Talk:Solar system/Archive 3

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.

Any ideas on how to improve this page?

I think this page could do with a clean up, but for the life of me I can't figure out how to go about it. These days pretty much the only changes made to this page are by vandals, and I think it would be nice if we could get this page up to feature quality. Any thoughts?

Note: I've been experimenting with shifting the page's layout, and I've thought that the table of planetary orbits really belongs in the "structure and layout" section, and the "major planets" table has been moved further up. I actaully think it belongs further up still. I'm also not too fond of the orbit/diameter graph, as it's dull and nearly impossible to read. I've been thinking of getting rid of it, but I won't do it without consensus.

EDIT: I experimented with removing that graph and I think it improved the page considerably. I've taken it down. If anyone feels that the graph should still be included, I'll post it here and they can revert it back if they wish.

Plot of equatorial diameter versus semi-major axis for the Sun, Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. Vertical pixels are in units of equatorial diameters of Pluto, and horizontal pixels are in units of (4 * semi-major axis of Mercury).

Serendipodous 12:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd be interested in a push on solar system to get it up to featured quality - I think it's one of those at the moment where there's lots of content but a lack of organisation and polish. Difficult one to get right as it's such a broad topic. What I would suggest would be to start by setting out here the structure you'd give it if you were starting from scratch, then once that's sorted fit all the existing content into it, then fill in any gaps that identifies. I just did this with Mercury and was very happy with how it turned out. Worldtraveller 13:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

• I think we should add some details of the 10th planet

--Ninad 19:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a section on that already, under "2003 UB313". Serendipodous 10:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Heliopause

I don't believe that the sun's light just stops. I believe that the radiation and heat has a limit, but I don't believe in light having a limit.--Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 12:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

The solar wind isn't made of light; it's made of plasma. Second, it doesn't just stop; it bumps into the interstellar wind coming the other way and gradually loses strength until it can no longer hold the opposing wind back. And thirdly, heat is light, so it is just as limitless as any other form of light. Some forms of radiation, such as x-rays and gamma rays, are light as well. Serendipodous 13:15, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I didn't think of that. But I still say they cansee the Sun in places like Alpha Centauri, like we can see them.--Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 03:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

You're right. But the solar wind isn't light. It's made of particles that are ejected from the Sun. So while someone at Alpha Centauri could certainly see the light from the Sun, the particles that make up the solar wind won't reach there. —Bkell (talk) 03:33, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Origin and age

What is the rationale that there are gases in the inner planets? If the heaviest materials stayed close to the sun, and the lightest materials were thrown more distant, then the worlds near the sun would get less of an atmosphere. Then again, maybe the near planets would conglomerate fairly quickly, and then pick up some atmosphere just after the gases left the sun. But then why would the Jovian planets be so big? And if the solid contents of those planets (not including their atmosphere) is not that large, how would it collect gases? Does anyone have a good explanation for this? (I thought this was the most relevant place to pose this question.) D. F. Schmidt 02:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

The atmospheric gases were trapped in gas form in the liquid matles of the planets during formation and subsequently erupted out of the crusts via volcanism. Serendipodous 08:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Why would the lighter gases be among the heavier elements such as rock? D. F. Schmidt 14:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Dust grains made of materials with high melting points condense first in an interstellar cloud; subsequently these dust grains will act as condensation seeds for more volatile elements. It's not entirely clear how much of the volatiles comes from outgassing and how much has been added later by comets (see also Origin of water on Earth). Icek 17:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

White dwarf - gravitational pull

I notice that the article currently contains When the sun becomes a white dwarf, its gravitional pull will be almost non existent, sending the planets ever outward

I think this is a bit misleading. White dwarves remain very massive objects - and I've certainly seen predictions to suggest that the Sun's eventual white dwarf state will have at least 0.5 solar masses. If that is the case, then the Sun's eventual gravitational pull will be at least half it's present value, and not "almost non existent". Anyone else have any comments? Richard B 22:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be a lot of contradictory information on this, but according to at least one source, you're right. Since the source is relatively detailed, I'm sticking to its interpretation. Serendipodous 23:15, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

External Link re-added

I've readded the external link http://devhed.com/solar-system, after discussing it with Zanaq, who removed it. He's still not thrilled with the link, but sees that it does have subjective value.