation ...


7

Picture the Earth as a small ball suspended in midair, not moving, although it's rotating on its axis. Unless forces are applied to it, absolutely nothing will happen. That's conservation of energy (or momentum; you can work with it either way). Earth will not spontaneously start moving in one direction because that would violate conservation of ...


4

Pluto and its largest moon Charon are tidally locked to each other. Charon and Pluto revolve about each other every 6.387 days. The two objects are both gravitationally locked to the other, so each keeps the same face towards the other. This is a mutual case of tidal locking . . . Because of Charon's large size compared to Pluto, and because its ...


2

Consider the case of similar-mass, close binary systems. If the orbital periods are less than a few days they are expected to become tidally locked on a timescale much shorter than the stellar lifetimes. In many cases the synchronisation can be established by comparing the rotation periods of the stars using modulation by starspots with the orbital period ...


1

Simply said if a star would orbit a planet, the planet would become the star and viceversa. Hm... never seen that. But who knows. The universe is so vast and the physics we know only covers an insignificant percent of all phenomena in the universe. You just imagined that, so in another universe this is true. It is your universe!


2

Neither statement is true, just like the statement that the "Earth orbits the Sun" is not strictly speaking true. In truth, if we are talking about a system with two masses, what happens is that they both orbit their common centre of gravity. Whether we perceive that one object orbits another is really just a question of their mass ratio. In the example ...


4

Well, technically, a planet and a star orbit each other. In that sense, yes. If a gas giant is orbiting a red dwarf, then the red dwarf is also orbiting the gas giant. Always. If you quibble that it doesn't count if the star doesn't move much, I throw the quibble back by pointing to Jupiter and Sol. The barycenter of the system is outside the sun, and that ...


5

Pretty much by definition, no. In order for "object A" to orbit "object B", "object B" needs to be substantially more massive than "object A". In order for your red dwarf to orbit something, that "something" needs to be more massive than a red dwarf. With the current composition of the universe, that "something" will be mostly hydrogen, and once you reach ...



Top 50 recent answers are included