I Solar system simulation -- Significant deviation of some Jovian moons

AI Thread Summary
The simulation of the solar system is experiencing significant deviations in the orbits of Jovian moons Io and Europa compared to NASA's reference values, despite using identical initial parameters. The simulated velocities for both moons differ notably from the expected values, indicating potential issues with the simulation setup. A key factor identified is the timestep used; a 24-hour step is too large for Io's 1.7-day orbital period and Europa's 3.6-day period, leading to inaccuracies. Reducing the timestep has been suggested as a solution to achieve more realistic orbital results. Adjusting the timestep is crucial for accurately simulating the dynamics of these moons.
madsmh
Messages
32
Reaction score
2
I am working on a simulation of the solar system, but I am having problems with the orbits with Europa and Io shown in the image below, the orbits of Jupiter, Ganymede and Callisto are consistent with NASA's simulations. For all bodies I have used identical parameters in generating the initial values (position and velocities) from NASA Horizons, but the simulated velocities deviate significantly from the reference values, see below the image.
jupiter_moons.png


Code:
Simulated velocities Io
[[ -8614.49286 -21369.57154   -632.93203]
[  9413.68985 -45300.37648  -1230.23422]
[  9386.14932 -44351.41911  -1197.69465]
[  9380.29852 -44091.59352  -1189.38208]
[  9384.20206 -43964.90674  -1185.66855]
[  9392.3708  -43887.48053  -1183.64575]
[  9402.739   -43833.83182  -1182.43573]
[  9414.37123 -43793.50441  -1181.67948]
[  9426.78351 -43761.39524  -1181.20215]
[  9439.70035 -43734.71132  -1180.90818]]
Reference velocities Io
[[ -8.6145e+03  -2.1370e+04  -6.3293e+02]
[  1.4312e+04   3.7050e+03   5.8373e+02]
[  3.2327e+03  -2.8330e+04  -7.1454e+02]
[  5.2868e+02   5.4834e+03   4.5001e+02]
[  1.6449e+04  -2.4527e+04  -3.9360e+02]
[ -1.0069e+04  -3.4329e+03  -1.9295e+01]
[  2.2782e+04  -1.2263e+04   1.3100e+02]
[ -1.0724e+04  -1.7200e+04  -5.2041e+02]
[  1.8110e+04   7.9950e+02   5.2812e+02]
[ -1.1648e+03  -2.7069e+04  -7.3810e+02]]
Simulated velocities Europa
[[ 17409.7477 -17977.8844   -149.1204]
[ 19892.0848  -6577.1288    388.6789]
[ 15345.577   -6005.3129    330.4903]
[ 13644.4897  -6241.7316    288.5844]
[ 12703.5633  -6475.9464    260.4778]
[ 12088.5888  -6670.4873    239.9645]
[ 11648.2814  -6830.9437    224.0745]
[ 11314.4114  -6965.0308    211.2436]
[ 11051.081   -7078.774     200.5634]
[ 10837.3529  -7176.5748    191.4658]]
Reference velocities Europa
[[ 17409.7477 -17977.8844   -149.1204]
[  9657.1567   1697.3447    562.7489]
[ -8209.8182  -9418.8943   -242.2855]
[  6511.8877 -25017.7237   -653.561 ]
[ 18583.2     -7391.2116    327.0779]
[  -703.984     970.8296    340.24  ]
[ -5401.237  -19722.1106   -642.0661]
[ 16113.2379 -19990.1371   -266.1455]
[ 12018.9873    776.3151    558.5457]
[ -7545.2962  -6950.3879   -130.6148]]

These are the first ten velocities in vx, vy, vz-format. The stepsize used is 24 hours.

The physical constants, using in the simulation are
Code:
NAME,RADIUS,GM, COMMENT,
Sun, 695700e3,1.3271244004193938e20, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Mercury, 2439.7e3,22032.09e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Venus, 6051.8e3,324858.63e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Earth, 6371.0e3,398600.440e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Mars, 3389.5e3,42828.3e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Jupiter, 69911e3,126686511e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Saturn, 58232e3,37931207.8e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Uranus, 25362e3,5793966e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Neptune, 24622e3,6835107e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Pluto, 1737.4e3,872.4e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Luna, 469.7e3, 4902.801076e9, "Source: JPL, Lunar Constants and Models Document",
Ceres, 469.7e3,62.6284e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Pallas, 272.5e3,14.3e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Vesta, 262.7e3,17.8e9, "Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Hygiea, 203.56e3,7e9, "Asteroid. Source: NASA/JPL Horizons",
Ganymede, 2634e3,9887.83e9, "Moon of Jupiter. Source: International Astronomical Union, Icy Bodies of the Solar System",
Titan, 2575.5e3,8978.1356e9, "Moon of Saturn. Source: International Astronomical Union, Icy Bodies of the Solar System",
Callisto, 2410.3e3,7179.29e9, "Moon of Jupiter. Source: International Astronomical Union, Icy Bodies of the Solar System",
Io, 1821.46e3,5959.916e9, "Moon of Jupiter. Source: International Astronomical Union, Icy Bodies of the Solar System",
Europa, 1562.09e3,3202.72e9, "Moon of Jupiter. Source: International Astronomical Union, Icy Bodies of the Solar System",
Any help would be appreciated :)

.. Mads
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Io has an orbital period of 1.7 days. With a step size of 1 day, you cannot get a realistic orbit.
Europa has an orbital period of 3.6 days, still too low.
Ganymede has 7 days and Callisto has 17 days, for these moons steps of 1 day can lead to something that looks like an orbit (with a large error, however),
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
mfb said:
Io has an orbital period of 1.7 days. With a step size of 1 day, you cannot get a realistic orbit.
Europa has an orbital period of 3.6 days, still too low.
Ganymede has 7 days and Callisto has 17 days, for these moons steps of 1 day can lead to something that looks like an orbit (with a large error, however),

A smaller timestep fixed it, sorry for not looking before posting.
 
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
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