Backwards Alien Planets Challenge Theories

[Jarvamundo]

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/backwards-planets-100413.html
(http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/backwards-planets-100413.html)


6 out of 27? eek

[renormalised]

Yes, it's a very interesting conundrum. Makes you wonder just how stable their orbits are given that they must've been there for quite some time...if you follow accepted wisdom in these matters.

[Nesti]

Perhaps in the early years of the system, a second system took a swipe at such an angle as to knock material into a counter rotating orbit...imagine a small sun being pulled into the advancing horizon of a much larger sun, it then being pulled apart with pieces being scattered into outer orbits.

[Jarvamundo]

6 out of 27 tho mark...

Orbital dynamics places impacting swipes at ridiculously small probabilities, certainly not 6/27, let alone and impacting swipe ending up in a stable reversed orbit.

frabigillions to one yep i made that word up... everyone's doin it... heard it here first ;)

With these ratios, the coalescing gas solar system evolution planamajig thing has some work to do indeed!

[Nesti]

A Dodecagazillion to one...just like the origin/formation of our moon. :P

[sjastro]

Or Uranus falling on it's side (no jokes please:)) , a large chunk of Mimas missing.........

Regards

Steven

[Jarvamundo]

still no stable reverse orbits gents... these are hot gas giants, apparently meant to 've formed in the outer extremities of the coalescing gas disc model, not satellites of local origin, which are also not counter rotating. But hey a cosmic game of ping pong is as good as guess as any at this stage... capture is probably on the right track... 6/27 is big...

i think that number is Dodecagazillion is bigger than mine... darn it

[sjastro]

That's not the point. Impacts are not as improbable as you make out.

Regards

Steven

[Jarvamundo]

"a second system took a swipe at such an angle as to knock material into a counter rotating orbit"

impact swipes from an interacting second system ;)

you guys then took it local... and non-reverse... not me

almost tho ;)

[sjastro]

You don't get it. I'm not referring to the outcome of the impact but the probability of the impact in the first place.

Regards

Steven

[mswhin63]

Very interesting article, I wonder if the thought of a suns reverse spin is a plausable idea to some retrograde orbit. Could there be some new science to reverese spinning. Could that supposably dark matter/enengy be the link to this anomoly (the plot thinkens).
Although there is a high gravity on earth whirlpool's go in different direction between northern and southern hemispheres. I am not a science buff but like to ask silly question just in case I am right (or drop the plot on my head).

[Nesti]

Yes it is indeed interesting.

I don't think that a "new science" is needed to explain it. GR, Newtonian and Classical Mechanics should be able to represent a system with reverse spin of planets against the parent star's rotation...what the issues is-is in the theory of colessence of matter and stellar [system] formation; the standard convention being that planets form in the same rotational direction as the parent star...ergo my reasoning that perhaps a second system provided the necessary motivation to get the material to reverse the rotation while the parent star was not affected...perhaps two gas masses with clockwise rotation, revolving around each other in an anti clockwise direction (Analogy: epicyclic gearing, without a central sun gear and with planetary gears which spin and revolve inside a fixed outer gear casing).

Spin direction of Whirlpools, like those large ornamental rock balls suspended and spinning on a layer of pressured water is an affect of Coriolis, in that the water and rock balls alike are resisting the changing motion (angular momentum mostly I believe) of the Earth and partly the Sun...it's inertia! Like a gyroscope provides "rigidity in space", so too the water and rock balls wish to remain at rest or uniform motion. The rotation of Earth and revolution around the Sun is a continual external influence against that resting "rigidity", thus the balls spin in sympathy and the water cork-screws down the plug-hole (opposite in Northern and Southern Hemispheres of course).

There is however a link (perhaps). It's pretty complex so I'll not attempt to give an exact explanation as I'm still getting the gist of it also, but in surveying curvature in spacetime, a Parallel Transfer will show that curvature is present. An inaccurate analogy would be; imagine a spinning Top (toy) stationary in space, if you walk around in a small circle with the Top and come back to the same position, either left or right, the Top will remain the same however, in curved space, a left hand circle will result in the Top coming back to the same position tilted at an angle. Go back the opposite way and it will come back to normal. Move in a right hand circle and the Top tilts in the opposite way to that of the left hand circle.

I think Riemann worked out Parallel Transfer as part of his work on Intrinsic Curvature and how it may be surveyed in Metric Tensor form...A lot of hard work was done well before Einstein was even born; Euler, Gauss and Riemann did most of it I'd have to say.

Cheers

[Robh]

As a concrete example, consider the Sun and Jupiter in our solar system.
The kinetic energy of rotation of the Sun, calculated from its mass, is about 1.64 x 10^36 joules. It would be less than this as density actually decreases with distance from centre.
The kinetic energy of Jupiter due to its orbital velocity is about 1.62 x 10^35 joules. This is about 10 times less than the Sun's rotational energy.
Now, consider a near-equator tangential hit by a large body traveling in the opposite direction to the Sun's rotation. A body 10 times the size of Jupiter would be enough to nullify the Sun's rotational energy. Of course, the problem is much more complex than this as both bodies are gaseous but the gist of the idea is there.
In fact, if the Sun were rotating 3 times more slowly, a body the size of Jupiter would be enough to match its rotational energy.
Alternatively, if a Jupiter-sized body was traveling 3 times faster than Jupiter is now, it would also match the Sun's rotational energy.

A large enough hit could reverse the rotation of the Sun. The question is more about the origin of such a body.

Regards, Rob.

[Jarvamundo]

I think the far more likely scenario is capture of the counter rotating object... not collision causing a reversal.

The origin of hot gas giants is the big question, as it seems the coalescing gas disk model for them can be turfed for 6/27 of these... if not the lot.

Will also be interesting to see the orbits of any remaining objects in these systems.

[Robh]

Judging by the number of pot holes on the Moon and the recent hits on Jupiter, I wouldn't discount big hits on the most massive attractor, the Sun.
It is conceivable that as the Sun, or any star for that matter, circles the galaxy that it perhaps passes bodies (planets or stars) that for one reason or another have been flung its way. Although, broadly the stars in our galaxy circle as a unit, locally, stars may be moving in seemingly random directions due to momentum and changes in local gravitation. Body flybys may be quite common over a billion years!
This, of course, would also support your viewpoint.

Regards, Rob.

[snas]

Mark (Nesti)

Re your comment that the water corkscrews down the plug hole in opposite direction in the northern and southern hemispheres.
The Coriolis effect acts on a large scale. Hence a low pressure system in the southern hemisphere will rotate clockwise, but anti-clockwise in the northern hemisphere.
At a very small scale such as water going down a plug hole, the Coriolis effect is so miniscule that it can be ignored. The direction in which the water corkscrews down the plug hole is determined solely by local effects such as currents within the water before you pull out the plug, the effect of your hand moving through the water as you pull the plug etc.
There is a bloke in Kenya (I think???) who charges tourists a fee to demonstrate this. He steps to one side of the equator with a basin of water and pulls out the plug, the water goes down in one direction. He then steps across the equator and repeats the test and it goes in the opposite direction. But what he actually does is to set up a current in the basin by turning to his right on one side of the equator, and then to his left on the other side just before he pulls out the plug.
So the plug hole story is an urban myth. As for whirlpools, I don't claim to know for sure, but I would suspect that local forces would predominate here too. A quick google on the subject reveals that the urban myth re plug holes is very much alive and well. Could not find any reliable info re whirlpools.
As for why 6/27 planets are going the wrong way...I certainly cannot help there. :)
Stuart