Comments and questions about the
APOD on the main view screen.
-
ipgrunt
- Asternaut
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:35 pm
- Location: here
-
Contact:
Post
by ipgrunt » Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:44 pm
What on earth is meant by this claim ??
>> "Brightness measurements from different angles have shown Saturn's
>> rings to be about one kilometer thick, making them many times
>> thinner, in relative proportion, than a razor blade. "
![Question :?:](./images/smilies/icon_question.gif)
In relative proportion to what
![Question :?:](./images/smilies/icon_question.gif)
-- ipgrunt
-
ta152h0
- Schooled
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 12:46 am
- Location: Auburn, Washington, USA
Post
by ta152h0 » Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:44 pm
Saturn
Wolf Kotenberg
-
S. Bilderback
- Science Officer
- Posts: 235
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 12:12 am
- Location: The Enchanted Forests of N. Central USA
Post
by S. Bilderback » Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:16 am
But then the size of Saturn would need to be compared to something on the same scale and that is not posted. It is an open-ended comparison. Unless it is figurative speach.
ipgrunt is correct.
The more I learn, the more I know what I don't know.
-
ta152h0
- Schooled
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 12:46 am
- Location: Auburn, Washington, USA
Post
by ta152h0 » Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:38 am
Comparative sizes do not require the knowledge of absolute sizes. TA152h0 is correct
Wolf Kotenberg
-
S. Bilderback
- Science Officer
- Posts: 235
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 12:12 am
- Location: The Enchanted Forests of N. Central USA
Post
by S. Bilderback » Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:44 pm
ta152h0 wrote:]Comparative sizes do not require the knowledge of absolute sizes. TA152h0 is correct
"... making them many times thinner, in relative proportion, than a razor blade . . ."
It needs to state in relative proportions to "what"? I don't see a scale to satisfy the "what".
I would guess that it is a clumsy use of a figure of speech.
The more I learn, the more I know what I don't know.
-
Empeda2
- Science Officer
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 9:02 am
Post
by Empeda2 » Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:18 pm
In proportion of their diameter.
If you scaled the rings diameter down to the length of a razor blade, the rings would be much thinner than said blade.
The Artist Formerly Known as
Empeda
-
orin stepanek
- Plutopian
- Posts: 8200
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
- Location: Nebraska
Post
by orin stepanek » Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:27 pm
I would Imagine that the important thing is that the rings are very thin in respect to the size of Saturn. Being composed of so many moon lets it is amazing that they all stay within such a narrow band around the planet.
Orin
-
ta152h0
- Schooled
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 12:46 am
- Location: Auburn, Washington, USA
Post
by ta152h0 » Tue Dec 20, 2005 4:40 pm
Next time a politian wims by a " razor thin " margin, I am going to look at it from a different perspective. Pass the ice cold one
Wolf Kotenberg
-
S. Bilderback
- Science Officer
- Posts: 235
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 12:12 am
- Location: The Enchanted Forests of N. Central USA
Post
by S. Bilderback » Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:09 pm
Empeda2 wrote:In proportion of their diameter.
If you scaled the rings diameter down to the length of a razor blade, the rings would be much thinner than said blade.
Good answer, give yourself 2 points!
The more I learn, the more I know what I don't know.
-
harry
- G'day G'day G'day G'day
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
Post
by harry » Wed Dec 21, 2005 5:43 am
Smile,,,,,,,,,is this the comic relief
Harry : Smile and live another day.
-
William Roeder
- Ensign
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 3:46 pm
Post
by William Roeder » Wed Dec 21, 2005 4:01 pm
I remember reading elsewhere another comparison.
If saturn was the size of a (beach?) ball then the rings would be much thiner than a piece of paper.
-
harry
- G'day G'day G'day G'day
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
Post
by harry » Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:47 am
What makes it so thin?.
What controls it?
Why do most of the structures in the universe have this type of feature?
Is it the spin of the core or the spin of the planet.
Harry : Smile and live another day.
-
Empeda2
- Science Officer
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 9:02 am
Post
by Empeda2 » Fri Dec 23, 2005 12:32 pm
I don't think anyone knows for sure Harry, a lot of the rings are held in place by 'shepherd' moons that hold the particles in place - some of the moons are also replenishing the rings as technically, ring systems aren't that stable.
The Artist Formerly Known as
Empeda
-
ta152h0
- Schooled
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 12:46 am
- Location: Auburn, Washington, USA
Post
by ta152h0 » Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:29 am
<<<<<<I don't think anyone knows for sure Harry, a lot of the rings are held in place by 'shepherd' moons that hold the particles in place - some of the moons are also replenishing the rings as technically, ring systems aren't that stable.>>>>>
Isn't Saturn itself the "engine" that motors the rings and the moons ???? I would guess if Saturn rotated at a significant slower rate, the rings would be much thicker and more chaotic???
Wolf Kotenberg
-
William Roeder
- Ensign
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 3:46 pm
Post
by William Roeder » Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:54 am
Since the rings are totally outside the atmosphere of Saturn, the planet's mass can be treated mathematically as a point.
How would body rotation have any effect on the rings?
The moons however can affect the rings.
-
BMAONE23
- Commentator Model 1.23
- Posts: 4076
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:55 pm
- Location: California
Post
by BMAONE23 » Sat Dec 24, 2005 4:48 pm
I would imagine that it would be affected as far as gravity warping the space around the earth. The earth's gravity acts to pull the moon ( to a small degree) around it in a certain direction. (are there any (many) moons orbiting planets in a retrograde orbit?) If the rotation increases then the warping might also tend to increase which would affect all within the field of influence.
-
ta152h0
- Schooled
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 12:46 am
- Location: Auburn, Washington, USA
Post
by ta152h0 » Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:42 pm
gravitational viscosity
Wolf Kotenberg
-
harry
- G'day G'day G'day G'day
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
Post
by harry » Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:56 pm
Imagine some people here have no knowldge of Gravitational Viscosity.
Please explain
Merry Xmas
Harry : Smile and live another day.
-
ta152h0
- Schooled
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 12:46 am
- Location: Auburn, Washington, USA
Post
by ta152h0 » Sun Dec 25, 2005 1:32 am
gravitational viscosity is a summation of all the individual atom/molecule/substance attractions that occur .
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
.
Wolf Kotenberg
-
gordhaddow
- Ensign
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:50 am
- Location: London, ON
Post
by gordhaddow » Sun Dec 25, 2005 4:20 pm
Slan go foill!
-
Empeda2
- Science Officer
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 9:02 am
Post
by Empeda2 » Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:23 pm
BMAONE23 wrote: (are there any (many) moons orbiting planets in a retrograde orbit?)
There are a few (most notibly I believe is Triton), but these are believed to be captured moons.
The Artist Formerly Known as
Empeda