Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Question about gravity at the rotational poles...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    225

    Question about gravity at the rotational poles...

    Have there ever been any experiments measuring gravity in space above the rotational poles of any celestial body (Earth, Moon, Sun, etc.)?

    I don't mean an orbit that passes near the rotational pole, but rather an orbital path that passes through the exact rotational axis?
    And not on the surface of the celestial body, but in space - perhaps at the distance where satellites orbit the Earth or greater, however many miles above the surface that is.

    The reason I ask is because from what I understand, satellites never orbit in a path that would cross through the axis. The reasons that I have heard are:
    1. the data gathered from such an orbital path is relatively less helpful for GPS applications, and
    2. there may be "relativistic effects" which make that path more difficult to transverse (whatever that means - it's over my head), and
    3. in order to achieve such an orbital path, i would require more energy/fuel, making the satellite launch process much more expensive.

    I assume that Newton's gravitational laws still holds in space along the rotational axis (b/c gravity is a function of mass and distance, not orientation with respect to rotation), but I was wondering if there have ever been any experiments to confirm it.

    Also, what is meant by relativistic effects?

    Thank you.

  2. #2
    Polar orbits do take more energy to reach from any non-polar launch sites than lower inclinations (since launching with an eastward component starts with that fraction of the Earth's rotational velocity as a head start). Polar orbits are used for:

    - remote-sensing and reconnaissance applications where one wants to see every point on the surface at some time. These orbits should then pass close enough to the pole to get a view at whatever desired slant range there is.

    - missions which require either having constant sunlight or seeing the surface at the same sun angle on each pass. The Earth's oblateness makes an orbit precess at a rate depending on altitude and inclination - a slightly retrograde orbit (inclination 98 degrees, typically) is this kind of sun-synchronous orbit. These are used for both Earth-sensing and astronomical missions. IRAS and WISE, for example, could survey the entire sky just by pointing outward, and without having to move their solar arrays.

    - applications where every point on the surface must have a view of a satellite (or a member of a constellation of them). This applies to the Iridium phone satellites and the GPS systems and its analogs Galileo and GLONASS. Orbital inclinations for them are 86.4 degrees for Iridium, 55 for Iridium since they are fairly high, 64.8 for GLONASS, 56 for Galileo.

    So there are orbits that are close to polar (within 3-4 degrees both ways), but I know of none that are exact (and perturbations by the Sun and Moon wouldn't leave such an orbit exactly polar for a long time anyway).

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    16,659
    Quote Originally Posted by TOEfetish View Post
    I assume that Newton's gravitational laws still holds in space along the rotational axis (b/c gravity is a function of mass and distance, not orientation with respect to rotation), but I was wondering if there have ever been any experiments to confirm it.
    You do have to remember though that the Earth isn't exactly spherical. It's a bit thicker at the equator than the poles, and there are areas of higher density. So the gravity isn't quite what it would be for a uniform sphere, and these variations are sources of perturbations for orbiting satellites. Also the Moon and Sun are significant sources of perturbations as well.

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    11,264
    Relativistic effects are the effects which are described by
    either special relativity or general relativity. Except in
    situations involving extremely high speeds, extremely
    strong gravity, or extremely high precision, relativistic
    effects are small enough to ignore. GPS measurements
    require sufficiently high precision in order to work that
    relativistic effects must be taken into account.

    Relativistic effects would not make going exactly over the
    rotational poles more difficult. But as noted by ngc3314
    and Van Rijn, any satellite will very quickly be moved off of
    an "exact" polar orbit by perturbations from the Moon, Sun,
    and variations in Earth's gravity, plus uneven atmospheric
    drag. These are all much larger than the relativistic effects.

    There is, of course, no reason to think that gravity would
    be any different over the poles from what it is elsewhere.
    Rotation of a planet does not figure in the Newtonian
    measurement of gravity at all. It is irrelevant unless you
    are on the planet and need to take the centrifugal effect
    into account when you measure your weight. Centrifugal
    effect and greater distance from Earth's center combined
    make a person who weighs 200 pounds at either pole
    weigh 199 pounds at the equator.

    -- Jeff, in Minneapolis
    http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

    "I find astronomy very interesting, but I wouldn't if I thought we
    were just going to sit here and look." -- "Van Rijn"

    "The other planets? Well, they just happen to be there, but the
    point of rockets is to explore them!" -- Kai Yeves

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    451
    Gravity Probe B was not only placed in an orbit traversing the poles of Earth, its intended mission was to test general relativity by measuring the twisting of space-time due to the rotation of the Earth.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Probe_B

Similar Threads

  1. Another Gravity Question. Surface Gravity This Time.
    By BigDon in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 2010-May-07, 01:21 AM
  2. Center of Gravity vs Rotational Axis Question
    By Tog in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 2009-Jun-12, 09:45 PM
  3. flat rotational curve defies mainstream theory of gravity
    By Nereid in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 2009-Feb-05, 07:43 AM
  4. Rotational Brownian motion
    By Blob in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2006-Oct-30, 02:27 PM
  5. Question about celestial poles
    By katmandu2 in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 2006-Sep-11, 01:53 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •