Page 1 of 1
Thinner than a razor blade?
Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:44 pm
by ipgrunt
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)
raqsor blade thin
Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:44 pm
by ta152h0
Saturn
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:16 am
by S. Bilderback
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.
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:38 am
by ta152h0
Comparative sizes do not require the knowledge of absolute sizes. TA152h0 is correct
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:44 pm
by S. Bilderback
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.
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:18 pm
by Empeda2
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.
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:27 pm
by orin stepanek
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
razor thin
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 4:40 pm
by ta152h0
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
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:09 pm
by S. Bilderback
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!
Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2005 5:43 am
by harry
Smile,,,,,,,,,is this the comic relief
Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2005 4:01 pm
by William Roeder
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.
Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:47 am
by harry
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.
Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 12:32 pm
by Empeda2
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.
rings
Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:29 am
by ta152h0
<<<<<<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???
Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:54 am
by William Roeder
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.
Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 4:48 pm
by BMAONE23
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.
razor thin rings
Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:42 pm
by ta152h0
gravitational viscosity
Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:56 pm
by harry
Imagine some people here have no knowldge of Gravitational Viscosity.
Please explain
Merry Xmas
razor thin rings
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2005 1:32 am
by ta152h0
gravitational viscosity is a summation of all the individual atom/molecule/substance attractions that occur .
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
.
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2005 4:20 pm
by gordhaddow
Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:23 pm
by Empeda2
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.