Compute Tidal Locking Radius: Planet/Moon Area

  • Thread starter Thread starter rieman zeta
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Radius Tidal
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the tidal locking radius of a planet based on its moon's area. A formula is presented, derived from Burn's chapter in "Satellites," which calculates the timescale for tidal locking using variables such as density, rotation rate, semi-major axis, and mass. The formula indicates that the tidal braking torque has a dependence on mass and distance, specifically showing an a^6/M^2 relationship. It emphasizes that while any body can theoretically achieve tidal locking given sufficient time, the specific time allowed for locking is crucial for accurate calculations. Further insights into the numerical values of the dissipation function and the Love number are suggested to be explored for deeper understanding.
rieman zeta
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
How does one compute the tidal locking radius of say a planet on a putative moon its area?

Is there a formula?
rieman zeta
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
There's a formula for how fast tidal lock occurs, see for instance

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.science/msg/e05283a619187a8f?dmode=source&hl=en

Both you and Geoffrey have rightly commented on my poorly-defined
variables, so let me re-state this. BTW, I'm cribbing this formula (very
slightly modified) from somewhere else, namely Burn's chapter in
"Satellites" (U of Az Press), edited by Burns & Mathews:

T = 16 rho omega a^6 (Q/k2) / ( 45 G M^2 )
rho = density of body being despun [kg/m^3]
omega = inital rotation rate of body being despun [rad/s]
= 2 pi / P, where P is the inital rotation rate
a = semi-major axis of orbit [m]
Q/k2 = dissipation function divided by the 2nd order Love #
M = mass of body doing the despinning [kg]

I hope this is clearer - I've taken the formula for the despinning
timescale out of Burn's chapter and modified it very slightly.


The very rough justification for this formula goes like this:

tidal height is proportional to (M/a)^3
stored tidal energy is proportioanl to tidal height squared
some fraction of the stored tidal energy gets disapated every cycle. A cycle occurs every time the planet rotates.

This gives a M^2/a^6 dependence on the tidal braking torque, or an a^6/M^2 dependence on the "time constant". This addresses only the dependence on mass and distance, but those are the main variables of interest.

'a' here is the semi-major axis of the orbit of the body being locked around the more massive body, what you would be calling (I think) the "tidal locking radius" of the more massive body.

Note that you have to specify the time allowed for the lock occurred - theoretically, anything will lock up given enough time.

For more details, see the quoted textbook source. I really don't know much more than what I've quoted (plus the comments I've added about the a^6 dependency) - specifically I don't have much insight into the numerical values of Q and k2 (though Brian Davis probably does, I don't think he's on this board).
 
Last edited:
thanks

Although I am light years ahead of where I was before your reply, I would invite others to continue to edify me.

Thanks
Riemann Zeta
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top