According to physics, gravity has a greater effect on bodies that have a larger mass [GMm/R^2 ], if so, how come the planets that have the largest mass like jupiter, uranus saturn and neptune are much farther away than the dwarf planets like mercury venus earth and mars? should'nt the matter that formed them been pulled closer during the genesis of the planetary system?
2007-04-09 06:23:00 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
The size of the mass has nothing to do with the establishment of a planet's orbit. Why are there so many little minor planets between Mars and Jupiter? Why is tiny Pluto in orbit so far away? The speed and distance of a sun orbiting body is controlled by Kepler's third law which does not have mass mentioned anywhere in it. Why can an astronaut doing an extra-vehicular activity stay in the same orbit as the much more massive spacecraft which is orbiting the Earth at the same speed and distance?
The size (not mass) of the outer planets is most likely due to their distance from the sun. Being of the Jovian class, they are mostly low density gas bags with small icy/rocky cores. With out the solar wind and heat to blow the atmospheres away, they retained most of their size (atmosphere) and mass. Also, the distance between them does not encourage enough interaction to tear them apart into smaller objects.
2007-04-09 07:51:55 · answer #1 · answered by Bruce D 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The planets formed from what was probably a large cloud. Once an object is in orbit, gravity does not pull the more massive things toward the middle. The inner planets may have been just like Jupiter etc at one time, but the energy from the sun would probably have caused all the light gasses to escape.
2007-04-09 06:31:04 · answer #2 · answered by Gene 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the solar system was born about 4 to 5 billion years ago, the big bang was 12 to 15 billion years ago. the solar system formed out of cloud of gas, often called the solar cloud. the sun then collapsed on itself as it started to fire up as a star. the outter planets were then gaseous, so they were flung out farther than the others planets. so the heavier rocky planets stayed close to the sun by the gravity of the sun. but the gravity also kept the outter planets from zooming out of the solar system, since the sun's gravity had them in it's hold.
2007-04-09 07:12:43 · answer #3 · answered by captcosmos420 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One additional factor that may have made the outer planets larger is that they sweep through a larger volume of space, meaning that they had more volume within which to collect gas and debris. Being colder they also could hang on to more hydrogen and helium, and as most of the proto-solar system was hydrogen and helium they had a better shot at growing big than the inner planets did.
2007-04-09 06:34:15 · answer #4 · answered by Isaac Laquedem 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is ongoing debate about how the planets form and where. One school says that they formed in about the same place they are today, another school says they all formed closer to the Sun but have been moved out due to gravitational interaction with each other, another school says they were all built by Magatheria and are part of a giant computer program.
2007-04-09 06:30:17 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's possible that the planets did not form where they currently are. Planetary migration seems to be responsible for a large part of solar system formation.
2007-04-09 07:27:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no because objects in motion tend to stay in motion (newtons law)
so when the big bang happened, planets of more mass flew farther faster and planets of smaller mass flew not as far before they were slowed down by gravity...
same as if someone threw a bowling ball at you at say 15mph it would require alot more force to stop it than a baseball at 15mph...
2007-04-09 06:32:19 · answer #7 · answered by jwalker343 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋