Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Physicist
As one example of a gap in the heliocentric model, I give you the long-term stability of planetary orbits.

How is that any more a gap in the heliocentric model than in the geocentric?

For that matter, why is that even a gap at all? What would cause the orbits to be unstable?

104 posted on 02/27/2004 2:50:16 PM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]


To: inquest
How is that any more a gap in the heliocentric model than in the geocentric?

Because in the heliocentric model, we claim to know the specific structure of all the forces involved (namely, gravity). In the geocentric model, there are epicycles upon epicycles, but the mathematical details of the forces that cause the planets to move in those convoluted paths are unknown. Without those details, you can't say whether you'd expect the orbits to be stable or unstable.

For that matter, why is that even a gap at all? What would cause the orbits to be unstable?

The fact that the planets interact with each other via gravity. For example, every time we swing past Jupiter on the same side of the sun, we get a little tug, and our orbit gets distorted a little bit. Those distortions pile up over time, and eventually the planets kick each other out...at least, according to the computer simulations.

Obviously, planetary orbits are stable over the long term in the real solar system. Something keeps them stable, but there is no unanimity on what that something is. The problem is enormously complicated, and the answer, subtle.

190 posted on 02/27/2004 10:07:57 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson