My theory on rocky planet formation

And do really believe you can get the momentum of these slingshot movements to disappear?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I've always been under the impression that very small particles (dust particles) would lose any heat they had rather fast through radiating it away as inferred radiation. So I fail to see how these dust particles could ever maintain enough heat to persist in any kind of molten state.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This was the paragraph that I thought would solve the issue and is from the link provided:

Disks are cool and only their inner parts get hot. ( Is that "inner" the parts facing (nearest) the protostar. Or are they meaning the core of the disk itself, with the outer layers of dust forming a thermal blanket?)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Killjoy, long time no see.

Robittybob, the outward momentum is eventually slowed down by the other planets and their gravity once Uranus and Neptune are far enough away from Jupiter and Saturn to where the "slingshot" has less of an effect. If I remeber correctly, I think they actually discovered Neptune because of Uranus' orbit, so I wouldn't say the momentum is gone completely, but it is far less then when the "slingshot" began.

 

i think you'll find that the term 'hot' means that the particles have a high kinetic energy. i maybe wrong though.

 

Like take some supercooled material at 2 degrees Kelvin and move it at 30,000 Km/hour is it hot or cold?
I think of "hot" as if you were able to hold it and ask what temperature would it be? So it isn't the relative difference in velocity that is heat, even though the kinetic energy could convert to heat.

 

Yeah! I've been laid up with a broken foot and all the problems that go with it.

Maybe, but I think planetary science still has a long way to go before I'll feel very comfortable with any one theory over another. Nobodies mentioned that Neptune's pole is mostly pointed at the sun, which means sometime in the past something big must have collided with it. Any chance that might have something to do with it's orbit?

 

Yes, you are wrong. For instance an asteroid heading for a planet has very high kinetic energy, but it is not hot until it encounters atmosphere or solid surface. Friction and impact are a good way of converting kinetic energy into heat energy.

 

It is Uranus that has the extreme tilt. It has something to do with the winds. In my theory (and I haven't thought too much about Uranus for a long time), these strong winds have made the planet rotate this way.
But what drives the winds?

 

Sorry about the planet mix up. I clipped the following from Wikipedia and red colored the part about what is believed to have caused the unusual axial tilt.

 

But you check out my theory for a moment. Find out the cause for the wind, and when they started. If there has been this circulation from day 1 when the planet was forming there is no need for this impact. And remember it is a massive ball of liquid. Is anything going to changed it's rotation? I don't think so.

I think there is a reason the material forming this planet spun and had this angular momentum and that shows up in the tilt and the extreme winds circling the planet today. The winds make the oceans move which then makes the rocky core rotate the same way. Billions of years to make it happen. But it starts with the winds.

 

As to whether the wind could cause the change in the planets axis I can't say for sure, however it doesn't seem very probable. When a planet first forms the planets rotation is a result of the conservation of angular momentum as the dust and gas comes together gravitationally. This spin is always in the plane of the disk that the planets are forming in and planetary winds will flow parallel to the spin. That being the case, please tell me how those winds could end up changing the planets axis? Next if it could happen once, why didn't any other planets have a similar fate?

Anyway, we as a species have a long way to go when it comes to planetary science. Every new planet we discover is still a surprise. So I would say give your theory a number and wait and see what develops.

 

It was 15 years ago I thought the rotation of Uranus could be caused by accumulation of charged particles. I don't see any reason why these particles could not result in winds. Imagine if the solar wind particles are going slow enough at that distance to be accumulated by the gravitational attraction. The ionised particles reform in the atmosphere.

Ok I did read that the net wind circulation of the Earth has an effect on the speed of rotation of the Earth. OK it was fairly minimal but it was measured. Now that might have been 6 years ago so I'm not sure if it could be found again.
Now on the Earth and Venus the wind is powered, I believe, by the Sun so the energy source is external to the planet and depending on the density of the atmosphere and surface friction it would determine the speed of the wind and how much energy can be transferred.
The trees and mountains on Earth go along way to slowing the wind. If the wind wasn't slowed the circulation around the globe would intensify. For I believe the absorption of the incident radiation occurs to higher degree when the wind and radiation are moving in the same direction. (Conservation of energy and momentum preclude the opposite.)

Mercury has virtually no atmosphere so can't really be discussed, and what happens on Mars I don't know; I haven't looked it up.

Jupiter would be the real test case due to its enormous size. I'll get back on that.

 

The deeper winds on Jupiter are prograde (going in the same direction as planet is spinning).

So if my analysis is correct this too is making the planet power-up. Considering Jupiter is the largest and fastest rotating planet, with a "surface" velocity of 45,300 km/hour it is surprising to think this might be getting faster!
So once again I'd say the winds affects the rotation of a planet.

 

Earth has comparatively little atmosphere compared to Jupiter so the windage effect is always going to be minimal, but with global warming the effects of the wind will be one of the most notable results. Storms etc could get worse.
Extracting energy out of the wind will be one of the better things to do, so that the relative velocity of the wind compared to the Earth's surface is kept to a minimum. This may make the Earth rotate slightly faster but not by much.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_energy

didn't think i was that wrong.

 

Which bit in particular?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

heat is a measure of the kinetic energy of a system.

 

From that link

So there is the microscopic KE and the Macroscopic KE plus the additional motion of the whole mass of all the microscopic parts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Here are two links to prove that outer space can get pretty hot without really close stars.
http://phys.org/news4521.html (3rd paragraph)
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2010/arch10/100104proplyds.htm (5th paragraph)