Constant acceleration of gravity

AI Thread Summary
Constant acceleration in rotating objects results from a combination of centrifugal force and gravity, with constant thrust required for sustained acceleration. The density of celestial bodies near the sun is not coincidental; as the solar nebula collapsed, heavier elements were drawn toward the center due to gravitational forces. This process led to the formation of denser planets closer to the sun, particularly within the frost line. However, some exoplanetary systems challenge this theory, showcasing gas giants in unexpected orbits, suggesting they may have migrated from their original positions beyond the snow line. Overall, the dynamics of gravity and rotation play crucial roles in the structure of solar systems.
quincy harman
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
It's a combination of centrifugal force and gravity that allows constant acceleration of a rotating object? also is it just coincidence that the most dense objects are near the sun?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
quincy harman said:
also is it just coincidence that the most dense objects are near the sun?

no its not, as the sun formed and started shining and the solar wind started radiating out from the sun, it blew much of the lighter
material further out into the outer reaches of the of the early solar system

Note how the outer planets are gas giants Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and NeptuneDave
 
  • Like
Likes quincy harman
quincy harman said:
It's a combination of centrifugal force and gravity that allows constant acceleration of a rotating object? also is it just coincidence that the most dense objects are near the sun?
I am not sure what your asking in your first question. An object that is rotating will continue to rotate unless acted upon by an external force (Newton's first law of motion). In order to obtain "constant acceleration" you have to apply constant thrust. Also, enough centrifugal force can nullify the effects of gravity. For example, if Earth had a rotation of only 2 hours, 15 minutes per day (~18,000 mph), the centrifugal force would overcome Earth's gravity and break the planet apart.

As to your second question, the prevailing theory is that as the solar nebula collapses it gradually begins to rotate and the heavier elements in the nebula are drawn closer to the center of this rotating mass by gravity. Therefore, the planets with the highest density should be closest to their parent star. Particularly, those planets that are closer to their star than the star's snow line (a.k.a. frost line). Once the protostar reaches an internal core temperature of ~15 million degrees Kelvin, hydrogen fusion begins and it becomes a star. When that happens, solar winds are created that clear out the majority of the remaining gas in the solar system.

It should be noted that we have found solar systems that fly in the face of prevailing theory. Such as a 10 Jupiter mass exo-planet orbiting only 1 AU from its parent Type F5 star. And other solar systems where "hot" gas giants are much closer to their parent star where it should be impossible for them to form. The only explanation is that they formed beyond the snow line of the star and somehow migrated into a much closer orbit.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
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...
Back
Top