Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Changes in planet orbits as a star (eg. the Sun) decreases is mass.

  1. Dec 31, 2009 #1

    Jus

    User Avatar

    Hi,

    I'm actually a Design Engineer but I find the topic of Relativity extremely interesting and I was wondering if somebody could give me some guidance on this.

    If Planets and Stars (due to their mass) 'warp' Space-Time then this means that our Sun distorts the fabric of space just like a heavy ball on a trampoline... Have I understood that right?

    Ok, presuming that the above is correct, the orbits of the planets around the sun follow this distortion just like a ball rolling around a sink bowl... Does that sound right?

    Again assuming I've understood the above points correctly, if the Sun is decreasing in mass all of the time then clearly the amount of distortion caused by the mass of the Sun on the fabric of space is decreasing... Does that sound right?

    If all of the above is true, then wouldn't this mean that the planets following the path of the distortion (the balls rolling around the sink) would actually be moving away from the Sun as the 'sink' is effectively becoming slightly flatter due to the reduction in mass of the Sun?

    Sorry if this sounds like a stupid question but it's been bothering me for the last few days!

    Thanks in advance.

    Jus
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 31, 2009 #2

    D H

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Yes, but you don't need relativity to arrive at this result. Newtonian mechanics says the same thing will happen.
     
  4. Dec 31, 2009 #3
    Yes planets are moving their orbits as sun losses mass. But numbers are almost insignificant. When you add both solar winds and mass-energy conversion of sun, I think that you get about one earth's own radius increase in earth's orbit over entire life of sun so far.
     
  5. Dec 31, 2009 #4

    Jus

    User Avatar


    Thanks for the answer. Sorry if it sounded like a stupid question, I didn't realise that the change in Orbit would be so insignificant.
     
  6. Dec 31, 2009 #5
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  7. Dec 31, 2009 #6

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    The sun losses about 10^-13 of it's mass/year
    This increases the Earth-Sun distance at the same rate.
    But since the Earth-Sun distance is 150million km this is only about 1cm/year
     
  8. Jan 4, 2010 #7
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  9. Jan 4, 2010 #8

    George Jones

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Consider the Earth orbiting the Sun. What would happen to the distance between the Earth and the Sun if the Earth's kinetic energy were gradually siphoned off?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  10. Jan 4, 2010 #9
    I say : radius increase (and We say as seen above).

    How should I understand the 'assumed' orbit decay due to radiation of gravitacional waves (masss loss) ?
     
  11. Jan 4, 2010 #10

    George Jones

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    No Newtonian gravity, or, equivalently, Kepler's third law, can be used to show that the distance decreases. I would do this, but, right now, my three-year-old is demanding that I read to her.
     
  12. Jan 4, 2010 #11
    I agree with you George Jones and I have no need to see a 'proof'.
    My surprise is that under GR we can not have such a different result.
    Newtonian is an approximation of GR then I am prepared to sentences like this:
    the rate of increase of radius on GR is more (or less, not important to the discusssion) than under Newtonian gravitation.
    but never like this:
    under Newtonian: increase of radius ; under GR decrease of radius.

    I can not understand such a different outcome.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook