Ratio between Semi major and Velocity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between the semi-major axis of planetary orbits and their velocities. One participant claims to have derived formulas demonstrating a direct ratio between these two factors, while others clarify that the ratios of orbital velocities and semi-major axes are not directly related. For circular orbits, the velocity is inversely proportional to the square root of the semi-major axis. Additional formulas are provided for calculating orbital speeds at different points in the orbit, emphasizing the complexities introduced by eccentricity. The conversation highlights the need for careful consideration of orbital mechanics when discussing these relationships.
phi-lin good
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi, has anybody shown that the ratio between two planets semi-major equals the ratio of their velocity. I've been studying the solar system using geometry and came up with formulas that show this relationship. I've checked my work several times and can't find anything wrong with it. I'll post my work up maybe later on today or tomorrow so you guys can check it.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
If you are talking about the ratio of the orbital velocities vs ratio of semi-major axi, then these two ratios are not directly related.

For a circular orbit, the orbital velocity can be found by:

V = \sqrt{\frac{GM}{a}}

With G being the gravitational constant, M the mass of the Sun (Or body being orbited) and a the semi-major axis.

With two planets orbiting the same Sun the only thing that changes is a. Thus the orbital velocity changes inversely to the squareroot of the semi-major axis.
 
Last edited:
It may also be helpful to note that one can calculate the orbit speed at apoapsis distance (a) based on arbitrary eccentricity (e):

v = \sqrt{\frac{GM}{a} \frac{1 - e}{1 + e} }

Where e = 0, this works out to the same as the formula for circular orbit given in the post above.

Where e = 1, this works out to 0 velocity, which is equivalent to radial in-fall.

Likewise, at periapsis distance (p), the formula is:

v = \sqrt{\frac{GM}{p} \frac{1 + e}{1 - e} }

Where e = 1, things obviously fall apart due to division by zero. In other words, it's nonsensical to talk about orbit and radial in-fall in the same breath, since they are mutually exclusive concepts.
 
Last edited:
Or you can use

v=\sqrt{GM \left ( \frac{2}{r}- \frac{1}{a} \right )}

to find the velocity at a distance of r, for an orbit with a semi-major axis of a (this assumes that the eccentricity of the orbit allows for the given value of r for the given orbit.)
 
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.
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...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top