English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Mercury , venus, earth revolve around the sun once every 3,7, and 12 months. If the three plantes are now inthe same straight line, what is the smallest number of the months thar must pass before they line up again

2007-08-21 16:01:32 · 4 answers · asked by Yolie b 1 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

4 answers

Your question is actually pretty complicated because the orbits of the planets aren't perfect circles, and they aren't centered on the Sun. There is no simple pattern to the alignments.

Mercury, Venus and Earth will align in a straight line (called a conjunction) 8 times in the next 5 years on these dates:
3/27/2008
6/7/2008
8/20/2008
1/5/2010
4/4/2010
5/7/2011
11/1/2011
6/1/2012

So in the near future, it looks like your answer is about 2 1/2 months between 6/7/2008 and 8/20/2008.

If this answer seems strange to you, don't forget the planets don't all have to be on the same side of the Sun to line up. They can be just about anywhere in their orbits when it happens.

2007-08-21 16:12:51 · answer #1 · answered by I don't think so 5 · 0 1

I agree with "angelhugger1", 84 months.

I disagree with "I don't think so" because the problem tells you to assume the orbits are exactly 12, 7 and 4 months long. And if the alignment takes place at the same part of Earth's orbit, as is the case for 84 months (which is exactly 7 years) then it doesn't even matter if the orbits are elliptical. However he is right that the alignment doesn't necessarily have to take place on the same side of the Sun each time, although it does in this simplified example.

I almost agree with "tham153" because he gets the right answer, but he still gets overly technical and changes the statement of the problem by saying that Mercury and Venus do not take exactly 3 and 7 months to orbit. For that mater, Earth doesn't take exactly 12 months either.

2007-08-21 16:45:00 · answer #2 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 0 0

Christians in the process the history of Christians to boot as many others have had a warped sense of reading the Bible. You accused me the different day of no longer information evolution. yet right here you bypass no longer fairly information the Bible. there is not any technological awareness that has ever come around that has ever disproved the Bible. merely by way of fact some misinformed Christians seek for to silence people who venture their inflexible procedures does not recommend that the Bible is fake. The Bible is regularly genuine with the caveat it is has been translated and retranslated and retranslated lower back. And errors have crept in over the years. and what's worse is that the fairly unique manuscripts are no further obtainable. The Bible consists of lots of the elementary suggestions God has set forth for us. And because it income a guy for solid to ensure and to have faith. technological awareness additionally has a flaw. it incredibly is studied by skill of guy. guy makes errors. sometimes scientists carry directly to errors, merely like Christians by way of fact they're afraid of what the outcomes could be in the event that they're proved incorrect. Even between evolutionists, there are large debates approximately how lots of that concept is genuine and how lots is conjecture. we are taught that if we've 2 factors, the least complicated element to do is draw a promptly line from element A to point B. regrettably, that doesn't assure that accuracy every time. regardless of in case you have a element C that seems to make your assumption much extra certain, it incredibly is not any assure. all of us could desire to be open minded adequate that any learn a guy makes in any field could have and probable could have errors. a manner or the different, if we can usher in merely the suited blend of religion to maintain us on the suited course, God will finally lead us to the fact. no longer something will exchange once you settle for the fact that evolution is definitely one of those theories which isn't yet comprehensive. And the conclusions you have widespread to be genuine, could no longer likely be entirely suited. different than which you would be open to extra fact regardless of if it does contradict your cutting-edge point of view.

2016-10-09 00:19:19 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

sounds like 84 months -- the least common multiple of the 3 numbers

2007-08-21 16:12:14 · answer #4 · answered by angelhugger1 4 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers