Timeline for How does the gravity of a massive non-spherical object act on things around it?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 5, 2016 at 13:36 | comment | added | uhoh | This is really fascinating! The lake in Figure 1. of the ArXiv paper really caught my eye - clearly I'm not going to get anything done today now! | |
| Sep 13, 2013 at 13:17 | comment | added | Robert English | Amazing answer. Really appreciate the effort. This makes for a very interesting read. | |
| Sep 13, 2013 at 13:14 | vote | accept | Robert English | ||
| Sep 13, 2013 at 13:04 | comment | added | TildalWave | @AlanSE - The reason it will eventually crash is that it precesses. If you look at the last image and follow the orbit, you will notice that while it's at approximately same distance at the bottom edge that looks to be the most problematic, it is actually reducing distance to the upper edge with each orbit and will eventually hit it, even if the eccentricity doesn't increase at all. Of course, in real world scenario, even the eccentricity will increase, but you are absolutely correct, that doesn't necessarily translate into an orbit that would result in a crash, not on its own at least. ;) | |
| Sep 13, 2013 at 12:50 | comment | added | AlanSE | What exactly is the reason the orbit will eventually hit the cube? I was never very clear on that, although I've heard such statements before. Does it just precess, or does the eccentricity increase? If the former, then that shouldn't necessarily lead to a crash. | |
| Sep 13, 2013 at 11:49 | history | answered | TildalWave | CC BY-SA 3.0 |