Is planetary angular momentum

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of planetary angular momentum, exploring its relationship with gravity, inertia, and the processes that lead to rotation in celestial bodies. Participants engage in a technical examination of the concepts involved, including the origins of angular momentum and the roles of gravitational forces and inertia.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that angular momentum is a consequence of inertia and gravity, while others argue it is primarily a result of rotation and mass.
  • There is a question about the origin of rotation, with some asserting that gravity is the accelerating force that contributes to it.
  • One participant posits that the initial gravitational attraction causes matter to clump, leading to angular momentum due to non-uniform infall, but questions the direct role of gravity in causing rotation.
  • Another viewpoint states that once particles are bonded by gravity, they can only move around each other, thereby creating angular momentum, linking this to the concept of constant acceleration due to gravity.
  • Some participants clarify that inertia is a consequence of angular momentum rather than a cause, and discuss the relationship between gravity and angular momentum in terms of conservation laws.
  • There is a contention regarding the definitions of velocity and acceleration, particularly in the context of spinning objects and the conservation of linear and angular momentum.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between gravity, inertia, and angular momentum, with no consensus reached on the primary causes or definitions involved in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various physical laws and concepts, such as the law of inertia and conservation of momentum, but there are unresolved questions regarding the definitions and implications of these concepts in relation to angular momentum.

quincy harman
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Essentially just a consequence of inertia and gravity?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not sure what you mean by bringing gravity into it. Angular momentum is a consequence of rotation and mass, not rotation and weight.
 
phinds said:
Not sure what you mean by bringing gravity into it. Angular momentum is a consequence of rotation and mass, not rotation and weight.
Then where does rotation come from? Gravity is the accelerating force right?
 
quincy harman said:
Then where does rotation come from? Gravity is the accelerating force right?
The original gravitation attraction that cause matter to clump to form a planet or star brought in matter that was not all uniformly headed for the center of the mass accumulation, thus there was initial angular momentum, but I still think it's a stretch to say that gravity is directly responsible. It's the initial offset from pure radial infalling that causes the rotation / angular momentum. Gravity is quite capable of drawing in matter that is not offset from pure radial infalling, in which case there is no angular momentum, so how can you say it's gravity that is the cause?
 
because momentum at this point can only be transferred right? then once the particles are bonded by gravity they won't have anywhere else to move but around Each other creating angular momentum. The same reason that gravity is the force that allows the Earth to be in constant acceleration. Inertia insures constant velocity while gravity changes direction.
 
quincy harman said:
because momentum at this point can only be transferred right?
If I understand what you mean, then yes.

then once the particles are bonded by gravity they won't have anywhere else to move but around Each other creating angular momentum.
I think your wording is weird but I think you get the idea

The same reason that gravity is the force that allows the Earth to be in constant acceleration. Inertia insures constant velocity while gravity changes direction.
.I'm not at all clear what you mean by all this.

Gravity keeps the Earth from flying apart, angular momentum tries to get it to fly apart. Constant velocity is just because there is no force opposing constant velocity (forgetting for the moment the rather trivial contribution of the moon). I'm not sure where you think inertia comes in. Inertial is a consequence of the angular momentum, not a cause of the angular momentum.
 
phinds said:
If I understand what you mean, then yes.

I think your wording is weird but I think you get the idea

.I'm not at all clear what you mean by all this.

Gravity keeps the Earth from flying apart, angular momentum tries to get it to fly apart. Constant velocity is just because there is no force opposing constant velocity (forgetting for the moment the rather trivial contribution of the moon). I'm not sure where you think inertia comes in. Inertial is a consequence of the angular momentum, not a cause of the angular momentum.
The law of inertia states that an object in motion stays at constant velocity unless a force acts on it and change in direction is a change in velocity is acceleration so in essence a spinning object is in constant acceleration. nd change in velocity is change in direction I wouldn't know how else to word it other than once bonded by gravity they would have no other place to transfer momentum thus producing angular momentum.
 
Last edited:
quincy harman said:
The law of inertia states that an object in motion stays at constant velocity unless a force acts on it and change in direction is a change in velocity is acceleration so in essence a spinning object is in constant acceleration.
Yes. Perfectly correct
[A]nd change in velocity is change in direction
A change in velocity does not necessarily involve a change in direction.
I wouldn't know how else to word it other than once bonded by gravity they would have no other place to transfer momentum thus producing angular momentum.
Linear momentum is conserved. There is no need to "transfer" linear momentum into anything else. Angular momentum is conserved. It cannot be produced at all. If it is discovered to exist, it was always present. What gravity can do is bring moving bits of matter closer to one another so that the angular momentum that had always existed manifests as a higher spin rate -- like a figure skater bringing her arms in close.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: quincy harman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K