MostCelestialObjectsSpin.SomeRoll.WhatDoWeCallObjectsThatRo

returnviewersguidedotca · Aug 4, 2005

Most celestial objects spin. Some objects "roll." What do we call objects that roll? --------- Years ago I saw an example of a type of "solar system," celestial object that rolled forward in the direction that it traveled through space as opposed to "spinning," or "rotating," the way "normal," celestial objects behave when they move through space. This object is solid as opposed to gaseous. Can someone identify and describe this type or class of object? Thank you very much. Don B.

Saiph · Aug 4, 2005

what do you mean by "rolls"? I see no difference between rolling motion and spinning (at least, when it is not in contact with the ground, as is the case with planets) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

nevers · Aug 4, 2005

I don't know but that's got to be the longest title for any thread I've ever seen! I guess it matches the "user" name. Congrats <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

heyscottie · Aug 4, 2005

Well, Uranus rotates somewhat in the method you describe -- its pole is inclined almost 90 degrees with respect to its revolution. But there is nothing special about these types of objects that would cause us to give them their own classification....

returnviewersguidedotca · Aug 5, 2005

Hello Saiph & heyscottie Thank you for considering my question. Saiph; - This comment that you made is interesting to me. I had not considered the point or idea you mention about how there is "no difference between rolling motion and spinning... as is the case with planets. - Certainly, I suppose, the location or position that the observer is seeing from, their viewing perspective, would or could determine how they perceived the motion of the object they were observing. heyscottie; "Well, Uranus rotates somewhat in the method you describe -- its pole is inclined almost 90 degrees with respect to its revolution. But there is nothing special about these types of objects that would cause us to give them their own classification.... Saiph; Maybe this is the way you are thinking or the way you are describing "motion," with your comment; "I see no difference between rolling motion and spinning (at least, when it is not in contact with the ground, as is the case with planets) " 1. - If an observer on Earth was looking at Uranus, could it be said that they may possibly describe the motion that they were seeing as a rolling through space "type of motion," in the direction of travel? This as opposed to the way that the majority of the planets in our solar system "rotate," as they travel in their orbit? ( heyscottie

("Well, Uranus rotates somewhat in the method you describe ) I does seem to me that this is the point that you are making. Question two will hopefully help to expand the original question that I asked. - In a further effort to understand. I am having trouble putting this question I am trying to ask into words but I will try again. 2. - Would it appear as if north and south pole of Uranus, the two poles, would seem to be the turning sides of the planet? I am asking this question because I don't fully understand this point; " its pole is inclined almos

Saiph · Aug 5, 2005

Rolling and spinning both involve rotation about an axis. Rolling is spinning, with an additional condition: A "rolling" objects does so across a surface, where the point of contact does not slip/slide. Like a wheel spins in the air, but put on the ground it will roll without sliding. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

petepan · Aug 6, 2005

Did you not believe me when i said that "objects" don't roll in space? To "roll" implies the "object" is on a solid surface, interacting with the surface. Objects in space have nothing to interact with, except space itself. You might say it's a matter of semantics, but i don't believe that is the case.

petepan · Aug 6, 2005

Would the poles of Uranus be situated horizontally in relation to the plain[sic] of the planets orbits? Yes. It seems to me that generally speaking the north and south poles of the Earth and I suppose all the planets except for Uranus are all aligned or situated up and down or vertically up through the plain[sic] that is the plain[sic] of the planets of our solar system as the planets orbit the Sun. Yes. BTW, it's the 'plane' of the orbits. 2. - Would it appear as if north and south pole of Uranus, the two poles, would seem to be the turning sides of the planet? I am asking this question because I don't fully understand this point; " its pole is inclined almost 90 degrees with respect to its revolution." ROTATIONAL AXIS Uranus' rotational axis is strongly tilted on its side (97.9°). Instead of rotating with its axis roughly perpendicular to the plane of its orbit (like all the other planets in our Solar System), Uranus rotates on its side (along its orbital path). http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/astronomy/planets/uranus/

dragon04 · Aug 7, 2005

Spin is spin regardless of axis. You "roll" just indicates some significant event that changed the spin's axis if you compare it to 8 of 9 planets. I AM very interested, however, in the reason that causes the slow rotational period of Venus. Are there any models that show at what radius relative to the sun that a planet becomes tidally locked? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!". </div>

tempel1 · Aug 7, 2005

Dear friends Go here please: http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/news/press-release-details.cfm?newsID=117 ” The spacecraft's VELOCITY RELATIVE TO THE SUN is at about 26 kilometers per second (about 59,250 miles per hour). Cassini is now more than 9 million kilometers (almost 6 million miles) from Earth”. Since our probe is launched from the earth, it has already a velocity of 65,000 miles per hour (earth's velocity). Why have NASA engineers steered Cassini on this trajectory? http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=h_cassini_trajectory_02.gif&cap=The Instead of increasing Cassini's velocity they have slowed down it at 59,250 miles per hour. NASA engineers think the earth is the center of our solar system and don't consider earth's velocity. In this wrong way Cassini has travelled for 2 200 000 000 miles to meet Saturn. Cassini would have been able to fly along a straight line travelling for less than 1 000 000 000 miles. 65,000 miles per hour (earth velocity) + 36,000 miles per hour (spacecraft's velocity) = 101,000 miles per hour 1 000 000 000 miles : 365 days : 24 hours : 101,000 miles per hour = 1.13 years If NASA engineers considered the earth's velocity, Cassini could meet Saturn in one year!

tempel1 · Aug 7, 2005

moderators have banned me from Phenomena without reasons

yevaud · Aug 7, 2005

Incorrect. The Mods have banned you from this entire site. But, typical for those who have no real clue, you have reappeared as a new username, oh...5 times is it? Or 6? And each time, you are re-banned. Does that explain anything to you? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

tempel1 · Aug 7, 2005

Yes, it tell me you are not from the land of the free IF YOU DON'T AGREE WIYH MY STATEMENTS, IT IS ENOUGH YOU DON'T READ ME

yevaud · Aug 7, 2005

Ah. The Mods do their job, and now it's my fault? Cool. Your logic is impeccable...and dead wrong. Though they could tell you more accurately, you have been banned for insults, ad-hominims, and generally continual despicable language. Rebut *that* why don't you? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

tempel1 · Aug 7, 2005

MINE WERE HUMOROUS AD HOMINEM I HAVE NEVER OFFENDED ANYONE

yevaud · Aug 7, 2005

You're talking to the wrong person. I am not a Moderator. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

tempel1 · Aug 7, 2005

YOU COULD DEFEND ME

the_masked_squiggy · Sep 10, 2005

*blink*

votefornimitz · Sep 10, 2005

Ummm, is that bigbrain you are talking to? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> In the event of a full scale nuclear war or NEO impact event, there are two categories of underground shelters available to the public, distinguished by depth underground: bunkers and graves... </div>

MostCelestialObjectsSpin.SomeRoll.WhatDoWeCallObjectsThatRo

returnviewersguidedotca

Guest

Saiph

Guest

nevers

Guest

heyscottie

Guest

returnviewersguidedotca

Guest

Saiph

Guest

petepan

Guest

petepan

Guest

dragon04

Guest

tempel1

Guest

tempel1

Guest

yevaud

Guest

tempel1

Guest

yevaud

Guest

tempel1

Guest

yevaud

Guest

tempel1

Guest

the_masked_squiggy

Guest

votefornimitz

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page