Stationary model of the solar system

  • 56 Replies
  • 16330 Views
*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #30 on: May 22, 2020, 07:55:34 AM »
1. The solar system is an autonomous object of the universe.
2. Sunlight, due to the deflecting force of the Coriolis, revolves around the Sun.
3. The diameter of the solar system depends on the speed of light and the angular velocity of rotation of the sun D = c / ω.
4. At the edge of the solar system, sunlight rotates against the rotation of the sun, at a speed of about 0 km / s, relative to the universe. https://images.app.goo.gl/GZMt3h1e1dH86wWN6

Ok, there are more details this time at least.

1. I'm not sure what you are saying here.  The solar system is separate from the universe? This is clearly not true or the solar system would have escaped the gravitational pull of the Milky Way long ago.

2. Sunlight does not revolve around the sun in any way. Photons that escape the sun are moving at light speed, which is significantly faster than the sun's escape velocity and therefore do not orbit it.

3. I'm not sure what you mean by "diameter of the solar system" here.  Are you putting some sort of limit on how big it is?

4. None of this is backed up by any observations or evidence. Nor does i make much sense. If light at the edge of the solar system (which would be a sphere not a circle) is standing still relative to something, that means the whole solar system has to be reverse-orbiting the now standing still phons? 

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #31 on: May 23, 2020, 03:54:10 PM »
Galaxies cyclones and cycles, are a single slowly rotating "monolith", which does not obey the law of universal gravitation.

Do you have a source for this?

I'd performed simulations of galaxies, and read about many more complex ones and the math certainly obeys Newtons laws. I'm not aware of any theory stating that galaxies rotate as one large solid object.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_curve
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics https://life.ru/p/907112

Your own links show that galaxies rotate on a curve, not as a solid monolithic objects.

Dark matter or something is causing them to not behave as expected, we simply don't know enough yet to know what that is. But they absolutely behave as a pack of dense stars, circulating at differing speeds.


*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #32 on: May 27, 2020, 03:21:28 AM »
1. The solar system is an autonomous object of the universe.
2. Sunlight, due to the deflecting force of the Coriolis, revolves around the solar system.
3. The radius of the solar system depends on the speed of light and the angular velocity of rotation of the sun R ≈ c / ω.
4. At the edge of the solar system, sunlight rotates against the rotation of the sun, at a speed of about 0 km / s, relative to the universe. https://images.app.goo.gl/GZMt3h1e1dH86wWN6

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #33 on: May 27, 2020, 05:13:59 AM »
1. The solar system is an autonomous object of the universe.
Yes, near enough.

Quote from: Fermer05
2. Sunlight, due to the deflecting force of the Coriolis, revolves around the solar system.
No, it does nothing of the sort. Why would "the deflecting force of the Coriolis" effect significantly affect sunlight in The Solar system.

Sunlight takes about 4 hours to reach Pluto and in that time the planets have move a negligible amount.

Quote from: Fermer05
3. The radius of the solar system depends on the speed of light and the angular velocity of rotation of the sun R ≈ c / ω.
No, the radius of the Solar system has nothing to do with "the speed of light". Why would it?

Quote from: Fermer05
4. At the edge of the solar system, sunlight rotates against the rotation of the sun, at a speed of about 0 km / s, relative to the universe. https://images.app.goo.gl/GZMt3h1e1dH86wWN6
I don't follow. What has the "rotation of the sun" got to do with anything?
The Sun doesn't send out beams like a searchlight - it emits light almost equally in all directions.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #34 on: May 27, 2020, 06:38:42 PM »
1. The solar system is an autonomous object of the universe.
2. Sunlight, due to the deflecting force of the Coriolis, revolves around the solar system.
The Coriolis effect does not deflect anything. It is simply that straight-line motion (light here) in a non-rotating "frame of reference" seems curved in a rotating "frame of reference".

But there's no indications that the Solar System as a whole is rotating at all - other than orbiting the galactic centre.

Quote from: Fermer05
Quote from: Fermer05
3. The radius of the solar system depends on the speed of light and the angular velocity of rotation of the sun R ≈ c / ω.
4. At the edge of the solar system, sunlight rotates against the rotation of the sun, at a speed of about 0 km / s, relative to the universe. https://images.app.goo.gl/GZMt3h1e1dH86wWN6
The radius of the solar system is R ≈ c / ω
Why should there be any logical reason why the "radius of the solar system" should be related to "the angular velocity of the Sun"?

Quote from: Fermer05
The speed of light ≈ 1,000,000,000 km / h.
The angular velocity of the Sun ≈ 0.0105 rad / h.
The radius of the solar system is ≈ 95,000,000,000 km.
https://www.universetoday.com/15585/diameter-of-the-solar-system/
I don't know where the "radius of the solar system is ≈ 95,000,000,000 km" comes from because:
Sedna, the farthest known observable object in the Solar system, is about 143,730,000,000 km from the Sun.

In any case sunlight does not circulate around the Solar System but travels in near enough to straight lines.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #35 on: June 01, 2020, 04:50:00 PM »
A planet is an object of the solar system that has an atmosphere and axial speed. (Pluto).
Planets do not necessarily have an atmosphere or even any significant axial speed. have a look at: Planetary Fact Sheet - Metric.

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #36 on: July 17, 2020, 03:38:47 PM »
What theory or experiment proves that the gravity of the planets is infinite?
The formula F = G ∙ M ∙ m / R˛ does not prove that the force of gravity is infinite.
The law of universal gravitation says: The force of gravitational attraction between two material points is proportional to both masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
And not a word that the gravity of the planets is infinite.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation
What would the gravitational force formula look like if the gravity of the earth did not exceed - 10,000,000 km, and the moon - 100,000 km?
If the gravity of the Earth reached the Sun, then the temperature of the Earth would be much higher.

Earth's gravity does not reach Venus, proof of this is Venus's circular orbit.
The reason for the formation of the ellipse of the planets is beyond the cognitive capabilities of modern science. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_eccentricity

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #37 on: July 17, 2020, 03:57:51 PM »
If the gravity of the Earth reached the Sun, then the temperature of the Earth would be much higher.

How much higher?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #38 on: July 17, 2020, 05:02:25 PM »
What theory or experiment proves that the gravity of the planets is infinite?
NONE! Because "the gravity of the planets is" NOT "infinite".

Quote from: Fermer05
The formula F = G ∙ M ∙ m / R˛ does not prove that the force of gravity is infinite.
Of course it doesn't!  "Because "the gravity of the planets is" NOT "infinite".

Quote from: Fermer05
The law of universal gravitation says: The force of gravitational attraction between two material points is proportional to both masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
And not a word that the gravity of the planets is infinite.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation
What would the gravitational force formula look like if the gravity of the earth did not exceed - 10,000,000 km, and the moon - 100,000 km?
Why bother?

Quote from: Fermer05
If the gravity of the Earth reached the Sun, then the temperature of the Earth would be much higher.
The "gravity of the Earth" DOES "reach the Sun" but that has nothing to do with the "temperature of the Earth"!

Quote from: Fermer05
Earth's gravity does not reach Venus, proof of this is Venus's circular orbit.
The "gravity of the Earth" DOES "reach the Venus" but that has nothing to do with the "temperature of the Earth"!
They two slightly affect the orbits of each other but even Isaac Newton was fully aware of that.

Quote from: Fermer05
The reason for the formation of the ellipse of the planets is beyond the cognitive capabilities of modern science. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_eccentricity
I wouldn't say "beyond the cognitive capabilities of modern science" but when something started possibly 4.5 billion years ago the exact cause might not be apparent.

Then early planetary collisions probably have changed some orbits:
Quote
What is most widely accepted today is the giant-impact theory. It proposes that the Moon formed during a collision between the Earth and another small planet, about the size of Mars. The debris from this impact collected in an orbit around Earth to form the Moon.

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #39 on: July 18, 2020, 02:31:11 AM »
What is most widely accepted today is the giant-impact theory. It proposes that the Moon formed during a collision between the Earth and another small planet, about the size of Mars. The debris from this impact collected in an orbit around Earth to form the Moon.
This means that if there were no accidental collision, then there would be no our satellite, and possibly other satellites of the planets.

The laws of nature exist to avoid accidents and chaos.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2020, 03:47:59 AM by Fermer05 »

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #40 on: July 18, 2020, 04:38:35 AM »
What is most widely accepted today is the giant-impact theory. It proposes that the Moon formed during a collision between the Earth and another small planet, about the size of Mars. The debris from this impact collected in an orbit around Earth to form the Moon.
This means that if there were no accidental collision, then there would be no our satellite, and possibly other satellites of the planets.

The laws of nature exist to avoid accidents and chaos.
But there were collisions in the past though none likely between major planets in th forseeable future.
There could easily be a collision between a large asteroid and the Earth or another planet.

But there are no "laws of nature"  "to avoid accidents and chaos."

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: The Coriolis Force on Earth and in the Universe
« Reply #41 on: August 18, 2020, 01:14:29 PM »
It is believed that the abnormally high "Tides of the Century" with an amplitude of 15 meters in the Gulf of Saint-Malo, France, formed during the parade of planets. Then why, in other bays of France and the northern hemisphere, during the parade of the planets, abnormally high "Tides of the century" are not formed.
Moreover, in some bays of France during the parade of the planets, abnormally low tides of the century are formed.

Well, if you do a Google search for that, you basically just come up with you reposting it on a few sites.

So I'd say the answer is... you making stuff up?

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Coriolis force on Earth and in the Solar System
« Reply #42 on: October 21, 2023, 01:52:48 PM »
11. I believe that a star, like planets, reflects sunlight.
a) If the stars emitted light in all directions, then we would see only those stars that are located close to the Sun, and the star could be observed both during dawn and during sunset and during the day. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature
12. It is believed that the farthest stars are located at a distance of about 10 billion light years from us.
a) How does sunlight travel such distances and how far can sunlight travel?
13. So little solar energy and light comes to Pluto that our star can be confused with a large star. Sunlight on Pluto is thought to be 1,600 times dimmer than on Earth. https://spainproject.ru/gable/kak-vyglyadit-solnce-s-raznyh-planet-kak-vyglyadit-solnce-na-drugih/
Why? As stars emit light in all direction, they can be seen from all directions, not just a narrow region near the sun.
The star's light can travel forever, until it is absorbed or reflected/scattered. However, as it travels outwards from the star, it spreads out over a larger and larger area, following an inverse square law.
This makes star-light quite dim for most stars. The exception is the sun, which is much closer.
The sun is roughly 150 000 000 km away. The next closest star is ~4.2 light years away, or roughly 40 000 000 000 000 km away.
The incredibly brightness of the sun, even after scattering in the atmosphere, is much brighter than other stars for an observer on Earth, so during the day you see the sun and the brightly lit up sky.
During night, you can see the other stars, unless someone shines a light in your face, or you are in a brightly lit up room.

And we can also observe stars, including those near the sun, during a solar eclipse.

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: The reason for the geological activity of the planets
« Reply #43 on: October 23, 2023, 04:35:41 AM »
b) Whether the planet can hang motionless, above the pole of the sun.
  it is still no
Star yes, planet no.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2023, 04:41:59 AM by Fermer05 »

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Coriolis force on Earth and in the Solar System
« Reply #44 on: October 23, 2023, 01:49:19 PM »
11. I believe that a star, like planets, reflects sunlight.
a) If the stars emitted light in all directions, then we would see only those stars that are located close to the Sun, and the star could be observed both during dawn and during sunset and during the day. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature
12. It is believed that the farthest stars are located at a distance of about 10 billion light years from us.
a) How does sunlight travel such distances and how far can sunlight travel?
13. So little solar energy and light comes to Pluto that our star can be confused with a large star. Sunlight on Pluto is thought to be 1,600 times dimmer than on Earth. https://spainproject.ru/gable/kak-vyglyadit-solnce-s-raznyh-planet-kak-vyglyadit-solnce-na-drugih/
Why? As stars emit light in all direction, they can be seen from all directions, not just a narrow region near the sun.
The star's light can travel forever, until it is absorbed or reflected/scattered. However, as it travels outwards from the star, it spreads out over a larger and larger area, following an inverse square law.
This makes star-light quite dim for most stars. The exception is the sun, which is much closer.
The sun is roughly 150 000 000 km away. The next closest star is ~4.2 light years away, or roughly 40 000 000 000 000 km away.
The incredibly brightness of the sun, even after scattering in the atmosphere, is much brighter than other stars for an observer on Earth, so during the day you see the sun and the brightly lit up sky.
During night, you can see the other stars, unless someone shines a light in your face, or you are in a brightly lit up room.

And we can also observe stars, including those near the sun, during a solar eclipse.
It's difficult to add anything here.
So you agree your prior claim that stars should only appear near the sun was incorrect? That light can travel all that distance, but just appear very dim?

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: Coriolis force on Earth and in the Solar System
« Reply #45 on: October 24, 2023, 11:27:16 AM »
This requires an experiment.

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #46 on: November 15, 2023, 01:57:25 AM »
1. Planets and satellites, rotating around the Sun and around their axis, have axial and orbital kinetic energy, which is transformed from axial energy to orbital, and from orbital to axial.
a) The Earth, rotating around its axis, transfers its axial energy into orbital energy, and Mercury transfers its orbital energy into axial energy, due to which the Earth moves away from the Sun, and Mercury approaches the Sun.
b) Venus transfers its orbital speed to the axial one, and rotates the planet to the left, and the atmosphere of Venus rotates Venus to the right, which is why Venus quickly loses orbital energy. 
c) The transformation coefficient, orbital inclination, shape and speed of rotation of orbits depend on the axial and orbital speed of the planets and the angle of inclination of the rotation axis to the orbital plane.

d) The atmosphere also participates in the axial rotation of the planets - atmospheric transfer, the speed of which depends on the temperature difference between the night and day sides of the planet. https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ruwiki/1302676
The transformation of the speeds of Mercury and Venus occurs at perihelion.
https://www.fieldphysics.ru/mercury_perihelion/
e) In celestial mechanics, the transformation of velocities occurs due to the mechanics of interaction of two and three bodies, which can be expressed in the form of a structure.
The lower the axial velocity of the planets, the faster the planet approaches the Sun.
I believe that the physical libration of the Moon in longitude is the result of the transformation of the orbital energy of the Moon into the axial energy of the Moon. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libration
The Earth's orbital speed is transformed into the Moon's orbital speed.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2023, 12:34:42 PM by Fermer05 »

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #47 on: November 15, 2023, 12:02:23 PM »
I believe that the physical libration of the Moon in longitude occurs as a result of a minuscule transformation of the Moon orbital speed into the Moon axial speed. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libration
Why not stick with the existing explanation of the moon's orbit being elliptical?
That also explains why the apparent size changes.

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #48 on: November 20, 2023, 03:29:03 AM »
There is optical libration and physical libration, in longitude and latitude. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libration
« Last Edit: November 20, 2023, 03:30:43 AM by Fermer05 »

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #49 on: November 20, 2023, 01:06:09 PM »
There is optical libration and physical libration, in longitude and latitude. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libration
There is liberation and parallax.
If you stand on a different position on Earth and look towards the moon, you will see a slightly different view. This is parallax.
Likewise, as Earth rotates so your position relative to the moon changes, parallax causes a slightly different view.
But if you observe the moon from the sub-lunar point, it will appear to move slightly due to the elliptical orbit.

Not a single natural satellite of the planets has a permanent or temporary satellite, because... this will already be the task of four bodies, which contradicts the laws of existence. By inertia, the artificial satellite of the Earth will rotate much longer than the artificial satellite of the Moon.
What law of existence?
The moon has had plenty of temporary satellites. Artificial ones.

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #50 on: November 22, 2023, 02:08:54 AM »
The claim that the solar system revolves around the center of the galaxy is questionable.
The density of the fog in the galaxy averages about 1 atom per cubic centimeter.
The densest nebulae can have a density of 10,000 molecules per cubic centimeter. https://spacecenter.org/what-is-a-nebula/#:~:text=A%20nebula%20is%20an%20enormous,hydrogen%20and%20other%20ionized%20gases
If the solar system revolves around the center of a galaxy shrouded in fog, why is there no nebula in the solar system? If there were interstellar clouds in the solar system, then the orbital speed of planets and comets would quickly decrease. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milky_Way

The statement that a star emits dust, gas and plasma, and then the dust, gas and plasma turns back into a star, contradicts elementary logic.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_evolution
Perhaps when the central star in a globular cluster reaches critical mass, an explosion occurs, resulting in the formation of nebulae and galaxies. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova

Continuation: Academgorodok Forum Novosibirsk. The science. https://forum.academ.club/index.php?showtopic=1235578
Forum on the Flagship https://vmf.net.ru/forums/viewtopic.php?p=33194#p33194
« Last Edit: January 29, 2024, 06:19:32 PM by Fermer05 »

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #51 on: November 22, 2023, 02:24:09 AM »
Objects of the Solar System will not be able to endlessly rotate around numerous centers.
The laws of celestial mechanics are not omnipotent and they are limited to the task of three bodies; The Earth revolves around the Sun, the Moon revolves around the Earth, but nothing revolves around the Moon.
Not a single natural satellite of the planets has a permanent or temporary satellite, since this would already be the task of four bodies, which contradicts the laws of existence. https://naked-science.ru/qa/518331
Only the Sun and planets without satellites will be able to revolve around the “center of the Galaxy”.
Due to inertia, artificial satellites of the Earth will rotate much longer than artificial satellites of the Moon. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsatellite
In nature there is no relationship without symbiosis, and the solar system does not need the center of the galaxy.
And the most important question is why asteroids have satellites, but planetary satellites do not have satellites, despite the fact that planetary satellites are much more massive than asteroids. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor-planet_moon
Saturn's two moons, Janus and Epimetheus, move in the same orbit and pass each other every four years.
If these two satellites orbited the Sun, then Janus would have captured Epimetheus. https://elementy.ru/kartinka_dnya/430/Tanet...usa_i_Epimetey
There is no such law of existence.
You have also demonstrated the problem with your claim.
The entire solar system orbits the galactic centre.
Then planets orbit the sun, and moons orbit the planets. They are your 4 bodies.
So if there was a magical law prohibiting 4 bodies, then we couldn't have a moon.

You also contradict yourself when you discuss satellites of the moon.
You admit that there are temporary satellites orbiting the moon, directly contradicting your claim that there are none.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #52 on: January 07, 2024, 12:56:07 AM »
The radius of the Solar System depends on the speed of light and the speed of rotation of the Sun. R ≈ c/ω
The speed of light is ≈ 1,000,000,000 km/h.
The axial speed of the Sun is ≈ 0.01 rad/h.
The radius of the Solar System is ≈ 100,000,000,000 km.
Thanks to the Coriolis force of the Sun, the solar system is not scattered in space, but has the shape of a sphere. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere
8. The radius of the Solar system can also be calculated using the following formula. R ≈ c•r/ω
The speed of light is ≈ 1,000,000,000 km/h.
The radius of the Sun is ≈ 700,000 km.
The axial speed of the Sun is ≈ 0.01 rad/h.
The radius of the Solar System is ≈ 70,000,000,000,000,000 km.
Great job showing your claims are nonsense.
You have provided 2 different formulae, with different results, with no justification.
And one of these doesn't even have correct units.
If you do your math correctly, you end up with R=(1 000 000 000 km/hr) * 700 000km / (0.01 rad/hr) = 70 000 000 000 000 000 km^2.

But there is no justification at all.
Why should the radius of the sun affect the radius of the solar system?
Why should the speed of light? Why should the angular velocity?

How are you even obtaining that angular velocity?
0.01 rad/hr corresponds to 1 rotation every 628 hours, or once every 26 days.

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #53 on: January 26, 2024, 10:44:02 AM »
It doesn't always work out the way you want.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #54 on: January 26, 2024, 12:28:02 PM »
It doesn't always work out the way you want.
I know. So why do you keep pretending it should work out the way YOU want?

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #55 on: February 19, 2024, 12:42:41 PM »
The stability of the orbits of planetary satellites is also reduced by unstable orbital resonance and stable orbital resonance between the Sun and the satellite.
A supermoon is also the result of a stable orbital resonance between the Sun and Moon. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermoon
« Last Edit: March 19, 2024, 06:34:40 PM by Fermer05 »

*

Fermer05

  • 68
  • Если лошадь сдохла, слезь.
Re: Stationary model of the solar system
« Reply #56 on: March 03, 2024, 02:06:29 PM »
Mechanics of comet motion.
Community of Russian scientists. https://vk.com/rosuch

A comet is born when a satellite, revolving around the planet during the new moon phase, capsizes, breaks into fragments and breaks out of orbit.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet
Jupiter's satellite Metis, synchronously rotating around its own axis and Jupiter at a speed of 1 revolution per 7 hours, is slowly approaching Jupiter.
And everything that rotates, including a satellite, has the properties of a gyroscope - maintaining the vertical position of the axis in space, regardless of the rotation of the Earth.
When the axial and orbital speed of the satellite reaches a critical point, the satellite, having the properties of a gyroscope, overturns, due to which the synchronous rotation of the satellite is transformed into asynchronous.
During a satellite capsize, a centrifugal force appears, due to which the satellite breaks into fragments, like the Shoemaker-Levy comet.
Next, one part of the satellite fragments leaves orbit and moves around the Sun both clockwise and counterclockwise, another part enters the asteroid belt, and the third crashes into the planet. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_Shoemaker%E2%80%93Levy_9
The eccentricity of the comet's orbit can be expressed using the following formula: E = Vp/Vs.
Jupiter's orbital speed is 12 km/sec.
The orbital speed of Jupiter's satellite is 30 km/sec.
Asteroids, rotating around their axis and in orbit, periodically collide with meteorites, and as a result, the asteroid, having the properties of a gyroscope, first sways due to a violation of the center of mass, and then overturns, leaves orbit and moves towards the Sun.
While the asteroid, rotating around its own axis, makes one revolution, the asteroid, when capsized, also makes one revolution.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt
The stability of the orbits of planetary satellites is also reduced by unstable orbital resonance and stable orbital resonance between the Sun and the satellite.
Perhaps the supermoon is the result of a stable orbital resonance. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_resonance
The claim that tidal forces tear apart comets is questionable.
Because the tidal force is too small and depends more on the diameter of the comet than on the distance from the Sun to the comet. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_force
When a satellite is between the Sun and Jupiter, the gravity of the Sun and Jupiter stretches the satellite.
During the new moon, when the orbital speed of Jupiter and its satellite are equal, the satellite is in a stationary state in space, due to which the centrifugal force acting on the satellite from the Sun and Jupiter is zero.
For this reason, unbridled by centrifugal force, the gravity of the Sun and Jupiter in the new moon phase stretches the satellite revolving around Jupiter.
The above can be easily verified by experiment.
Perhaps the gyroscope has other unstudied properties, one of them is the Dzhanibekov effect.
Anticyclones also have gyroscope properties, due to which anticyclones are blocked. http://meteoweb.ru/2018/phen20180730.php

Continuation: Forum of Akademgorodok Novosibirsk. The science. https://forum.academ.club/index.php?showtopic=1235578
Astronomical forum "AstroTalk". https://astrotalk.ru/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=10510
« Last Edit: March 26, 2024, 11:02:49 PM by Fermer05 »