What keeps the planets in orbit

  • Thread starter Thread starter G.U.T.finder
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orbit Planets
Click For Summary
The discussion addresses the mechanics of planetary orbits, questioning how planets avoid colliding despite gravitational attraction. The trampoline analogy is criticized for oversimplifying the complexities of spacetime and gravity, misleading those trying to understand orbital dynamics. It is clarified that planets maintain their orbits due to their tangential velocity, which allows them to "fall around" the sun rather than crash into it. While some argue the analogy can illustrate the concept, it ultimately fails to accurately represent the underlying physics. Understanding the balance of gravitational forces and orbital velocity is crucial for grasping why planets remain in stable orbits.
G.U.T.finder
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
If the reason why the planets orbit around the sun is the deviations in the fabric of spacetime,what keeps the planets from crashing into each other? Like if I put a boulder on a trampoline and then I put a baseball next, the baseball would go toward the boulder. I think it could be dark matter pushing the planets away and gravity bringing them closer in equilibrium. But who knows the correct answer ( if there is one).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
G.U.T.finder said:
Like if I put a boulder on a trampoline and then I put a baseball next, the baseball would go toward the boulder.

You're one of many people who have been misled by the trampoline analogy. It makes for nice pictures and non-technical descriptions of kinda sort of what's happening, but it's very misleading if you want to really understand what's going on.

You can search this forum for some of the previous criticism of the trampoline analogy (try searching on "rubber sheet").
 
Nugatory said:
You're one of many people who have been misled by the trampoline analogy. It makes for nice pictures and non-technical descriptions of kinda sort of what's happening, but it's very misleading if you want to really understand what's going on.

While I'm firmly in the "the rubber sheet analogy is horrible" camp, it can handle OP's question just fine. Planets are in orbit around the sun. If they didn't have orbital velocity, they would crash into the sun just like OP is suggesting. As it is, they do have tangential velocity so they effectively "fall around" the sun. You can simulate this perfectly well with a boulder and a baseball on a trampoline, though friction will damp things pretty quickly.

It's still a bad analogy though.
 
In an inertial frame of reference (IFR), there are two fixed points, A and B, which share an entangled state $$ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0>_A|1>_B+|1>_A|0>_B) $$ At point A, a measurement is made. The state then collapses to $$ |a>_A|b>_B, \{a,b\}=\{0,1\} $$ We assume that A has the state ##|a>_A## and B has ##|b>_B## simultaneously, i.e., when their synchronized clocks both read time T However, in other inertial frames, due to the relativity of simultaneity, the moment when B has ##|b>_B##...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
6K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K