What Are the Orbital Periods and Star Mass for These Hypothetical Planets?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the orbital periods of hypothetical planets based on their semi-major axes and the known period of Planet A, which is 190 days. Using the formula p^2 = k a^3, the value of k was determined to be 1.93, allowing for the calculation of the other planets' orbital periods. The mass of the star can be derived using the relationship between orbital period and star mass, indicating that the star's mass is a crucial factor in these calculations. Additionally, it is suggested that all three planets could retain an atmosphere of oxygen molecules, although the specifics of atmospheric loss times are left for further exploration. Understanding these dynamics is essential for assessing the habitability of these hypothetical planets.
ltung
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Planet A: Mass - 8 × 10^24 kg, Radius 8,200 km, Temperature - 500 K, Semi-major axis - 0.52 AU
Planet B: Mass - 3 × 10^27 kg, Radius - 57000 km, Temperature - 150 K, Semi-major axis - 6.4 AU
Planet C: Mass - 6 × 10^23 kg, Radius - 3500 km, Temperature - 105 K, Semi-major axis -37.8 AU

1. If the orbital period of planet A is 190 days, what are the periods of the other two planets? What is the mass of the star around which these planets orbit?
2. Which of these planets could retain an atmosphere of oxygen molecules?

Based on the 190 days orbital period, p^2 = k a^3, which plugging in the semimajor axis, I get k for 1.93 and used it to find the orbital periods of hte other planets.
Then I don't know how to do the other part of question 1 and question 2. There is a similar question on this forum, but it didn't help me with answering this question.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
There's an expression for k that involves the star's mass. Do you know what it is, or can you derive it if you don't?
 
ltung said:
Planet A: Mass - 8 × 10^24 kg, Radius 8,200 km, Temperature - 500 K, Semi-major axis - 0.52 AU
Planet B: Mass - 3 × 10^27 kg, Radius - 57000 km, Temperature - 150 K, Semi-major axis - 6.4 AU
Planet C: Mass - 6 × 10^23 kg, Radius - 3500 km, Temperature - 105 K, Semi-major axis -37.8 AU

1. If the orbital period of planet A is 190 days, what are the periods of the other two planets? What is the mass of the star around which these planets orbit?
2. Which of these planets could retain an atmosphere of oxygen molecules?

Based on the 190 days orbital period, p^2 = k a^3, which plugging in the semimajor axis, I get k for 1.93 and used it to find the orbital periods of hte other planets.
Then I don't know how to do the other part of question 1 and question 2. There is a similar question on this forum, but it didn't help me with answering this question.

Thanks

The mass of the star can be worked out relative to our Sun's mass by the fact that the orbital period is proportional to the inverse square root of the mass of the primary. In this case the planet takes 190 days to orbit at a distance of 0.52 AU. Earth takes 365.25636 days to orbit our Sun at 1 AU. Thus the mass of the other star relative to the Sun can be worked out via the relation I mentioned. The full equation is: p2 = 4.π2.a3/[G.(Ms+Mp)] ...where Mp & Ms are the masses of the Primary and Secondary respectively, in this case the star and planet. In most cases the planetary mass is so small that the mass of the star is a near enough approximation.

As for retaining oxygen molecules what do your notes tell you about atmospheric loss times? The short answer is all those planets will retain oxygen, but I'll let you work out why yourself. You do have notes on the equations? Or are you asking because you don't?
 
Last edited:
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...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top