Spinning and rotation of planets

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the orbital dynamics of two planets, X and Y, around their center of mass, emphasizing that their orbital periods are equal due to their collinearity. It highlights that if planet X is significantly more massive than planet Y, the center of mass is nearly at planet X, leading to its axial spin. However, the assumption that spin is dependent on the center of mass is challenged, as spin is generally independent of the barycenter's position. Adding more celestial bodies complicates the system, altering the center of mass, but the overall motion remains consistent. The complexities of multiple stars and planets do not negate the fundamental principles of orbital mechanics.
wilsonlye
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
consider two planets, planet X and planet Y with masses, Mx and My separated with distance, D and they orbits about the centre of mass of the system which remains stationary.

we know that period of orbit for X and Y are the same because they are always collinear with the centre of mass

suppose Mx much more bigger than My, then the centre of mass of the system is almost at the centre of planet X, thus planet X will spin in its own axis.

then how to explain in system consists of multiple stars and planets. It seems to be too complicated, and the ratio of masses between planets is not infinite.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
wilsonlye said:
suppose Mx much more bigger than My, then the centre of mass of the system is almost at the centre of planet X, thus planet X will spin in its own axis.

This is an incorrect assumption.
In general, the spin is independent of orbital center of mass, usually referred to as the barycenter.
For a planet of uniform density , the position of barycenter doesn't affect spin.

...
 
I don't really see a question here. What do you want explained? Don't make the mistake of equating "effectively zero" with "exactly zero" in those ratios.

When you change "the system" by adding more bodies you change where the center of mass will be. Yes the motions will be complex. But still the total center of mass remains unchanged (or moves with constant velocity depending on your frame of reference).
 
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...
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...
Back
Top