![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For many orbits, e.g. selenocentric orbits, atmospheric interaction cannot be the primary cause of orbital decay. Instead, isn't it brought about by the gravitational attraction of other nearby masses -- primarily the Earth in the case of selenocentric orbits? ( sdsds - talk) 08:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
While orbital decay from gravitational radiation is in theory possible, I know of no data to suggest it happens with man made satellites. Probably because for things the size of satellites (say, the ISS) gravitational radiation would work on the scale of billions of years. Can we please remove this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.95.66 ( talk) 03:06, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Whenever two masses orbit each other, the combined effect of the spacetime curvature of the moving objects produces gravitational waves which carry away orbital energy. citation needed For small masses this effect is negligible, but for very massive objects like black holes and neutron stars the energy carried away can be rapid enough to cause their orbits to spiral in on each other, eventually merging the two masses.
I think this is what comes of a little too much physics, and not enough engineering. JustinTime55 ( talk) 21:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
This article seems to neglect the effects of mass concentration (astronomy), which is a well-known cause of decaying lunar orbits. This is not a tidal effect, which implies significant fluidity of the body. Mascons are essentially rigid, uneven distributions of matter. JustinTime55 ( talk) 19:13, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Why does the atmosphere have to be oxygen-bearing? Well, because it says "burns up", and technically, burning cannot occur without oxygen. Of course, if the atmosphere is sufficiently dense (like Earth's), a great deal of heat is generated, and the object could melt and break up (pseudo-"burning") even without oxygen. We need to give this some thought to word it clearly and accurately, so it's general enough for any situation. (Or does it really need to be? In the real world, we're mostly concerned with Earth satellites; maybe Mars or Venus orbiters.) JustinTime55 ( talk) 16:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For many orbits, e.g. selenocentric orbits, atmospheric interaction cannot be the primary cause of orbital decay. Instead, isn't it brought about by the gravitational attraction of other nearby masses -- primarily the Earth in the case of selenocentric orbits? ( sdsds - talk) 08:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
While orbital decay from gravitational radiation is in theory possible, I know of no data to suggest it happens with man made satellites. Probably because for things the size of satellites (say, the ISS) gravitational radiation would work on the scale of billions of years. Can we please remove this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.95.66 ( talk) 03:06, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Whenever two masses orbit each other, the combined effect of the spacetime curvature of the moving objects produces gravitational waves which carry away orbital energy. citation needed For small masses this effect is negligible, but for very massive objects like black holes and neutron stars the energy carried away can be rapid enough to cause their orbits to spiral in on each other, eventually merging the two masses.
I think this is what comes of a little too much physics, and not enough engineering. JustinTime55 ( talk) 21:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
This article seems to neglect the effects of mass concentration (astronomy), which is a well-known cause of decaying lunar orbits. This is not a tidal effect, which implies significant fluidity of the body. Mascons are essentially rigid, uneven distributions of matter. JustinTime55 ( talk) 19:13, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Why does the atmosphere have to be oxygen-bearing? Well, because it says "burns up", and technically, burning cannot occur without oxygen. Of course, if the atmosphere is sufficiently dense (like Earth's), a great deal of heat is generated, and the object could melt and break up (pseudo-"burning") even without oxygen. We need to give this some thought to word it clearly and accurately, so it's general enough for any situation. (Or does it really need to be? In the real world, we're mostly concerned with Earth satellites; maybe Mars or Venus orbiters.) JustinTime55 ( talk) 16:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)