Odd thing about planets's gravities

Hello. So i found this wery odd thing when looking at wiki. Chances of this happeming naturaly are undeniably low

Mercury and Mars have almost same gravity (3.7 m/sē)

Venus and Uranus both have gravity aroubd 8.8 m/sē

What does this mean? Is it possible that persions who were choosing gravities (if they faked solar system) said f**** it, they won't notice?

Is it possible this is some sort of God's little joke?

Why are the chances of that happening "undeniably low"?

Why are the chances of that happening "undeniably low"?

So, i don't know precise chances of this happening, but it us obiviously low. Look, lets assume planet gravities can be a 0.1 m/sē higher and lower. This will require little less or little more of matter, so we aren't breaking any Early solar system simulations of quantaty of gas form which we formed.

Gravities match with one decimal digit of accuracy so we are going to go with that.

So imagine you had dices with 20 (representing 0.1 m/sē more and less) sides, and you needed to roll them to match. After some time you will get it. Nice, you have one pair of planets, but what about second pair? Do the same thing, but with both sets if dices, since we are calculating chances of it both happening in same systems (you don't need to have same number on both dices, for example 6-6 and 18-18 will work.)

And this is only when we are using 0.1 m/sē change of gravity...


Chances are low. Our solar system has some odd things. Like intensity of sun bieng 6.66 higher on mercury than Earth, and mars Aphelion bieng 1.66 AU, and this...

They like to put hidden messages in solar system

Quote from: boydster on November 06, 2020, 02:38:40 PM

Why are the chances of that happening "undeniably low"?

So, i don't know precise chances of this happening, but it us obiviously low. Look, lets assume planet gravities can be a 0.1 m/sē higher and lower. This will require little less or little more of matter, so we aren't breaking any Early solar system simulations of quantaty of gas form which we formed.

Gravities match with one decimal digit of accuracy so we are going to go with that.

So imagine you had dices with 20 (representing 0.1 m/sē more and less) sides, and you needed to roll them to match. After some time you will get it. Nice, you have one pair of planets, but what about second pair? Do the same thing, but with both sets if dices, since we are calculating chances of it both happening in same systems (you don't need to have same number on both dices, for example 6-6 and 18-18 will work.)

And this is only when we are using 0.1 m/sē change of gravity...


Chances are low. Our solar system has some odd things. Like intensity of sun bieng 6.66 higher on mercury than Earth, and mars Aphelion bieng 1.66 AU, and this...

They like to put hidden messages in solar system

Who is they? Do the math. Include the radius of the planets in question. Then check back.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 10:26:39 PM

Quote from: boydster on November 06, 2020, 02:38:40 PM

Why are the chances of that happening "undeniably low"?

So, i don't know precise chances of this happening, but it us obiviously low. Look, lets assume planet gravities can be a 0.1 m/sē higher and lower. This will require little less or little more of matter, so we aren't breaking any Early solar system simulations of quantaty of gas form which we formed.

Gravities match with one decimal digit of accuracy so we are going to go with that.

So imagine you had dices with 20 (representing 0.1 m/sē more and less) sides, and you needed to roll them to match. After some time you will get it. Nice, you have one pair of planets, but what about second pair? Do the same thing, but with both sets if dices, since we are calculating chances of it both happening in same systems (you don't need to have same number on both dices, for example 6-6 and 18-18 will work.)

And this is only when we are using 0.1 m/sē change of gravity...


Chances are low. Our solar system has some odd things. Like intensity of sun bieng 6.66 higher on mercury than Earth, and mars Aphelion bieng 1.66 AU, and this...

They like to put hidden messages in solar system

Who is they? Do the math. Include the radius of the planets in question. Then check back.

Why do i need to do include radius? To gen density? I know Mercury has higher density than Mars and that Uranus is ice giant and therefore has low density? Isn't just comparing Gravities enought?

Quote from: Stash on November 06, 2020, 10:32:45 PM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 10:26:39 PM

Quote from: boydster on November 06, 2020, 02:38:40 PM

Why are the chances of that happening "undeniably low"?

So, i don't know precise chances of this happening, but it us obiviously low. Look, lets assume planet gravities can be a 0.1 m/sē higher and lower. This will require little less or little more of matter, so we aren't breaking any Early solar system simulations of quantaty of gas form which we formed.

Gravities match with one decimal digit of accuracy so we are going to go with that.

So imagine you had dices with 20 (representing 0.1 m/sē more and less) sides, and you needed to roll them to match. After some time you will get it. Nice, you have one pair of planets, but what about second pair? Do the same thing, but with both sets if dices, since we are calculating chances of it both happening in same systems (you don't need to have same number on both dices, for example 6-6 and 18-18 will work.)

And this is only when we are using 0.1 m/sē change of gravity...


Chances are low. Our solar system has some odd things. Like intensity of sun bieng 6.66 higher on mercury than Earth, and mars Aphelion bieng 1.66 AU, and this...

They like to put hidden messages in solar system

Who is they? Do the math. Include the radius of the planets in question. Then check back.

Why do i need to do include radius? To gen density? I know Mercury has higher density than Mars and that Uranus is ice giant and therefore has low density? Isn't just comparing Gravities enought?

Apparently not. Look it up.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 10:40:57 PM

Quote from: Stash on November 06, 2020, 10:32:45 PM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 10:26:39 PM

Quote from: boydster on November 06, 2020, 02:38:40 PM

Why are the chances of that happening "undeniably low"?

So, i don't know precise chances of this happening, but it us obiviously low. Look, lets assume planet gravities can be a 0.1 m/sē higher and lower. This will require little less or little more of matter, so we aren't breaking any Early solar system simulations of quantaty of gas form which we formed.

Gravities match with one decimal digit of accuracy so we are going to go with that.

So imagine you had dices with 20 (representing 0.1 m/sē more and less) sides, and you needed to roll them to match. After some time you will get it. Nice, you have one pair of planets, but what about second pair? Do the same thing, but with both sets if dices, since we are calculating chances of it both happening in same systems (you don't need to have same number on both dices, for example 6-6 and 18-18 will work.)

And this is only when we are using 0.1 m/sē change of gravity...


Chances are low. Our solar system has some odd things. Like intensity of sun bieng 6.66 higher on mercury than Earth, and mars Aphelion bieng 1.66 AU, and this...

They like to put hidden messages in solar system

Who is they? Do the math. Include the radius of the planets in question. Then check back.

Why do i need to do include radius? To gen density? I know Mercury has higher density than Mars and that Uranus is ice giant and therefore has low density? Isn't just comparing Gravities enought?

Apparently not. Look it up.

Mercury is more dense. It has radius of 2.437 km while mars has 3.389 km radius, and both have same gravity. It is natural to say mercury is more dense.

Uranus is similar in composition to Neptune, and both have bulk chemical compositions which differ from that of the larger gas giants Jupiter and Saturn. For this reason, scientists often classify Uranus and Neptune as "ice giants" to distinguish them from the other gas giants.

-Wikipedia 

Now, why do i need to use radiuses? I was pointing that gravities for 2 pairs of planets are almost same, why need for radius?

Now, why do i need to use radiuses? I was pointing that gravities for 2 pairs of planets are almost same, why need for radius?

Because a planets gravity is calculated using two variables, a planets mass and the radius of the planet.

If you want to understand you have to look at both. Ignoring one just leads to confusion and questions.

F = GMm/r^2
F= ma
ma = GMm/r^2
a = GM/r^2

Chances are low. Our solar system has some odd things. Like intensity of sun bieng 6.66 higher on mercury than Earth, and mars Aphelion bieng 1.66 AU, and this...

I'm not sure why these things are odd to you. Given Mercury's proximity to the Sun, what would you expect the Sun's intensity to be? Given where Mars' orbit is located, what would you expect for a distance at aphelion? And have you considered checking to see what 1.66 AU is when converted to miles, or light-minutes, or any other arbitrary units of distance? Granted, those are all very Earth-centric examples. Lots of other star systems have gas giants like Jupiter though. How many Jupiter Units (let's define that as the mean distance between Jupiter and the Sun) away from the Sun is Mars at aphelion?

Are those numbers odd because of the sixes? If so, I've got good news for you. While I haven't looked into them to verify they are even accurate, I can still tell you with a pretty high degree of confidence that they are rounded to the hundredths place and that's why they end the way they do.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 07, 2020, 03:47:46 AM

Now, why do i need to use radiuses? I was pointing that gravities for 2 pairs of planets are almost same, why need for radius?

Because a planets gravity is calculated using two variables, a planets mass and the radius of the planet.

If you want to understand you have to look at both. Ignoring one just leads to confusion and questions.

But why do i need to calculate planets's gravity. We have it calculated and it matches up!

If you are talking about this part of my original post

This will require little less or little more of matter, so we aren't breaking any Early solar system simulations of quantaty of gas form which we formed.

I didn't say more/less mass. I said more or less Matter. Adding matter will increace both mass and radius

Quote from: JJA on November 07, 2020, 04:05:10 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 07, 2020, 03:47:46 AM

Now, why do i need to use radiuses? I was pointing that gravities for 2 pairs of planets are almost same, why need for radius?

Because a planets gravity is calculated using two variables, a planets mass and the radius of the planet.

If you want to understand you have to look at both. Ignoring one just leads to confusion and questions.

But why do i need to calculate planets's gravity. We have it calculated and it matches up!

If you are talking about this part of my original post

Quote

This will require little less or little more of matter, so we aren't breaking any Early solar system simulations of quantaty of gas form which we formed.

I didn't say more/less mass. I said more or less Matter. Adding matter will increace both mass and radius

Poke around the web. The answer/explanation/calculations are out there.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 07, 2020, 06:07:20 AM

Quote from: JJA on November 07, 2020, 04:05:10 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 07, 2020, 03:47:46 AM

Now, why do i need to use radiuses? I was pointing that gravities for 2 pairs of planets are almost same, why need for radius?

Because a planets gravity is calculated using two variables, a planets mass and the radius of the planet.

If you want to understand you have to look at both. Ignoring one just leads to confusion and questions.

But why do i need to calculate planets's gravity. We have it calculated and it matches up!

If you are talking about this part of my original post

Quote

This will require little less or little more of matter, so we aren't breaking any Early solar system simulations of quantaty of gas form which we formed.

I didn't say more/less mass. I said more or less Matter. Adding matter will increace both mass and radius

Poke around the web. The answer/explanation/calculations are out there.

I don't understand what is your argument? Gravities are same on 2 pairs of planets? Why need for radius and Mass? To calculate gravity? Why d we need to do that?
Ther gravities are known, and easly accesable.

Quote from: Stash on November 07, 2020, 06:11:30 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 07, 2020, 06:07:20 AM

Quote from: JJA on November 07, 2020, 04:05:10 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 07, 2020, 03:47:46 AM

Now, why do i need to use radiuses? I was pointing that gravities for 2 pairs of planets are almost same, why need for radius?

Because a planets gravity is calculated using two variables, a planets mass and the radius of the planet.

If you want to understand you have to look at both. Ignoring one just leads to confusion and questions.

But why do i need to calculate planets's gravity. We have it calculated and it matches up!

If you are talking about this part of my original post

Quote

This will require little less or little more of matter, so we aren't breaking any Early solar system simulations of quantaty of gas form which we formed.

I didn't say more/less mass. I said more or less Matter. Adding matter will increace both mass and radius

Poke around the web. The answer/explanation/calculations are out there.

I don't understand what is your argument? Gravities are same on 2 pairs of planets? Why need for radius and Mass? To calculate gravity? Why d we need to do that?
Ther gravities are known, and easly accesable.

I don't have an argument. Like I said, poke around the web. The answer/explanation/calculations are out there.

Hello. So i found this wery odd thing when looking at wiki. Chances of this happeming naturaly are undeniably low

Mercury and Mars have almost same gravity (3.7 m/sē)

Venus and Uranus both have gravity aroubd 8.8 m/sē

What does this mean? Is it possible that persions who were choosing gravities (if they faked solar system) said f**** it, they won't notice?

Is it possible this is some sort of God's little joke?

Mass, Volume, Density are all important factors.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 02:26:02 PM

Hello. So i found this wery odd thing when looking at wiki. Chances of this happeming naturaly are undeniably low

Mercury and Mars have almost same gravity (3.7 m/sē)

Venus and Uranus both have gravity aroubd 8.8 m/sē

What does this mean? Is it possible that persions who were choosing gravities (if they faked solar system) said f**** it, they won't notice?

Is it possible this is some sort of God's little joke?

Mass, Volume, Density are all important factors.

Umm...  Mass / Volume = Density.  Radius^2 matters too.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 02:26:02 PM

Hello. So i found this wery odd thing when looking at wiki. Chances of this happeming naturaly are undeniably low

Mercury and Mars have almost same gravity (3.7 m/sē)

Venus and Uranus both have gravity aroubd 8.8 m/sē

What does this mean? Is it possible that persions who were choosing gravities (if they faked solar system) said f**** it, they won't notice?

Is it possible this is some sort of God's little joke?

Mass, Volume, Density are all important factors.

But why! I DON'T NEED TO CALCULATE GRAVITY

Quote from: NotSoSkeptical on November 07, 2020, 10:09:52 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 02:26:02 PM

Hello. So i found this wery odd thing when looking at wiki. Chances of this happeming naturaly are undeniably low

Mercury and Mars have almost same gravity (3.7 m/sē)

Venus and Uranus both have gravity aroubd 8.8 m/sē

What does this mean? Is it possible that persions who were choosing gravities (if they faked solar system) said f**** it, they won't notice?

Is it possible this is some sort of God's little joke?

Mass, Volume, Density are all important factors.

But why! I DON'T NEED TO CALCULATE GRAVITY

But why what?

Quote from: NotSoSkeptical on November 07, 2020, 10:09:52 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 02:26:02 PM

Hello. So i found this wery odd thing when looking at wiki. Chances of this happeming naturaly are undeniably low

Mercury and Mars have almost same gravity (3.7 m/sē)

Venus and Uranus both have gravity aroubd 8.8 m/sē

What does this mean? Is it possible that persions who were choosing gravities (if they faked solar system) said f**** it, they won't notice?

Is it possible this is some sort of God's little joke?

Mass, Volume, Density are all important factors.

But why! I DON'T NEED TO CALCULATE GRAVITY

You're welcome to go to Mars and Mercury to make accurate gravity measurements yourself if you like.

Quote from: NotSoSkeptical on November 07, 2020, 10:09:52 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 02:26:02 PM

Hello. So i found this wery odd thing when looking at wiki. Chances of this happeming naturaly are undeniably low

Mercury and Mars have almost same gravity (3.7 m/sē)

Venus and Uranus both have gravity aroubd 8.8 m/sē

What does this mean? Is it possible that persions who were choosing gravities (if they faked solar system) said f**** it, they won't notice?

Is it possible this is some sort of God's little joke?

Mass, Volume, Density are all important factors.

But why! I DON'T NEED TO CALCULATE GRAVITY

Then why are you complaining?
The point is its not a made up estimate...

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 07, 2020, 03:02:21 PM

Quote from: NotSoSkeptical on November 07, 2020, 10:09:52 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 06, 2020, 02:26:02 PM

Hello. So i found this wery odd thing when looking at wiki. Chances of this happeming naturaly are undeniably low

Mercury and Mars have almost same gravity (3.7 m/sē)

Venus and Uranus both have gravity aroubd 8.8 m/sē

What does this mean? Is it possible that persions who were choosing gravities (if they faked solar system) said f**** it, they won't notice?

Is it possible this is some sort of God's little joke?

Mass, Volume, Density are all important factors.

But why! I DON'T NEED TO CALCULATE GRAVITY

You're welcome to go to Mars and Mercury to make accurate gravity measurements yourself if you like.

Dude, what is problem? Why do * I *need to do the math? It is done:

Mercury: 3.7

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_(planet)

Mars: 3.711

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars

Less than 0.11 m/sē diffirence! (Mercury is rounded, so it is probably less)


Uranus:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranu

8.69 m/sē

Venus: 8.87 m/sē

Bigger diffirence, but considering gravity is measured on surface and Uranus has no surface and gravity becomes weaker futher we go form center I will call it close


https://www.universetoday.com/14245/what-is-the-gravity-on-venus/

Look up the Birthday problem for a good example of how humans are bad at calculating probabilities and evaluating coincidences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

There are lots of numbers in astronomy.  If you look for coincidences, you will find them.  They are not evidence of fraud or design.

Look up the Birthday problem for a good example of how humans are bad at calculating probabilities and evaluating coincidences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

There are lots of numbers in astronomy.  If you look for coincidences, you will find them.  They are not evidence of fraud or design.

Yeah, but this will be like you have 8 people and four people (two pairs) have same birthday. I don't need PHD to tell you this is highly unlikley

So you feel they arbitrarily picked two planets and arbitrarily picked a G amd then forced the measured R to match the measured R to calc the M?

You realize no one can measure the mass of a planet
Its an estimate.
Then its M is cross ref estimated based on orbit.

Quote from: JJA on November 08, 2020, 04:26:06 AM

Look up the Birthday problem for a good example of how humans are bad at calculating probabilities and evaluating coincidences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

There are lots of numbers in astronomy.  If you look for coincidences, you will find them.  They are not evidence of fraud or design.

Yeah, but this will be like you have 8 people and four people (two pairs) have same birthday. I don't need PHD to tell you this is highly unlikley

No, there are hundreds of numbers you can measure about planets.  Mass, radius, density, rotational speed, orbital speed, distance, kinetic energy, gravity, energy emissions, blackbody radiation, temperature...

So a few of them match.  Not a big deal.  It's just basic statistics.

You don't need a PHD to realize that it's HIGHLY LIKELY you can find matching numbers in anything if you look hard enough.

Dude, what is problem? Why do * I *need to do the math? It is done:

Good question.  If them math is already done, then it seems to me that * you * don't need to do it.  That is unless * you  * want to double check the math to see if it's correct.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 08, 2020, 06:42:15 AM

Quote from: JJA on November 08, 2020, 04:26:06 AM

Look up the Birthday problem for a good example of how humans are bad at calculating probabilities and evaluating coincidences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

There are lots of numbers in astronomy.  If you look for coincidences, you will find them.  They are not evidence of fraud or design.

Yeah, but this will be like you have 8 people and four people (two pairs) have same birthday. I don't need PHD to tell you this is highly unlikley

No, there are hundreds of numbers you can measure about planets.  Mass, radius, density, rotational speed, orbital speed, distance, kinetic energy, gravity, energy emissions, blackbody radiation, temperature...

So a few of them match.  Not a big deal.  It's just basic statistics.

You don't need a PHD to realize that it's HIGHLY LIKELY you can find matching numbers in anything if you look hard enough.

Thoese aren't small numbers. Thoese are literal planet's gravities. And 2 of them are pretty close.

You know what is also similar? Visual size of Sun and Moon

Quote from: JJA on November 08, 2020, 07:55:14 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 08, 2020, 06:42:15 AM

Quote from: JJA on November 08, 2020, 04:26:06 AM

Look up the Birthday problem for a good example of how humans are bad at calculating probabilities and evaluating coincidences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

There are lots of numbers in astronomy.  If you look for coincidences, you will find them.  They are not evidence of fraud or design.

Yeah, but this will be like you have 8 people and four people (two pairs) have same birthday. I don't need PHD to tell you this is highly unlikley

No, there are hundreds of numbers you can measure about planets.  Mass, radius, density, rotational speed, orbital speed, distance, kinetic energy, gravity, energy emissions, blackbody radiation, temperature...

So a few of them match.  Not a big deal.  It's just basic statistics.

You don't need a PHD to realize that it's HIGHLY LIKELY you can find matching numbers in anything if you look hard enough.

Thoese aren't small numbers. Thoese are literal planet's gravities. And 2 of them are pretty close.

Yes, they are.

You know what is also similar? Visual size of Sun and Moon

Yes, we know.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 09, 2020, 06:44:10 AM

Quote from: JJA on November 08, 2020, 07:55:14 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 08, 2020, 06:42:15 AM

Quote from: JJA on November 08, 2020, 04:26:06 AM

Look up the Birthday problem for a good example of how humans are bad at calculating probabilities and evaluating coincidences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

There are lots of numbers in astronomy.  If you look for coincidences, you will find them.  They are not evidence of fraud or design.

Yeah, but this will be like you have 8 people and four people (two pairs) have same birthday. I don't need PHD to tell you this is highly unlikley

No, there are hundreds of numbers you can measure about planets.  Mass, radius, density, rotational speed, orbital speed, distance, kinetic energy, gravity, energy emissions, blackbody radiation, temperature...

So a few of them match.  Not a big deal.  It's just basic statistics.

You don't need a PHD to realize that it's HIGHLY LIKELY you can find matching numbers in anything if you look hard enough.

Thoese aren't small numbers. Thoese are literal planet's gravities. And 2 of them are pretty close.

Yes, they are.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 09, 2020, 06:44:10 AM

You know what is also similar? Visual size of Sun and Moon

Yes, we know.

Two planets having almost same gravities isn't small. It might have saved us form asteroid impact, for example. I whoud get it if it was number of tectonic plates or something. But literaly half of planets having same gravity as other planet isn't small thing

Quote from: Stash on November 09, 2020, 06:50:06 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 09, 2020, 06:44:10 AM

Quote from: JJA on November 08, 2020, 07:55:14 AM

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 08, 2020, 06:42:15 AM

Quote from: JJA on November 08, 2020, 04:26:06 AM

Look up the Birthday problem for a good example of how humans are bad at calculating probabilities and evaluating coincidences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

There are lots of numbers in astronomy.  If you look for coincidences, you will find them.  They are not evidence of fraud or design.

Yeah, but this will be like you have 8 people and four people (two pairs) have same birthday. I don't need PHD to tell you this is highly unlikley

No, there are hundreds of numbers you can measure about planets.  Mass, radius, density, rotational speed, orbital speed, distance, kinetic energy, gravity, energy emissions, blackbody radiation, temperature...

So a few of them match.  Not a big deal.  It's just basic statistics.

You don't need a PHD to realize that it's HIGHLY LIKELY you can find matching numbers in anything if you look hard enough.

Thoese aren't small numbers. Thoese are literal planet's gravities. And 2 of them are pretty close.

Yes, they are.

Quote from: Code-Beta1234 on November 09, 2020, 06:44:10 AM

You know what is also similar? Visual size of Sun and Moon

Yes, we know.

Two planets having almost same gravities isn't small. It might have saved us form asteroid impact, for example. I whoud get it if it was number of tectonic plates or something. But literaly half of planets having same gravity as other planet isn't small thing

It's just a few numbers matching up. It happens all the time, ask lottery winners if their matching all the numbers is a small thing.

Why does this even matter to a flat or round Earth?  Do you not believe in coincidences?  They happen all the time.