Does the earth translate around the sun?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nonequilibrium
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earth Sun The sun
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concept of whether the Earth translates around the sun, exploring definitions of translational motion, the implications of orbital dynamics, and the terminology used in physics. The scope includes conceptual clarification and technical reasoning related to motion in classical mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested, Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the meaning of "translate" in the context of Earth's motion, seeking clarification on the term.
  • Another participant defines translational motion and asserts that the Earth does undergo translational motion, though not in a straight line due to its orbit.
  • A participant mentions a professor's unclear response to whether the Earth translates, suggesting that there may be nuances in the definition of translational motion that complicate the question.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of conservation of energy on the Earth's motion, particularly regarding changes in kinetic energy as the Earth orbits the sun.
  • Another participant distinguishes between uniform motion and translational motion, arguing that translational dynamics encompasses more than just uniform motion.
  • A participant corrects the terminology, stating that the Earth "rotates" around its axis and "revolves" around the sun, indicating that "rotating" around the sun is not a valid term.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definitions and implications of translational motion, with some asserting that the Earth does translate in its orbit while others question the clarity of the terminology and concepts involved. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the nuances of these definitions.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the definitions of translational motion and uniform motion as discussed, with unresolved implications regarding energy conservation and the specific terminology used in physics.

nonequilibrium
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
2
(imagining a perfect Earth without rotation around its own axis etc)

In which way does it; and which way doesn't it?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Maybe I'm the moron here, but I don't know what you mean by "translate" in this context.
 
Ah, maybe I'm using the wrong verb? (English is not my mother language)

I mean translational motion, defined by: take an object and mark two random points A and B on the object; then the object goes through a translational motion if and only if at any later moment if you were to connect the place A and B were at (in your coordinate system) with your "new" points A' and B' (on your object) those two lines are parallel. Another definition is: not rotation ;)
 
Of course it undergoes translational motion. That is what an orbit is. It's just not straight-line translational motion.
 
I thought every elementary school student knew that the Earth goes around the sun. That's why I thought the question was more complicated than it was.
 
Oh, okay... When I asked my professor of classical mechanics he said "no", although he wasn't very clear on it. Any idea what he could have ment? And after that I thought about it again and there was indeed something weird: we had proven in class that translational motion implies that any specific point continues to have the same velocity vector, but this can't be in the case of the Earth (even in the idealest of cases), because if a certain point is at one time closer to the sun than at another time, due to conservation of energy (potential difference...), the kinetic energy must be different. Can we ignore this for some reason due to connective forces?

EDIT: Jack, I don't know if the question is that obvious? Well anyway when I asked it this week in my university course class, a lot students started snickering at the apparent stupidity of the question because they thought the Earth rotated around the sun.
 
You are talking about uniform motion, which is quite different from translational motion.

Why would physicists and others use the term "translational dynamics" and write papers and books about "translational dynamics" if the concept of translation was restricted to the trivial case of uniform motion?
 
The correct astronomical terms are the Earth "rotating" around it's axis and "revolving" around the sun.

"Rotating" around the sun doesn't really mean anything.
 

Similar threads

High School What Are Quasi-Moons and How Do They Orbit Earth and the Sun?
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
High School The Sun's Influence on the Moon's Orbit: Is it Negligible?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Stargazing Does an Analemma visualize the Earth's actual orbit around the sun?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
High School Is the Earth falling into the sun from gravity?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
High School How long it takes the Earth to fall halfway to the Sun--ellipse method
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
High School How Does a Massive Planet's Orbit Around the Sun Appear?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
High School What is the shape of an asteroid impact on Earth?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
High School What If We Could See the Past by Placing a Mirror on the Sun?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Undergrad Earth-centered frame with Earth-Sun line fixed
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
High School Sun's peak wavelengths and chlorophyll's green colour
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K