How (un)stable are the Lagrangian points 1, 2 and 3?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the stability of the Lagrangian points 1, 2, and 3 in the context of capturing natural objects such as asteroids or clouds of cosmic dust. Participants explore the conditions under which these points might temporarily hold such objects and the implications of their instability over time.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether Lagrangian points 1, 2, and 3 can temporarily capture natural objects, citing their instability and the need for special orbits for spacecraft.
  • Another participant asserts that capturing an object from afar requires the object to lose energy, regardless of the stability of the potential at the Lagrangian points.
  • A participant raises the example of Trojan asteroids at more stable points (L4, L5) and questions how they were captured without collisions, suggesting that gravitational deflection could suffice.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of a rotating coordinate system on the analysis of Lagrangian points and the forces involved.
  • There is mention of NASA's reference to a "23-day stability" for L(1,2), with a participant expressing uncertainty about its meaning in relation to capturing objects.
  • A later reply clarifies that the "23-day stability" refers to the typical time scale for an object placed at a Lagrangian point to leave that position due to instability.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of capturing objects at L(1,2,3) points, with some arguing that it is possible under certain conditions while others emphasize the inherent instability and energy requirements for such captures. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of capturing and retaining objects at these points.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the analysis is complicated by the rotating coordinate system associated with Lagrangian points, which introduces additional inertial forces that may affect stability and capture dynamics.

xpell
Messages
139
Reaction score
16
A couple questions, please: I know that the Lagrangian points 1, 2 and 3 are unstable and special Lissajous orbits plus some station-keeping are required to place a spacecraft around them. But I was wondering if they are so totally unstable that they can't temporarily "capture" a passing natural object (let's say an asteroid or a cloud of cosmic dust, in a stationary way or entering some kind of not-very-stable orbit around them)? Or could they?

And if they were able to, how much time would (approximately) be required for this/these object(s) to go "off-orbit" and abandon the L(1,2,3) area? In the case of the cloud of cosmic dust, would it just slowly (or quickly) drift away, or would they be "launched" towards another direction or orbit?

Thanks in advance!

PS. NASA says that L(1,2) are unstable "on a time scale of approximately 23 days" and this book talks about 23 days too. But I'm not sure if I can understand this as L(1,2) being naturally able to capture an object during approximately 23 days before "losing it"...
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Capturing an object moving from far away will always require that the object loses energy by some means. Regardless of how stable the potential is at that point. The sun could not capture a spec of dust unless that spec of dust hit something else while in the solar system.
 
Orodruin said:
Capturing an object moving from far away will always require that the object loses energy by some means. Regardless of how stable the potential is at that point. The sun could not capture a spec of dust unless that spec of dust hit something else while in the solar system.
Thank you, Orodruin. Actually I was thinking in a cloud of dust just "wandering" out there. But if so, how did the Trojans end up in so many (more stable but not totally stable) points L(4,5) of the Solar System, please? Or, how could a wandering planet be captured into a solar system? Does it need some kind of collision? (I thought those were fully gravitational / orbital mechanics phenomena...)
 
You do not need an actual collision. It is sufficient with some gravitational deflection. Anything which changes the velocity of the object other than the background potential itself.

In a rotating coordinate system such as the one where the Lagrange points appear also makes it a bit more difficult to analyse due to the implied inertial forces.
 
Orodruin said:
You do not need an actual collision. It is sufficient with some gravitational deflection. Anything which changes the velocity of the object other than the background potential itself.

In a rotating coordinate system such as the one where the Lagrange points appear also makes it a bit more difficult to analyse due to the implied inertial forces.
Thank you again, Orodruin. :-) Unfortunately I'm still unsure about my original question. :-( Could an L(1,2,3) point capture some small asteroid or cloud of dust or gas and keep it there for some time? Is that what NASA is talking about when they mention the "23-day stability"?
 
They are talking about a typical time-scale on which the Lagrange points are unstable so that if you have an object placed there, the typical time taken to leave the Lagrange point would be of the order of that time.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
15K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K