Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > Highly Technical

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-07-2013, 10:56 AM   #1
Apple Of Sodom
Golden Member
 
Apple Of Sodom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,794
Default Why do planets orbit in approximately the same plane as other planets?

Maybe I'm just not thinking of this properly...

Why do all of the planets in our system orbit the sun in approximately the same plane? Do other systems exist that have planets orbit a star orthogonally (or at least significantly different angle) from one another? Is this even a possibility? Is there basically a plane that has the strongest gravity so all stellar objects in orbit will eventually find that plane, like an equilibrium?
Apple Of Sodom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 11:02 AM   #2
mryellow
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 21
Default

I believe the accretion discs form along the plane of the stars rotation because of gravity.
mryellow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 05:21 PM   #3
Vectronic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 489
Default

It's possible to have all sorts of weird orbits going on at the same time, take a look at Jupiters moons.

The initial accretion disc inevitably has to follow the spin of it's largest/central mass... thus if enough material is there to eventually form a planet(s), it will be orbiting in that plane. A planet that forms out of that plane (which wouldn't form a planet at all really, maybe a small clump), doesn't have the momentum to maintain an orbit, so it either:
A. falls into the center of gravity.
B. flies off, if given enough time and depending on the rotation of the center of gravity, it may be able to "hang on" to an orbit really far away that matches the gravitational pull and it's momentum.

Planets/bodies that are "close" to the orbital plane, will eventually alter their orbit, or alter the plane so that they are both in-line... or... failing that, fly off.

Something like Pluto will probably eventually match the orbit of the other planets, because of the pull/gravity between it, and the much larger planets... since Pluto is so small this may take billions of years... in the meantime it's more likely to bump into something else and become an unstable orbit... dive in, or fly out.

You can play with stuff like this with something like Universe Sandbox... not terribly accurate, but accurate enough.

Disclaimer: I dunno s**t.
Vectronic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 12:52 PM   #4
Biftheunderstudy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 360
Default

The best model for solar system formation is the planetary disk. So why a disk?

If you start with a big cloud of gas with some net sense of rotation (the reasons to believe these initial conditions aren't that far fetched). As gravity collapses the cloud, it will collapse along the z axis preferentially since there is no rotational support there. (Rotational support being the angular moment or centrifigul force). So, if you take a rotating sphere and collapse it, it will invariably produce a disk like structure where the planets will form in.

Now, this is only part of the answer, the rest has to do with where the stable orbits are (resonances etc.)

If you look at the larger scale of the solar system (Kuiper belt and Oort cloud), this co-planar nature is basically completely lost (Pluto being a fine example of this type of orbit).

If you look at other gravitating systems like star clusters, galaxies, galaxy clusters etc. there is no constraint on their orbits being co-planar, in which case the velocity distribution is said to be isotropic.
Biftheunderstudy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 02:17 AM   #5
disappoint
Diamond Member
 
disappoint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,793
Default

I always thought it was because of spin.

Think of a weight at the end of a string. This weight has some other weights glued to it. Take the other end of the string and spin it fast enough to overcome the glue. Would the weights that detach not be likely to fly off in the plane that you spun it?
__________________
A man can't keep people from having a bad opinion of him, but he can keep them from being right about it.
We give evil it's greatest power through our belief in it.
"Pay no attention to what the critics say. A statue has never been put up to a critic." -Jean Sibelius
Per aspera ad astra: Through hardship to the stars.
disappoint is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 09:56 AM   #6
Ferzerp
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: B̿̄ͬͮͦ͐̐̂̌̂͛̓̃̔̈́̓
Posts: 5,242
Default

The items that orbit in the plane are items that formed from the spinning cloud of matter.

Items that are orbiting not with that plane are captured items.
Ferzerp is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 04:42 AM   #7
LightField
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 113
Default

Do a search for a video made by someone called Stan Deyo... he sounds like a conman but from what I have discovered there may be some truth to his claims.

I might be just ignorant or delusional but from what I have seen rotation has something to do with gravity.... as does electricity and magnetism.
LightField is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 07:17 PM   #8
John Connor
Diamond Member
 
John Connor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Somewhere with an encrypted radio mocking the NSA
Posts: 6,971
Default

Another question is why do most celestial objects rotate in a counter-clockwise direction?
John Connor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 08:22 PM   #9
crashtech
Platinum Member
 
crashtech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Southern Idaho
Posts: 2,841
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Conner View Post
Another question is why do most celestial objects rotate in a counter-clockwise direction?
Perceived direction of rotation is dependent on orientation, counterclockwise rotation from one side appears clockwise from the other.
crashtech is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 08:39 PM   #10
wirednuts
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferzerp View Post
The items that orbit in the plane are items that formed from the spinning cloud of matter.

Items that are orbiting not with that plane are captured items.
is this the answer? it makes sense
wirednuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 12:31 AM   #11
John Connor
Diamond Member
 
John Connor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Somewhere with an encrypted radio mocking the NSA
Posts: 6,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crashtech View Post
Perceived direction of rotation is dependent on orientation, counterclockwise rotation from one side appears clockwise from the other.

I just envisoed Jupiter turning counter-clockwise and it doesn't matter which side you see the planet it moves counter-clockwise. Same with galaxies.
John Connor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 04:37 PM   #12
OSULugan
Senior Member
 
OSULugan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nevada
Posts: 262
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Conner View Post
I just envisoed Jupiter turning counter-clockwise and it doesn't matter which side you see the planet it moves counter-clockwise. Same with galaxies.
Think about looking "down" onto the axis of rotation from the "top" of a planet.

Now, think about looking "up" onto the axis of rotation from the "bottom" of the planet.

If you need to, use your hand.
OSULugan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 06:16 PM   #13
John Connor
Diamond Member
 
John Connor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Somewhere with an encrypted radio mocking the NSA
Posts: 6,971
Default

And another question. What if instead of traveling out into space you travel down or straight up? What's up or down? I wondered about that since I was about 9 years old.
John Connor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 06:38 PM   #14
wirednuts
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Conner View Post
And another question. What if instead of traveling out into space you travel down or straight up? What's up or down? I wondered about that since I was about 9 years old.
sort of what were talking about. not really an up or down, but there is up and down. the universe started at the size of a head of a pin or less. then it exploded in flat ring like fashion. the universe is flat. space goes on forever, as far as we can tell, but the universe is basically a big flat disc.
wirednuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 07:25 PM   #15
John Connor
Diamond Member
 
John Connor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Somewhere with an encrypted radio mocking the NSA
Posts: 6,971
Default

We think it's flat. They said earth was flat at one time too. I think it's a big ass sphere.
John Connor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 11:36 PM   #16
Sunny129
Diamond Member
 
Sunny129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,764
Default

while spacetime can have significant curvature locally (meaning near relativistic objects such as black holes, neutron stars, galaxy clusters, etc.), the universe on a grand scale appears to be flat. but don't let the terminology confuse you - stating that the universe is "flat" simply means that spacetime is not curved. it does not mean that the universe expanded from the Big Bang in 2-dimensional fashion. we live in a universe of 3 spatial dimensions, and space has been expanding into all 3 of those spatial dimensions from the onset. that is to say, the universe is expanding like a beach ball being blown up, and not like a "flat disc" of ever-increasing radius.
__________________
1) i7 3770K, Hyper 212+, Gigabyte G1.Sniper 3, 2 X HD 7970, SeaSonic X-750, Win7 x64
2) i7 3770K, Hyper 212+, Gigabyte G1.Sniper 3, 2 X HD 7970, SeaSonic X-750, Win7 x64
3) i7 3770K, Hyper 212 EVO, Gigabyte Z77X-UD4H, HD 7970, SeaSonic X-650, Win7 x64
4) X6 1055T, Hyper 212+, MSI 890GXM-G65, 2 X HD 6670, Antec Neo Eco 620, Win7 x64
My Heat (56-0-0) | BOINCstats

Last edited by Sunny129; 02-22-2013 at 05:47 PM.
Sunny129 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 05:40 PM   #17
John Connor
Diamond Member
 
John Connor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Somewhere with an encrypted radio mocking the NSA
Posts: 6,971
Default

http://news.yahoo.com/why-higgs-boso...115810396.html
John Connor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 06:27 PM   #18
piasabird
Lifer
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,083
Default

What makes you think this actually occurs? We have not studies many solarsystems. However, if you look at most galaxies they tend to radiate out from an axis like a wheel. This may have something to do with magnetic patterns of rotational systems. So maybe a planetary system works much the same.

Then you look at formations like Pilades which is a star cluster and you wonder what is keeping it together.
__________________
Asus Memo Pad 7 HD. Quad Core Tablet.

Last edited by piasabird; 02-22-2013 at 06:30 PM.
piasabird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:03 PM   #19
piasabird
Lifer
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,083
Default

Using the hubble telescope, the further away the objects the less linear they seem to be. So maybe as stars evolved and collapsed they developed into linerar structures. This assumes that the further away something is the longer the light takes to reach Earth so it is like looking back in time.
__________________
Asus Memo Pad 7 HD. Quad Core Tablet.
piasabird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 09:28 PM   #20
Comdrpopnfresh
Golden Member
 
Comdrpopnfresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,167
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple Of Sodom View Post
Maybe I'm just not thinking of this properly...

Why do all of the planets in our system orbit the sun in approximately the same plane? Do other systems exist that have planets orbit a star orthogonally (or at least significantly different angle) from one another? Is this even a possibility? Is there basically a plane that has the strongest gravity so all stellar objects in orbit will eventually find that plane, like an equilibrium?
omfsm! I've oft wondered the same thing. My best guess is that because solar systems form in a galactic orbit they are prone to formation from clouds that compress along a common plane aligned to galactic center. The thing that always brought me to this same question is reflection on our own asteroid belt: is it a spherical formation? does our NEO search include object with approach paths bringing them toward our poles? why do we launch all our ranged satellites (think voyager(s)) on a planetary plane only? Good to know I am not the only one wondering this. (apologizes for not taking the time to read any responses past the first 1-3... forums need to adopt a rating system like Amazon product comments; "xx other users found this useful/ made a similar comment").
Comdrpopnfresh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 10:22 PM   #21
Sunny129
Diamond Member
 
Sunny129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,764
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Comdrpopnfresh View Post
why do we launch all our ranged satellites (think voyager(s)) on a planetary plane only?
ranged satellites need to reach high velocities in order to escape the sun's gravity and get to the outer reaches of the solar system (and perhaps beyond, like the Voyagers might soon be). scientists deliberately launch these satellites in such a way that they make "near passes" by another planet (or planets), thereby using that planet's gravity to accelerate and slingshot themselves away from the sun and farther out into the solar system (think back to Kepler's 2nd law of planetary motion, which implies that in an eccentric (elliptical) orbit, the object must move faster when it is closer to the source of gravitation). to reach the highest velocities possible in this manner, these satellites must travel in the direction of the planets' orbits around the sun, and they must stay within the plane of the ecliptic (the orbital plane of the planets).
__________________
1) i7 3770K, Hyper 212+, Gigabyte G1.Sniper 3, 2 X HD 7970, SeaSonic X-750, Win7 x64
2) i7 3770K, Hyper 212+, Gigabyte G1.Sniper 3, 2 X HD 7970, SeaSonic X-750, Win7 x64
3) i7 3770K, Hyper 212 EVO, Gigabyte Z77X-UD4H, HD 7970, SeaSonic X-650, Win7 x64
4) X6 1055T, Hyper 212+, MSI 890GXM-G65, 2 X HD 6670, Antec Neo Eco 620, Win7 x64
My Heat (56-0-0) | BOINCstats

Last edited by Sunny129; 02-22-2013 at 10:28 PM.
Sunny129 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 07:03 PM   #22
Ventanni
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 827
Default

Pluto orbits in a 2:3 resonance with Neptune
__________________
Desktop: Core i7 3770k, 8GB, Geforce 560 Ti
HTPC: Core2 Q6600, 4GB, Geforce 285
Ventanni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 10:29 PM   #23
Sunny129
Diamond Member
 
Sunny129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,764
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ventanni View Post
Pluto orbits in a 2:3 resonance with Neptune
while true, this phenomenon doesn't really answer the OP's question of why the planets tend to orbit in the same plane.
__________________
1) i7 3770K, Hyper 212+, Gigabyte G1.Sniper 3, 2 X HD 7970, SeaSonic X-750, Win7 x64
2) i7 3770K, Hyper 212+, Gigabyte G1.Sniper 3, 2 X HD 7970, SeaSonic X-750, Win7 x64
3) i7 3770K, Hyper 212 EVO, Gigabyte Z77X-UD4H, HD 7970, SeaSonic X-650, Win7 x64
4) X6 1055T, Hyper 212+, MSI 890GXM-G65, 2 X HD 6670, Antec Neo Eco 620, Win7 x64
My Heat (56-0-0) | BOINCstats
Sunny129 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2013, 09:30 AM   #24
sm625
Diamond Member
 
sm625's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple Of Sodom View Post
Maybe I'm just not thinking of this properly...

Why do all of the planets in our system orbit the sun in approximately the same plane?
For the same reason that all the beads on a string will spin around one single 2D plane when you twirl the string. The physics should be totally intuitive, no?

Objects in multiple planes would eventually collide with one another and the remains would merge into one final plane.
__________________
I am looking for a cheap upgrade to my 3 year old computer.
AT forum member #1: Buy a 4790k

I am looking for a way to get 10 more fps in TF2.
AT forum member #2: Buy a 4790k

Last edited by sm625; 02-28-2013 at 12:31 PM.
sm625 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.