B How can we find the curvature of a star or planet?

AI Thread Summary
To determine the curvature of a star or planet, one can utilize methods such as observing Doppler shifts, which indicate rotation, and using laser range finders for nearby moons to create 3D maps. For distant stars, measuring light reflected from planets at various times can reveal differences in brightness, suggesting a spherical shape rather than a disk. The discussion highlights that while self-gravity typically causes large celestial bodies to be spherical, centrifugal forces can complicate this assumption for rapidly rotating stars. The challenge lies in distinguishing between a non-rotating spherical star and a rapidly rotating star viewed along its axis, as Doppler shifts may not provide clear evidence in this scenario. Ultimately, a combination of observational techniques is necessary to accurately assess curvature.
Tahmeed
Messages
81
Reaction score
4
Suppose we are watching a star that is spehrical. But we will see its one face that is toward us(suppose its not rotating). We will see that face to be plane circular. Is there any way we can find the curvature? or tell if its spherical or disk shaped ?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
You mean we can't use the existence of gravity to infer that it's spherical? (have you been arguing with flat-earthers?:nb))

In that case, Doppler shift from rotation would give the easiest clue - note that pretty much the only case where it would not be rotating is for a tidally-locked moon.

And since in the case of a moon it's a close-by reflective solid body, you could use laser range finders (different return trip times for light signals aimed at different spots) to build a 3D map.
Observations of phases would work too (the varying curvature of terminator).

Another method for the star that would point to its spherical shape is to measure light reflected off of other planets at a range of times - a disc would not shine equally in all directions, so the amount of light reflected (after correcting for phases) would differ depending on the position of the planet w/r to the star.
Once you know it's spherical, the curvature from the observed disc gives the overall curvature.
 
DrClaude said:
Any sufficiently big celestial body will be spherical due to self-gravity
No, it won't.
Centrifugal force can resist gravity no matter how big the body may be.

How can we tell a difference between a star which is not rotating or slowly rotating, and which therefore is spherical, and a star which is rotating rapidly and strongly flattened, but which we are observing along its axis and which therefore looks perfect circle?
Doppler shift will not help. The pole we are looking at is not moving, and the equator at the edge of the disc is moving rapidly but neither towards nor away from us, so no Doppler shift.
 
  • Like
Likes Tahmeed
snorkack said:
No, it won't.
Centrifugal force can resist gravity no matter how big the body may be.

How can we tell a difference between a star which is not rotating or slowly rotating, and which therefore is spherical, and a star which is rotating rapidly and strongly flattened, but which we are observing along its axis and which therefore looks perfect circle?
Doppler shift will not help. The pole we are looking at is not moving, and the equator at the edge of the disc is moving rapidly but neither towards nor away from us, so no Doppler shift.

Exactly. Then what is the procedure? ?
 

Thread 'Potential biosignature found in Mars rock'

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.
View full post »

Thread 'Does it make sense to build new radio telescopes?'

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...
View full post »
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

I How Can We Measure Properties of Distant Planets and Stars?
Replies
12
Views
2K
B Will we ever communicate with extraterrestial life in a reasonable time frame?
3
Replies
148
Views
11K
B Sun's peak wavelengths and chlorophyll's green colour
Replies
27
Views
2K
I How Does the Size of Neutron Stars Compare to Black Holes?
Replies
48
Views
5K
I Lines of stars that we see in the sky
Replies
26
Views
5K
B Red Dwarf Stars - Planet Habitability around "Flare Stars"
Replies
1
Views
2K
I The Heavier Elements: A Question About Their Abundance
Replies
28
Views
3K
I Calculating planet's radius using a star's luminosity
Replies
32
Views
7K
B How well do we understand the formation of population III stars?
Replies
7
Views
2K
I Where Are the Missing Black Holes in the Milky Way?
2
Replies
87
Views
9K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top