PDA

View Full Version : The ecliptic plane - a standard solar system model?



Aetherium
2018-Jun-05, 05:27 PM
This is another question for the most learned here. The eight official planets are on a plane, or near enough. It is thought that this is due to the protoplanetary materials having gathered into a disc. Should this be considered a standard model for a solar system, or could other solar systems have different patterns?

Following on from that, in the universe of Judge Dredd, built in the 'seventies, set in the distant future (though tongue in cheek at times) there exists a planet called Hestia, which is in our solar system, but at a weird angle to the ecliptic plane, which meant that in their timeline it was not discovered until 2009. Is that concept a plausible one, or is it completely unscientific?

We really need a forum that's specifically for science-fiction.

grapes
2018-Jun-05, 06:07 PM
This is another question for the most learned here. The eight official planets are on a plane, or near enough. It is thought that this is due to the protoplanetary materials having gathered into a disc. Should this be considered a standard model for a solar system, or could other solar systems have different patterns?

Following on from that, in the universe of Judge Dredd, built in the 'seventies, set in the distant future (though tongue in cheek at times) there exists a planet called Hestia, which is in our solar system, but at a weird angle to the ecliptic plane, which meant that in their timeline it was not discovered until 2009. Is that concept a plausible one, or is it completely unscientific?

Hestia was an Earth "twin" colony world, orbiting at 90 degrees to Earth's orbit. Tiny Pluto, orbiting off-axis and very far away, was discovered a long time ago. A much bigger, closer-in world, like Hestia, would not have escaped notice. It would have been naked eye visible, maybe.



We really need a forum that's specifically for science-fiction.

ETA: Make one! :)

profloater
2018-Jun-05, 06:36 PM
Not beng learned, i don' t know if a wild planet would be stable within the multibody system, there is a simple version as one of the possible three body solutions, but i do suspect that an out of plane large planet could be disruptive and thus cause instability of the other orbits. The harmonic relations are a clue to stability of mutual disruption and we have still some disrupters like Jupiter being eccentric, but a planet at a big angle would probably cause trouble.

eburacum45
2018-Jun-05, 07:30 PM
Many other solar systems are significantly different to our own. A large number of extrasolar planets have a significant tilt compared to the rotation of their star, and some orbit in a retrograde fashion, like HAT-P-7b (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAT-P-7b). Many solar systems include hot Jupiters, very near the host star, and/or planets larger than Earth and smaller than Neptune, a class of planets missing in our system. Finally, a number of solar systems include at least one extra star at various distances. So although quite a few solar systems look vaguely like our own, many do not.

Swift
2018-Jun-05, 08:38 PM
We really need a forum that's specifically for science-fiction.
Science fiction is generally discussed in our Small Media at Large (https://forum.cosmoquest.org/forumdisplay.php?16-Small-Media-at-Large) sub-forum. Questions about the real world possibilities of science fiction ideas (such as your question) are fine to ask in Q&A or in another appropriate sub-forum, like Astronomy or Science and Technology.

Personally, I think we have too many sub-forums already and don't feel we need even more.

George
2018-Jun-06, 03:03 PM
This is another question for the most learned here. The eight official planets are on a plane, or near enough. It is thought that this is due to the protoplanetary materials having gathered into a disc. Should this be considered a standard model for a solar system, or could other solar systems have different patterns? The fact that the planets orbit in a plane (approx.) is the reason it was hypothesized (I. Kant, 1755) that stars form from nebulae and create disks, which is where planets form. Once radio and IR astronomy came along, the evidence favoring this model became overwhelming since disks are found to be ubiquitous for such pre-stellar regions.

Aetherium
2018-Jun-13, 05:04 PM
So is there anything or any factor that obstructs the view from Earth of a planet that is at a different angle to the ecliptic plane? What angle would an object have to be at before it was not visible in the night sky and would require probes or calculations based on gravity to pinpoint?

Hornblower
2018-Jun-14, 01:07 PM
So is there anything or any factor that obstructs the view from Earth of a planet that is at a different angle to the ecliptic plane? What angle would an object have to be at before it was not visible in the night sky and would require probes or calculations based on gravity to pinpoint?

It would have to stay behind the Sun. That means being in Earth's orbit, but 180 degrees around from Earth. That is the Lagrangian L3 point. It is unstable, so such an object would need station-keeping thrusters to stay there. Unless there is an advanced civilization operating and maintaining it, I would feel safe in saying "there ain't no such animal."

George
2018-Jun-14, 01:40 PM
So is there anything or any factor that obstructs the view from Earth of a planet that is at a different angle to the ecliptic plane? What angle would an object have to be at before it was not visible in the night sky and would require probes or calculations based on gravity to pinpoint? The very distant Planet 9, if it exists, may be hard to find if its inclination puts it in the galactic plane, as may be the case. The background light can overwhelm the imaging, like a lightning bug in stadium lighting.