What force keeps the planets orbiting normally?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter r731
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Planets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the forces that keep planets in orbit, particularly focusing on the roles of gravity, inertia, and centrifugal force. Participants explore theoretical models, mathematical representations, and conceptual clarifications related to planetary motion and orbital stability.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose a graph-theoretical approach to model the forces between planets, questioning why they do not collapse towards the center despite the presence of multiple forces.
  • Others argue that the arrangement of planets is not accurately represented in a complete graph model and emphasize the importance of tangential velocity for maintaining stable orbits.
  • A participant mentions that the gravitational force between planets is negligible compared to the force exerted by the Sun, which primarily governs their orbits.
  • Some contributions discuss the concept of centrifugal force as a counteracting force to gravity, while others challenge this notion, asserting that centrifugal force is not a true force in inertial frames.
  • There is a mention of Newton's second law and how it applies to planetary orbits, with some participants clarifying that gravity acts as a centripetal force rather than being counterbalanced by centrifugal force.
  • A later reply suggests that gravity can be viewed as the "invisible string" providing the necessary centripetal force for circular orbits.
  • Participants express differing views on the role of inertia, with one questioning whether inertia should be classified as a force in this context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the forces involved in planetary orbits, particularly around the roles of gravity, inertia, and centrifugal force. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus reached on the best explanation or model.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on specific assumptions about the arrangement and mass of planets, and the discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps related to orbital stability and dynamics.

r731
Messages
40
Reaction score
6
Let G be a graph where vertices are heavy planets and edges are forces between the incident vertices.

A complete graph K6 of six planets (of different masses) has 15 edges, why don't the planets collapse to the center?
 
  • Like
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: Delta2 and davenn
Astronomy news on Phys.org
What's the connection with physics?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and davenn
Planets aren't arranged like that, for a start.

Essentially, orbits work because the objects are moving fast enough that their paths curve towards the Sun at the exact rate they need to move in a circle (or ellipse, more usually). Newton provided a plausibility argument (nice explanation and animations at Wikipedia), and developed the detailed maths.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and davenn
r731 said:
Let G be a graph where vertices are heavy planets and edges are forces between the incident vertices.

A complete graph K6 of six planets (of different masses) has 15 edges, why don't the planets collapse to the center?
Well the forces between planets are considered "kind of" negligible (because their mass isn't so big in relation to the vast distance that separates the planets) and they don't affect a lot the orbit of the planets, it is the force between each planet and the sun that primarily determines the orbit of each planet.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: r731 and Ibix
r731 said:
A complete graph K6 of six planets (of different masses) has 15 edges, why don't the planets collapse to the center?

Let's say "planet" means planet-like object. If you arrange them this way, then they need to have a tangential velocity in order to prevent them from collapsing into the center. If you have n "planets" with the identical mass m at the positions

##r_i = R \cdot \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {\cos \varphi _i } \\ {\sin \varphi _i } \\ \end{array}} \right)##

with

##\varphi _i = 2 \cdot \pi \cdot \frac{i}{n}##

they would be accelerated with

##\ddot r_i = G \cdot m \cdot \sum\limits_{j \ne i} {\frac{{r_j - r_i }}{{\left| {r_j - r_i } \right|^3 }}} ##

towards the center and would need to move with the speed

##\left| {\dot r} \right| = \sqrt {R \cdot \left| {\ddot r} \right|} ##

to remain on a circular path.

However, such a configuration is not stable. This example with 6 Jupiter-like objects in a common orbit of 1 AU turns into chaos after 5 revolutions:

https://tinyurl.com/ybw8kyhv
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: r731 and Buzz Bloom
@r731 planets/objects generally don't fall into the sun while orbiting it because of centrifugal force which counteracts gravity and keeps them in balance. The same reason why satellites can orbit Earth and not fall down.

In fact centrifugal force is a way by which one can produce "artificial gravity" because the force that pushes on clothes that rotates within a centrifuge washing machine is identical to gravity.

http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~pfrancis/roleplay/MysteryPlanet/Orbits/
 
  • Skeptical
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn, Vanadium 50, weirdoguy and 2 others
artis said:
because of centrifugal force

Which exists only in non-inertial frames. I find it risky to explain things by using inertial forces because people usually don't understand them properly.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrStupid, Delta2 and Ibix
artis said:
@r731 planets/objects generally don't fall into the sun while orbiting it because of centrifugal force which counteracts gravity and keeps them in balance.

Newton's second law applies to planetary orbits with the gravitational force only; there is no counterbalancing centrifugal force. In Newtonian physics, gravity acts as a centripetal force.

If we apply general relativity, then there are no forces acting on the planets, gravitational, centrifugal or otherwise.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron
@PeroK @weirdoguy
Ok I agree , not the best explanation one could give. Pardon.
Gravity being the invisible "string" that provides centripetal force to keep planets in circular orbits should of have sufficed.
 
  • #10
There's no single force that can keep planets in orbit around the Sun. Gravity and inertia are two major forces that do it, and gravity is the major one.
 
  • Skeptical
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy, Vanadium 50 and Delta2
  • #11
SpaceJacob said:
Gravity and inertia are two major forces

Since when inertia is a force?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, Vanadium 50, Delta2 and 2 others

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K