Skip to main content

Classical Physics to Calculate Rotation Periods of Planets and the Sun

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Planetary Exploration and Science: Recent Results and Advances

Part of the book series: Springer Geophysics ((SPRINGERGEOPHYS))

  • 1331 Accesses

Abstract

The rotation period of the Earth was calculated from the fundamental quantities, mass, distance, and radius, of the Earth-Moon system by almost an exact number 24h3m5s. The rotation periods of Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and the Sun were also calculated by the same equation. The Earth spin axis which is inclined by 23.45° with respect to the Earth orbit was derived from the gravitation of the Sun acting on the Earth and calculated by almost an exact number, 23.487°. An optical experiment to measure the reaction torque on the Earth acted by the Moon is proposed and discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allen CW (1973) Astrophysical quantities, 3rd edn. Athlone Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Boss AP (2000) Possible rapid gas giant planet formation in the solar nebular and other protoplanetary disks. Astrophys J 536:L101–L104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlin TC (1897) A group of hypotheses bearing on climate change. J Geol 5:653–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dones L, Tremaine S (1993) Why does the Earth spin forward? Science 259:350–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giampieri G, Dougherty MK, Smith EJ, Russell CT (2006) A regular period for Saturn’s magnetic field that may track its internal rotation. Nature 441:62–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giuli RT (1968) On the rotation of the Earth produced by gravitational accretion of particles. Icarus 8:301–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg R, Fischer M, Valsecchi GB, Carusi A (1997) Sources of planetary rotation: mapping planetesimals’ contributions to angular momentum. Icarus 129:384–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes DW (2003) Planetary spin. Planet Space Sci 51:517–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ida S, Nakazawa K (1990) Did rotation of the protoplanets originate from the successive collisions of planetesimals? Icarus 86:561–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokubo E, Ida S (2007) Formation of terrestrial planets from protoplanets. II. Statistics of planetary spin. Astrophys J 671:2082–2090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kortenkamp SJ, Kokubo E, Weidenschilling SJ (2000) Formation of planetary embryos. In: Canup RM, Righter K (eds) Origin of the earth and moon. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, US, pp 85–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Lissauer JJ (1993) Planet formation. Annu Rev Astron Astrophys 31:129–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lissauer JJ, Kary DM (1991) The origin of the systematic component of planetary rotation I. Planet on a circular orbit. Icarus 94:126–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lissauer JJ, Stewart GR (1993) Growth of planets from planetesimals. In: Levy EH, Lunine JI (eds) Protostars and planets III. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, US, pp 1061–1088

    Google Scholar 

  • Lissauer JJ, Dones L, Ohtsuki K (2000) Origin and evolution of terrestrial planet rotation. In: Canup RM, Righter K (eds) Origin of the earth and moon. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, US, pp 101–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohtsuki K, Ida S (1998) Planetary rotation by accretion of planetesimals with nonuniform spatial distribution formed by the planet’s gravitational perturbation. Icarus 131:393–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park S (2008) Why are the Earth spin and its axis 24 hours, tilted by 23.5 degree?. APS April Meeting and HEDP/HEDLA Meeting 53(5)

    Google Scholar 

  • Park S (2013) MathcadText.pdf. http://sites.google.com/site/sahnggi

  • Podolak M (2007) The case of Saturn’s spin. Science 37:1330–1331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollack JB, Hubickyj O, Bodenheimer P, Lissauer J, Podolak M, Greenzweig Y (1996) Formation of the giant planets by concurrent accretion of solids and gas. Icarus 124:62–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith EP, Jacobs KC (1973) Introductory astronomy and astrophysics. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson DJ (2006) A new spin on Saturn. Nature 441:34–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wetherill GW (1990) Formation of the Earth. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 18:205–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams DR (2010) Planetary fact sheet – metric. http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/index.html. Accessed 17 Nov 2010

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sahnggi Park .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

9.1.1 Validity of the Initial Velocities Being Zero

The assumption in Eq. 9.4 that initial velocities v 10, v 20 which had not been driven by the forces f 1 and f 2 will be damped out may be validated by estimating the time to take for an initial velocity to decrease to a hundredth of its initial value. The increased radius, ΔR e, of the Earth by the tidal force of the Moon can be inferred by an equation:

$$ -\frac{G{m}_1}{\left({R}_{\mathrm{e}}+\Delta {R}_{\mathrm{e}}\right)}\approx -\frac{G{m}_1}{R_{\mathrm{e}}}+\left(\frac{Gm{}_2}{d-{R}_{\mathrm{e}}}-\frac{G{m}_2}{d}\right), $$
(9.35)

where the gravitational potential at the increased radius is equal to the gravitational potential increased by the tidal force of the Moon. The increased radius is calculated ΔR e = 21.6 m. The volume of the increased radius is given by ΔV ≈ (4πR e 2ΔR e) (1/3) (1/2), where the factor 1/3 comes from an increase in one direction among three perpendicular directions and the factor 1/2 from a rough average of the increased radius. The mass is given by Δm ≈ Δ e with the average density ρ e of the Earth. For more accuracy, the radius of the Earth can be replaced by a mass-averaged radius R e  = [∫ e(4πr 2 dr)]/m ≈ (3/4)R e to use the average density ρ e of the Earth instead of the surface density of the Earth. As the Earth rotates, gravitational potential of the mass Δm increases and decreases twice a rotation by height ΔR e ′ ≈ ζ(3/4)ΔR e = ζ × 16.2 m, where ζ is a constant representing the difference between the real increased radius and the calculated one here. The whole volume of increased radius per rotation may be approximated by 2 × ΔV, because there are two perpendicular directions on the equator plane. The potential energy loss per rotation is, approximately, ΔW ≈ η2 ⋅ 2 ⋅ Δm ⋅ g ⋅ ΔR e′, which must be a loss of the kinetic energy of the Earth per rotation. The constant η is a nonconservative potential energy loss rate as the mass Δm moves by the increased radius. The number of rotations to lose all the kinetic energy of spin is E kW ≈ (1/2) 2W. If the initial velocity v 10 makes 100 rotations per year, then the number is 5.86 × 106 for ζ = 1 and η = 1. It takes 2.7 × 105 years, many orders less than the Earth age, for the initial spin to be damped to one rotation per year, where R = R 0exp(−Ct), N 0–100 = N 0exp(–Ct 0), R 0 = 100 rotations per year, and R = 1 rotation per year to calculate the time, N 0 = 5.86 × 106 and t 0 = 1 year to calculate the constant C, are used. Even for ζ = 0.1 and η = 0.1, it takes 2.7 × 108 years, still an order less than the Earth age.

As the same calculations are made with the reduced two-body systems of planets, for ζ = 1 and η = 1, it takes 1.77 × 107 years for Jupiter, 4.55 × 107 years for Saturn, 6.98 × 107 years for Uranus, and 1.93 × 107 years for Neptune, for 100 rotation per year of a initial spin to be damped to one rotation per year. For the Sun, it takes 1.93 × 1013 years, but if the imaginary planet were in a distance of Mercury in early stage of solar system, it would take 5.63 × 107 years. For Mars, it takes 1.46 × 1012 years calculated from its satellites. If the tidal force of the Sun was taken into account in much closer distance at the early stage, it may take much shorter time by many orders, which may apply to other planets. Although it is a very rough calculation, the assumption that if they had not been driven by torques, initial velocities were damped out to negligibly small values may be validated.

One further validity may be inferred from the spins of satellites in Table 9.3 where all major satellites but Hyperion are rotating synchronously to their orbital periods. It proves that if their initial spins were much faster than the synchronous spins, kinetic energy losses of satellites due to gravitations of mother planets were large enough for the spins of the satellites to decrease to the synchronous spins. If it is the same for the planets, the remaining initial spins of the planets are, at most, smaller than the synchronous spins.

9.1.2 Influence of the Fast Rotating Planets on the Spin of the Sun

If the Sun acts torques on the fast rotating planets, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, in the direction to decrease the speeds of spins, the reaction torques would make the Sun rotate faster than the planets in the opposite direction to the current spin of the Sun. A possible reason why it does not happen may be explained by a small or negligible magnitude of the torques being acted by the Sun. With reference to Fig. 9.2, for the gravitation of the Sun to make a torque on the Earth, the volume of increased radius must be in a certain angle between 0° and 90° or −90° with respect to the line connecting two centers of the Sun and the Earth. As the Earth rotates so fast, the increased radius may appear in an angle of ineffective direction or the volume of increased radius may spread over all 360°, due to the retarded response of the Earth materials. In this case, the Sun would not make a realistic torque on the Earth, which would be the same with the other fast rotating planets.

To explain the reaction torque on the Sun to hold the current spin of the Sun, the fast rotating planets would have some elliptic shape of orbital trajectories with their own satellites due to the tidal forces of the Sun. As the planets rotate around the Sun, the long axis of the elliptic orbit would always direct toward the Sun just as the synchronous rotation of the Moon. If the long axis of elliptic orbit deflects from the line connecting two centers of the Sun and the planet, then the gravitational force of the Sun would act a torque to make the elliptic orbit rotate synchronously with the orbital motion of the planet around the Sun. From this torque, there should be a reaction torque on the Sun to hold the current spin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Park, S. (2015). Classical Physics to Calculate Rotation Periods of Planets and the Sun. In: Jin, S., Haghighipour, N., Ip, WH. (eds) Planetary Exploration and Science: Recent Results and Advances. Springer Geophysics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45052-9_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics