Can two planets inhabit the same orbit?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter astro1000000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orbit Planets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the hypothetical scenario of two planets inhabiting the same orbit around a star, exploring the implications of such an arrangement in terms of stability and gravitational interactions. Participants consider both theoretical models and practical limitations related to orbital dynamics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a scenario where two planets could occupy the same orbit at opposite positions (12 and 6 on a clock face) without collision, suggesting they would move at the same rate.
  • Another participant argues that while geometrically perfect orbits might allow for symmetrical arrangements, real orbits are not perfectly circular, leading to instability and potential chaos.
  • A third participant introduces the concept of a Klemperer Rosette, which allows multiple planets to be arranged around a star, but notes that this requires specific mass arrangements that are unlikely to occur naturally.
  • One participant questions the gravitational effects of a second planet on the first, suggesting that if the mass of the planets is significantly less than that of the star, the gravitational influence might be minimal.
  • Another participant reinforces that the L3 point, where one planet could theoretically be placed opposite the star, is an unstable equilibrium, similar to the proposed "6-12" configuration, indicating that any small perturbation would lead to drift from this arrangement.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the stability of planets in the same orbit, with no consensus reached on the viability of such arrangements. The discussion remains unresolved, highlighting differing opinions on gravitational interactions and orbital dynamics.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations related to the assumptions of perfect orbits and the specific mass distributions required for stable configurations, which remain unresolved in the discussion.

astro1000000
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Imagining a clock...the middle of the face where the hands rotate from represents the sun.

If at 12 and 6 were to planets, could they inhabit the same orbit around the sun without consequence?
I imagine they would not collide as they would be moving at the same rate and in this scenario are at polar opposites of each other.

For a manuscript I'm working on I have been puzzled by an imaginary planetary alignment...
I am to provide a single planet orbiting a sun with a planetary alignment to happen like the number five appears on dice.

The sun and Earth planet too be the center dot and the 4 other planets to align at the points of the remain 4 dots on the die.

I'm not sure if I'm explaining the problem correctly as I've found most ppl have trouble comprehending the issue.

Back to the clock reference, imagine the clock again, the sun and Earth being at the middle point and the four remaining planets being at alignment at 12 - 3 - 6 - 9

Preferably they would inhabit separate orbits but with my limited knowledge of the cosmos and its physics i am not sure how to present this in a way that is plausible and believable.

I have the imagination to envisage such but not the understanding to make it practical.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I suppose that if the orbits were geometrically perfect then it would be possible to have as many symmetrically placed planets in the same orbit as you like, as long as they are all separated by the same amount. Alas though, no orbit is perfectly circular, so such arrangements in reality are probably unstable and would tend towards chaos.

Lagrange points (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point) represent the places in a planet's orbit where another body can remain stable. L3 is directly opposite the star.
 
The problem with a planets at the "6 and 12" positions is that it is not a perfectly stable arrangement. The slightest nudge will displace them and they will drift out of position.

There is an arrangement called a Klemperer Rosette which allows multiple planets(at least 4) spaced equally around a star. The problem is that the planets must be alternating in mass (light, heavy, light heavy), and the light planets all have to have the same mass and the heavy planets have to have the same mass. It is, for all intents and practices, impossible for this to happen naturally.
 
M>>m ?

What if mass of the planet(s) is a lot less than the star they're orbiting(M>>m)? I don't think the gravity of the second planet effect the other planet's orbit? according to astro 100000 they're in the maximum mean distance condition! so the gravity force is at the minimum.
 
The L3 point is an unstable equilibrium point. The "6-12" configuration described in this thread is similarly unstable. There is no restoring force to bring the system back to the "6-12" configuration; any deviations from the equilibrium will grow. Any other planet in the system will perturb the equilibrium.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 98 ·
4
Replies
98
Views
12K