Talk:Solar system/Archive 2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Contents |
Quote
Although the term "solar system" is frequently applied to other star systems and the planetary systems which may comprise them, it should strictly refer to our system specifically: the word "solar" is derived from the Sun's Latin name, Sol (and the term sometimes appears as Solar System). When talking about another stellar system (or planetary system), including the star(s) and bodies associated with them through gravity, it is usual to shorten it to "the <name> system" (e.g. "the Alpha Centauri system" or "the 51 Pegasi system").
There is a fifty-fifty possiblity that other (clears through, then says sarcasticlly) stellar systems, could have a sun, too. --Wack'd About Wiki 13:11, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Orbital resonance
From revealed orbital resonance with 27 in closest integer denominator for all planets, could you now rewise the note about Neptune not being at its place, and that Pluto's orbit shows it does not behave like every other planet does ?
The planet between Jupiter and Mars already had a name, used in some occult circles, but I do not remember that name just now... (will add this soon)...
I would add the orbital resonance value to the table near the end of this article, but it would not fit the scaling to earth=1 in other columns ...
Any idea?
Semi Psi 17:36, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with what you speak of. Is this a new "law" of orbital resonances? What the article says is that Neptune is far closer than predicted by Bode's Law; if there is another law, it would need to be discussed separately Serendipodous 17:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
i need to find the labels for the nine planets in the solar system
Pluto and Neptune
I know that on a flat schematic diagram, the two paths of the these planets cross, but i also know that pluto is inclind at 17.5 degrees difference to the rest of the solar system, does anybody know if the two planets paths cross in 3D, or does pluto pass under or over neptune? and also if there paths do cross, will they ever collide? thanks Philc 0780 18:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't fully grasp the mechanics of it, but apparently Pluto and Neptune's 3:2 orbital resonance (Neptune goes round the Sun 3 times for every two orbits of Pluto) means Pluto and Neptune cannot collide. Serendipodous 20:57, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
In 3D space, the orbit of pluto near perihelion (where it crosses neptune's orbit) is far out of the plane of the rest of the planets. Also, because of the 3:2 resonance between neptune and pluto, whenever pluto is at perihelion, neptune is roughly 90 degrees ahead of or behind pluto. Here is an image that shows all the places that pluto can be, relative to neptune. You'll see that they don't ever get within even 15-20 AU of each other, which is about 2-3 billion kilometers. Short answer: No, they will never collide. shaggy 21:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Trimming
This article is very long, and I've just conducted some rather merciless trimming and merging of paragraphs that, I felt, while informative, did not directly relate to the topic heading, which is to explain what the Solar system is and, to a lesser extent, how we arrived at that conclusion. I've indicated redirects to related topics that offer more information on tangental subjects. Serendipodous 13:45, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Xena
Now that NASA has confirmed [1] the existence of the 10th planet, Xena, should this article reflect this new information? --Kmsiever 00:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- It has yet to be determined whether or not Xena should be defined as a planet or not. Anarchist42 00:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Confirmed is not the right word. NASA has offered an opinion as regards the identity of "Xena", but it is not actually possible to confirm an object's identity as a planet if, as is currenty the case, no single definition for planet exists. It is not NASA's job to define a planet, that job belongs to the IAU and they've said (touch wood) that they'll release a definition by early September. Then we will be able to confirm whether or not "Xena" is a planet. Serendipodous 12:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Confirmed is the right word. They confirmed that Xena does exist. I didn't say they confirmed that Xena is a planet nor that they have defind what a planet is. --Kmsiever 14:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Xena's existence has been confirmed for some time now; since January, 2005 in fact. It already has a subsection all to itself. I am confused as to what you feel this article needs to say about it. Serendipodous 16:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Confirmed is the right word. They confirmed that Xena does exist. I didn't say they confirmed that Xena is a planet nor that they have defind what a planet is. --Kmsiever 14:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
AU
Astronomy is more of a hobby interest than a passion as it is with some people, but I would feel it appropriate to add the AU from the Sun as follows: "67.9 ± 29.7 AU" into this area. For some reason I thought it would be beneficial to have this information included into this section since other AU distances are included for other objects as well. Would someone care to comment on the accuracy of the distance I calculated and also the insertion of this (if/when we determine it's correct) into the main section. --unixgold 11:23, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Pluto's orbital distance is also given as an average in that table, even though it too has a very elongated orbit. It's just the mean orbital distance, and really has little bearing on the actual orbital circumfrence of the world in question. The section on UB313 lists its greatest and least orbital distances. Serendipodous 12:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Change to "Sol system" or "Sol solar system"
As more and more planets are being discovered in other solar systems I think it's time to look forward and make some changes to this article. The article "Solar System" should talk about systems in general, planet formation etc. and have a list of systems discovered so far. The current article should be moved to "Sol System" and remain largely unchanged. Opinions?
- I would completely disagree - solar system is specific to our Sun, planetary system is a more generic term. 'Sol system' is generally only seen in sci-fi, and never in the astronomical literature. Worldtraveller 15:24, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- Ditto. See also archived earlier talk Talk:Solar system/Archive 001. Femto 15:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- Seems "Sol system" is used more and more but for now let's leave it. I guess we'll have this discussion again in about 50 years :)
- Ditto. See also archived earlier talk Talk:Solar system/Archive 001. Femto 15:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
About removing the category
Just to explain, when I loaded the article on another machine, the category bar, for some unknown reason, was blocking out the recently added table of solar system links. I figured since the article already had a complete list of links to every solar system topic, it really didn't need a link to the category list and, on balance, decided to get rid of it. However, now that it's been reinstated it seems to be back where it's supposed to be, so all's well. Serendipodous 18:46, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
