How Can I Derive the Kepler Equation?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Philosophaie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derive Kepler
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the derivation of the Kepler equation, specifically the relationship between Mean Anomaly (M), Eccentric Anomaly (E), and True Anomaly (TA). Participants explore the geometric and conceptual challenges in relating these anomalies, particularly in the context of different orbital planes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks to derive the Kepler equation and expresses confusion about equating Mean Anomaly and True Anomaly due to their representation in different planes.
  • Another participant asserts that Mean Anomaly and True Anomaly are typically measured in the same orbital plane, questioning the initial premise of the confusion.
  • A suggestion is made to approach the problem using conservation of momentum/inertia, although no further details are provided.
  • A participant clarifies that Mean Anomaly is not an angle but a time-related measure, emphasizing that Kepler's equation connects Mean Anomaly to Eccentric Anomaly, which is an angle.
  • There is a discussion about the potential confusion arising from the term "ecliptic plane," with participants noting that the ecliptic plane can refer to different contexts depending on whether discussing planets, moons, or satellites.
  • Another participant reiterates the distinction between Mean Anomaly as a time domain measure and Eccentric Anomaly as a physical angle, suggesting that finding a geometric comparison is challenging.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between Mean Anomaly and True Anomaly, with some asserting they are measured in the same plane while others maintain that the confusion arises from misinterpretations of the ecliptic plane. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to derive the Kepler equation.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of Mean Anomaly and True Anomaly, as well as the implications of the ecliptic plane in different orbital contexts. The mathematical steps connecting these concepts are not fully explored.

Philosophaie
Messages
456
Reaction score
0
I am trying to derive the Kepler equation:

M = E - e * sin(E)

where M=Mean Anomaly, e=Eccentricity and E=Eccentric Anomaly.

If you drop a perpendicular down from the object to the Perihelion-axis you can take:

a * cos(E) = a * e + Recl * cos (TA)

where Recl is the Ecliptic radius to the object from the Sun and TA=True Anomaly.

I am having a hard time equating M and TA because one is on the Ecliptic Plane and the other is on the Orbiting Plane.

Any hints are appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Mean anomaly and true anomaly are usually both measured in the plane of the orbit, so I guess I don't understand the question.
 
Try going at it using the conservation of momentum/inertia..
 
Philosophaie said:
I am having a hard time equating M and TA because one is on the Ecliptic Plane and the other is on the Orbiting Plane.
This is not the case, which is probably why you are confused. Mean anomaly is not an angle. It is merely the mean anomaly at some epoch time plus the product of time since that epoch and mean motion. There is no meaningful angle you can draw that represents mean anomaly. Kepler's equation relates mean anomaly to eccentric anomaly (which is an angle). Both eccentric anomaly and true anomaly are measured on the orbital plane rather than on the ecliptic.
 
Orbit of a planet or the orbit of a moon orbiting a planet or the orbit of a satellite orbiting the Earth?

If you're talking about a planet's orbit, the ecliptic plane of that planet (not the ecliptic plane, which normally refers to the Earth's ecliptic plane), then the ecliptic plane is the orbit plane of that planet. Using ecliptic plane in a generic question about orbits really creates a lot of confusion, probably for yourself, as well, since you seemed to believe they were referring to two separate planes. If you're talking about the Moon's orbit, then the Moon's orbital plane definitely is not the same as the ecliptic plane (and the orbital plane of a satellite will not be the ecliptic plane).

But, as DH said, it's going to be hard to find a geometric comparison between Mean Anomaly and Eccentric Anomaly. Mean Anomaly refers to the time domain. It's your location in time relative to perigee (the time you were at perigee). Eccentric Anomaly refers to the physical domain and represents an actual physical angle relative to perigee.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
12K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K