MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Orbital Planes (Astrophysics)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
DPCrisp


In: Bedfordshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

It just doesn't come from... Newtonian physics... Electromagnetism being discovered some time after Newton's laws were proposed.

Caution! Such intemperate speech might lead to (or be a sign of) intemperate thought. Nothing in plasma physics invalidates any of Newton's laws: not even gravitation(?)* If there's anything in the Electric Universe model to the contrary, I'd like to hear about it. On an Electric Universe thread.

* Newton says "gravity goes like this". That is not to say "the universe is assembled by gravity alone". Nor even "gravity can not be a subset of electromagnetism".

The fact that virtually every planet in the Solar System violates the law of rotating bodies contradicts Newton at the most basic level.

That's a new one on me. Please explain.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

DPCrisp wrote:
On an Electric Universe thread.

Yes. One of the 20-plus such threads now in operation.
Send private message
admin
Librarian


View user's profile
Reply with quote

Which reminds me....we need somebody with more time on their hands than is good for them to start tidying up the threads. Moving astrophysical ones from the New Concepts section to the astrophysical section, sorting out Electric Universe ones into a new thread and stuff like that. Any volunteers should contact the powers-that-be. And you'll then be a power-that-is.
Send private message
Komorikid


In: Gold Coast, Australia
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Dan wrote:

The fact that virtually every planet in the Solar System violates the law of rotating bodies contradicts Newton at the most basic level.

That's a new one on me. Please explain

It's basic Newtonian physics. The dumbbell exercise works only when there are two bodies rotating around a common CoG. Any additional bodies create a highly unstable system where the CoG changes depending on distance and mass. Also the line of axial rotation must be parallel for stability of even two bodies.

Our Solar System is a 'fruit salad' of bodies with vastly differing axial tilts. Basic physical laws say they don't belong in this System. The only two bodies that do are the Sun and Jupiter.

Trying to build theories based on current rotations and orbits is pointless because these orbits and rotations are transient and do not represent each body's true origin.
Send private message
DPCrisp


In: Bedfordshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Any additional bodies create a highly unstable system where the CoG changes depending on distance and mass.

I don't follow. There's no single equation of motion for 3 or more bodies, but non-analytic doesn't mean unstable or even unpredictable. And from outside the system, it's best to consider the CoG at rest and calculate the positions of the other bodies from the known forces. What is the law of rotating bodies that the Solar System violates?

Basic physical laws say they don't belong in this System.

Which laws?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

In making my DVD I actually had to get somebody to draw an animation of two bodies not orbiting in the same plane. When you do this, it's immediately obvious that Newtonian physics can't handle the problem since you can never stick the CoG in the right place. But presumably it can handle a situation like the Solar System where everything is in the same plane except Pluto/Charon, but only by forcing P/C to gradually get into line. Presumably this is how the whole system got into line...whenever something new pops up it is presented with an existing disc fait accompli.
Send private message
DPCrisp


In: Bedfordshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

In making my DVD I actually had to get somebody to draw an animation of two bodies not orbiting in the same plane. When you do this, it's immediately obvious that Newtonian physics can't handle the problem since you can never stick the CoG in the right place.

Yes, it's possible to draw something that can't happen just as well as you can say something that can't be true. If you do the drawing, Newtonianism says "you've drawn that wrong". If you observe the orbits, Newtonianism says "there must be something there that we can not see". (Whether you extrapolate to a 'fixed' mass that the others orbit independently -- which is what they say about the supposed Black Hole at the centre of the Milky Way -- or to one or more bodies all in motion together, depends on the precise details of the orbits you can see.)

But presumably it can handle a situation like the Solar System where everything is in the same plane except Pluto/Charon, but only by forcing P/C to gradually get into line.

No, not "...only by...". The CoG is in the plane of the orbit. {The velocity and acceleration vectors (directions) define a plane and since the acceleration is directed towards the CoG, the CoG must be in this plane.}

In the case of two bodies, the CoG is on the line between them, so they can not help but be all three in the same plane. All the time.

But if there are three or more bodies, as is the case in the Solar System, the CoG is... wherever it happens to be right now.

-- It could be that the bodies are always 'chasing after' the CoG and none of them actually completes a closed loop (as with the Moon reckoned against the Sun). 'Course, it's simpler to consider the CoG to be at rest, with all of the bodies constrained to move only in ways that keep it that way: not every imaginable arrangement of trajectories is actually possible. (You can never have all the bodies to left of the CoG, even for a microsecond.)

-- It could be that one (or some) of the bodies is so massive compared to the others that the CoG is never far from it (them) and the others can be considered to have independent orbits around a fixed point. In the Solar System, it makes sense to say the planets orbit the Sun: the fact that Pluto's orbit is inclined to the rest is neither here nor there, it could have been any way on, as long as the Sun is at the focus. (The comets are all over the place, but the Sun is at the focus of every one of them.)

Presumably this is how the whole system got into line...

Yes, the system flattens out over time, but that is, say, a third- or fourth-order effect: the first-order effect is the elliptical orbit with the CoG (maybe, but not necessarily, a body) at the focus.

whenever something new pops up it is presented with an existing disc fait accompli.

Disc-like or not-very-disc-like-yet is a matter of time.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3

Jump to:  
Page 3 of 3

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group