Why are all the orbits elliptical and not circular?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Monsterboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circular Orbits
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of orbits, specifically why they are predominantly elliptical rather than circular. Participants explore the implications of classical mechanics, Kepler's laws, and the conditions necessary for circular motion, touching on both planetary and atomic scales.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that traditional explanations involving centrifugal and centripetal forces often fail to address why orbits are elliptical rather than circular.
  • Another participant clarifies that a circle is a specific case of an ellipse and suggests that the real question should be why eccentricity is never zero, implying that perfect conditions are required for circular orbits.
  • Kepler's First Law is mentioned as a foundational principle describing planetary orbits as ellipses.
  • A participant argues that circular orbits require precise conditions that are rarely met, making elliptical orbits the more common outcome.
  • It is suggested that circular orbits are nearly impossible except in two-body systems, and even then, they can be affected by external gravitational influences.
  • A participant proposes that reframing the question to focus on the absence of orbits with very low eccentricity might clarify the discussion.
  • Another contribution discusses the conservation of angular momentum in central orbits and connects it to Kepler's laws, while also suggesting that the complexity of the mathematics may have influenced educational approaches.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of orbits, the conditions necessary for circular motion, and the implications of Kepler's laws. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on a singular explanation for the predominance of elliptical orbits.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of classical explanations and the assumptions underlying the conditions for circular orbits. There is an acknowledgment of the complexities involved in the mathematics of orbital mechanics.

Monsterboy
Messages
305
Reaction score
96
In high school whenever i asked questions about planets and their orbits around their star or the orbits of satellites around their planets ,i always got the answers with the terms centrifugal ,centripetal force and an example of a stone tied to a thread and how it behaves when you hold the thread at the other end and by swinging it, you make the stone orbit your fist but this circular not elliptical but all things that i mentioned about move in elliptical orbits ,even electrons revolve around the nucleus in elliptical orbits right ? i never got the answer for my "elliptical question" .can i get an answer please? maybe my teachers thought that it was too complicated for me to understand because i didn't know about relativity or something?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Electrons don't orbit in the classical sense.

A circle is a special case of an ellipse (with zero eccentricity) so even a circular orbit is elliptical. So the real question should be why is eccentricity never zero? Well that would require an absolutely perfect starting situation and no interaction with other objects to disturb that perfection later.
 
Circular orbital motion is a unique set of circumstances - exactly the right speed, distance from the central body, angle of the "flight path". Change any of these, and you no longer have the right combination. Imagine that, rather than swinging it around in a circle, you let the stone dangle - a pendulum - you can get it to swing back and forth in a straight line, or around in a circle, but neither is easy. It's very easy to get it to swing in random more or less elliptical loops. Ellipses are the typical, easy, normal condition - circles are atypical, difficult, unusual.
 
Circular orbits are virtually impossible save for the case of two body systems. Even then they are subject to distortions due to density anisotropies - not to mention gravitational influences by remote bodies.
 
If you were to phrase this "why do not all orbits have eccentricity exactly 0.000...", I think it would be easier to see.
 
Hi Monsterboy! :smile:

Central orbits (ie where the force is always towards a fixed centre) have to obey conservation of angular momentum, which gives you Kepler's equal-areas-in-equal-times law.

If the central force is inverse-square, then we can prove that the orbit must be an ellipse, and yes, your high school teacher was probably right in thinking that you wouldn't understand the maths! :wink:

(but it has nothing to do with relativity)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K