Orbital Plane - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

saltfish · 03-16-2004, 11:52 AM

Once again, I come to the forum with a question for the masses...

..why is it that the major planets in our solar system, exculding pluto and the new-found 10th planet, seem to all orbit on a 'plane' around the sun?

If you've ever noticed pluto's orbit, it does not orbit on the same plane as it's 8 larger peers.

Any thoughts, insights?

-SF

losthellhound · 03-16-2004, 12:19 PM

Im no scientist, but you can see this in saturn's rings.. All the rings are is debris, and it has moved into an orbit on a single plane..

to the sun, we're just debris (wow, deep)

Ustwo · 03-16-2004, 12:22 PM

Its been a long time and I no longer recall the physics but the plane is based around the direction of the suns spin.

Had the sun been spinning in a different orientation, we would have a different orbital plane.

KnifeMissile · 03-16-2004, 12:40 PM

Tricky question...

I don't really know but if you assume that the constituent mass of the solar system had a consistent angular momentum (treating it as a vector, now), it makes sense that the solar system is on a plane.

The centrifugal "force" will keep the masses in orbit except that such a force can only exist on one plane. The normal orientation of that plane has no forces to keep the masses apart so the gravitational forces will pull them together.

In other words, in one dimension (the dimension normal to the plane of rotation), the masses attract each other and there's no force keeping them apart, so they come together, whereas, on the plane of rotation (the other two dimensions), while there is also gravitational attraction there, they have the centrifugal "force" to keep them apart and, thus, our solar system eventually forms a disc on this plane...

kutulu · 03-16-2004, 01:03 PM

KM is pretty much right, I wouldn't be able to add much to that. It still doesn't explain why comets follow completely different paths.

On a side note (somewhat on topic), I'd like to add that if Pluto was discovered today, It would not be considered a planet.

saltfish · 03-16-2004, 01:11 PM

Would it be correct to assume that over a period of time, possibly millions of years, that pulto would also join the orbial plane that the other planets occupy?

I'm thinking that a comet, foreign to our solar system, has inertia and is following a vector that is different to our orbital plane. If said commet has sufficient inertia to escape our Sun's gravitiational pull it can only be bent in another direction and leave our solar system. If the comet's inertia is insufficent, it could be trapped in our solar system. It's path would be determined by it's inertia, vector and influenced by the gravity inside our solar system, eventually it's inertia will decay and it will find itself orbiting amoung the same plane as the other planets.

Am I correct in these assumptions?

Thanks guys/gals, you provie a great deal of insight.

-SF

Ustwo · 03-16-2004, 04:46 PM

Comets are thought to be sort of the junk left over in the far reaches of the solar system. The gravitational pull of the sun is very weak, and with their low mass they can be easily deflected off into the inner planets which in turn deflect them even more.

One theory is that we have a large 10th planet so far out that it hasn't be detected that every 26million years or so sends a new wave of comets into the inner planets.

rsl12 · 03-16-2004, 07:05 PM

saltfish: i would agree with your conclusion about comets. knifemissile beat me to the explanation, rats...

Pragma · 03-16-2004, 07:23 PM

Here's a rough explanation going from what I remember from an introductory astrophysics class:

When the solar system was being formed, there was giant amount of proto-planetary mass (gas, rubble, etc.) that was slowly spinning in a disc around the sun (I forget how it got like that) - as planets slowly formed out of the proto-planetary mass, they remained in the disc around the sun.

Of course, not sure how completely that answers your question. If you want to do a further google search, you're looking for more explanation about the "ecliptic plane"

03-16-2004, 11:52 AM	#1 (permalink)
saltfish !?!No hay pantalones!?! Location: Indian-no-place	Orbital Plane Once again, I come to the forum with a question for the masses... ..why is it that the major planets in our solar system, exculding pluto and the new-found 10th planet, seem to all orbit on a 'plane' around the sun? If you've ever noticed pluto's orbit, it does not orbit on the same plane as it's 8 larger peers. Any thoughts, insights? -SF

03-16-2004, 12:19 PM	#2 (permalink)
losthellhound Thats MR. Muffin Face now Location: Everywhere work sends me	Im no scientist, but you can see this in saturn's rings.. All the rings are is debris, and it has moved into an orbit on a single plane.. to the sun, we're just debris (wow, deep) __________________ "Life is possible only with illusions. And so, the question for the science of mental health must become an absolutely new and revolutionary one, yet one that reflects the essence of the human condition: On what level of illusion does one live?" -- Ernest Becker, The Denial of Death

03-16-2004, 12:22 PM	#3 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Its been a long time and I no longer recall the physics but the plane is based around the direction of the suns spin. Had the sun been spinning in a different orientation, we would have a different orbital plane. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

03-16-2004, 12:40 PM	#4 (permalink)
KnifeMissile Location: Waterloo, Ontario	Tricky question... I don't really know but if you assume that the constituent mass of the solar system had a consistent angular momentum (treating it as a vector, now), it makes sense that the solar system is on a plane. The centrifugal "force" will keep the masses in orbit except that such a force can only exist on one plane. The normal orientation of that plane has no forces to keep the masses apart so the gravitational forces will pull them together. In other words, in one dimension (the dimension normal to the plane of rotation), the masses attract each other and there's no force keeping them apart, so they come together, whereas, on the plane of rotation (the other two dimensions), while there is also gravitational attraction there, they have the centrifugal "force" to keep them apart and, thus, our solar system eventually forms a disc on this plane... Last edited by KnifeMissile; 03-16-2004 at 01:50 PM..

03-16-2004, 04:46 PM	#7 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Comets are thought to be sort of the junk left over in the far reaches of the solar system. The gravitational pull of the sun is very weak, and with their low mass they can be easily deflected off into the inner planets which in turn deflect them even more. One theory is that we have a large 10th planet so far out that it hasn't be detected that every 26million years or so sends a new wave of comets into the inner planets. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

03-16-2004, 01:03 PM	#5 (permalink)
kutulu Junkie	KM is pretty much right, I wouldn't be able to add much to that. It still doesn't explain why comets follow completely different paths. On a side note (somewhat on topic), I'd like to add that if Pluto was discovered today, It would not be considered a planet.

03-16-2004, 01:11 PM	#6 (permalink)
saltfish !?!No hay pantalones!?! Location: Indian-no-place	Would it be correct to assume that over a period of time, possibly millions of years, that pulto would also join the orbial plane that the other planets occupy? I'm thinking that a comet, foreign to our solar system, has inertia and is following a vector that is different to our orbital plane. If said commet has sufficient inertia to escape our Sun's gravitiational pull it can only be bent in another direction and leave our solar system. If the comet's inertia is insufficent, it could be trapped in our solar system. It's path would be determined by it's inertia, vector and influenced by the gravity inside our solar system, eventually it's inertia will decay and it will find itself orbiting amoung the same plane as the other planets. Am I correct in these assumptions? Thanks guys/gals, you provie a great deal of insight. -SF

03-16-2004, 07:05 PM	#8 (permalink)
rsl12 On the lam Location: northern va	saltfish: i would agree with your conclusion about comets. knifemissile beat me to the explanation, rats... __________________ oh baby oh baby, i like gravy.

03-16-2004, 07:23 PM	#9 (permalink)
Pragma I am Winter Born Location: Alexandria, VA	Here's a rough explanation going from what I remember from an introductory astrophysics class: When the solar system was being formed, there was giant amount of proto-planetary mass (gas, rubble, etc.) that was slowly spinning in a disc around the sun (I forget how it got like that) - as planets slowly formed out of the proto-planetary mass, they remained in the disc around the sun. Of course, not sure how completely that answers your question. If you want to do a further google search, you're looking for more explanation about the "ecliptic plane" __________________ Eat antimatter, Posleen-boy!