Solar System Formation Lab PDF

Preview

Summary

Formation lab...

Description

Formation of the Solar System Lab Report of Findings Name: Javeria Ijaz

Date: ________________

Based on what astronomers have observed in our solar system, they have developed a theory of how the solar system formed. The theory is outlined in the pre-lab materials; refer to these if you have forgotten the basics. A good overview (including some thoughts on how a planet is defined!) is here: http://www.pbs.org/video/2365621408/ The observations below are some of the reasons the theory was developed and offer support for it. However, not all the bodies in the solar system "follow the rules". Your job in Part I is to sort solar system bodies based on whether or not they support the observations. If they seem to contradict the basic observations, it will be important to see if there might be reasons that can explain it, or whether it might be necessary to add features to the theory. Evaluate each one to see if it fits the current theory, or would need further explanation. Potential objects include (go to the website below): http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/ Other fact sheets are also available from its parent site NSSDCA Planetary Home Page , and Wikipedia is a good source for most of basic facts organized by planetary object. And of course, search of the internet for specific aspects of planetary objects is also often fruitful, especially for comparative analysis.

Part I: Making & Documenting Principal Observations Here are some of the observations that went into development the current theory of solar system formation. Fill in the table below with various solar system bodies (you won’t be able to do all of the moons for example, so choose ones that provide interesting and possibly contradictory data). Indicate whether they support or challenge the current theory, and in either case give an explanation in the final column. Earth is listed as an example. 

   

Observation 1 – Most bodies in the solar system orbit the Sun (or in the case of Moons their planet) in the same direction (counter clockwise as see from the north pole of the Sun, above the plane of the orbits) Observation 2 – Most of these bodies also move in the same plane (more or less), sort of like marbles rolling on a plate. For Moons you might expect them to move in their planet’s equatorial plane. Observation 3 – Most solar system bodies also rotate on their own axes in the same direction (counter clockwise as seen from above the north pole of the Sun Observation 4 - Small rocky planets and objects are closer to the Sun Observation 5 – Larger gas giants and the small icy bodies lie outside the “frost line”

1

Solar system body

Supported

Earth

All

Mercury

ALL

Venus

1,2,4,5

Mars

ALL

Jupiter

ALL

Saturn

ALL

Uranus

1,2,4,5

Neptune

ALL

Pluto

Toutatis (asteroid)

Not Applicable

Explanation of observations that don’t fit this object

3

Venus does not fit observation 3 because it rotates in a retrograde motion which means it is moving backward or inverse to the planets.

Other observations or interesting facts  Include questions that the object raises for your group. Earth’s density is higher than either Mercury's or Venus’ yet it apparently formed farther out? Why? Mercury is the closest to the sun, yet it is not the hottest planet, why? Why is Venus rotating in retrograde motion from East to West?

Why does Mars not have an atmosphere? Has the shortest day of all the eight planets—9 hours and 55 minutes. Saturn has the fastest winds than any other planet in our solar system. They have been measured roughly around 1800 km per hour. Commonly referred to as an “ice giant”, Uranus has an icy mantle that surrounds its iron and rock core. Neptune also has a storm on the planet similar to the Great Red Spot Jupiter. Neptune’s storm is commonly known as the Great Dark Spot and is about the size of Earth. Is it possible the Pluto is actually just a former moon of Neptune?

3

Like Venus, Uranus also does not fit under observation 3 as it also moves in retrograde motion.

1,3

2,4,5

4,5

1,2,3

Pluto’s orbit does not lie on the same plane as the other 8 planets, it is inclined by an angle 17 degrees. Its orbital path is mostly oval and the most eccentric planet in the solar system The composition of Pluto is 70% rock and 30% ice, making it hard to pin down as a rocky or icy planet. Most astronomers refer to it as an overgrown comet. It is a small body and one would expect it to be closer to the sun, but it is far out—which explains the ice. Has an eccentric, four-year orbit Toutatis is an asteroid with a which extends from barely inside chaotic orbit caused by a 3:1 Earth's orbit to the main asteroid resonance with Jupiter and a

2

Write the numbers of all supported observations in the appropriate box. Explain if there are observations not supported - for example, you might say the planet has an orbit highly inclined to the plane of orbit of most of the planets. Not all observations will be applicable to each object and in some cases, the data is missing. If so, write the number in the NA box. Finally, if you see something else interesting or curious about the object, write it in the final box. Earth is given as an example.

Part II: Analysis & Interpretation of Findings Answer the following questions: 1. Consider how the solar system objects you examined fit with the current nebular theory a. List the objects that supported all relevant observations i. Earth, Mercury, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, Io, Titania. b. Discuss the Observations that seemed most strongly supported i. Observation 1, 4, and 5 seemed the most strongly supported as a lot of the objects are known to either orbit the sun (planets/comets/asteroids) or orbit their respective planets (moons/satellites). Additionally, observations 4 and 5 deal with the composition of the planets given a close proximity or a farther distance from the sun. I found that the planets closer to the sun were mostly rocky planets and the ones farther (or past the front line) were almost always composed of gas or ice. 2. Which of the objects raised significant questions? Come with an alternative explanation for each, what might have been different for this object without contradicting the nebular theory in general? a. Venus really stumbled me because all of the other 3 terrestrial planets all support the nebular theory but Venus. Rather than prograde motion, Venus moves in a retrograde motion—which begs the question why is Venus rotating in retrograde motion from East to West? i. According to current theory, astronomers and scientists alike believe that at some point Venus spun in the same direction as the other terrestrial planets, it just flipped its axis 180 degrees. Scientists have argued that it was actually the Sun’s gravitational pull on the atmosphere of the very dense planet that caused strong atmospheric tides. These tides in conjunction with friction between the mantle and core may have caused the flip.

3

Part III: Application 1. In light of what you saw in the first two parts, discuss an object you found that needs further explanation to account for its motion or characteristics in addition to the basic nebular theory. For example, Earth’s large moon is probably the result of a collision between Earth and another small planet early in solar system history. That would help explain why Earth’s density is a little higher than the other terrestrial planets, while the moon’s density is a little lower. a. Pallas follows all the observation except observation 2. It is like any other typical asteroid except it is highly eccentric and this eccentricity seems to vary time to time. I believe I need more information to understand what causes this shift and randomness to Pallas’ orbit and plane.

2. There has been talk recently of a Planet X in the Kuiper Belt that has so far not been observed but might be affecting the motion of other small planets beyond the orbit of Pluto. What if the Object X were observed and found to be moving in a highly eccentric orbit that is also in the opposite direction from the motion of the known solar system planets? Would this be a serious problem for the nebular theory or not. Explain in a paragraph or two. a. This would be a major problem for the nebular theory specifically for observations 2 and 3. Nebular theory ascertains that bodies orbit the sun on relatively the same plane. Basically, think about marbles rolling around a plate. However, if Object X is highly eccentric, this poses as a contradiction to that part of the nebular theory. Also, Object X moves in the opposite directin from the motion of the known solar system planet—essentially moving in a retrograde fashion. This, too, violates the nebular theory as most bodies will rotate on their axes in the same direction (counterclockwise). Since Object X is moving the opposite direction, this poses another problem for support of the nebular theory.

3. How would you expect the solar system and its bodies to be different if the frost line had been beyond the orbit of Jupiter? a. The frost line actually exists between Mars and Jupiter and is the distance where it was cold enough for hydrogen compounds to condense into ice. Now if the frost line was farther out, like somewhere beyond the orbit of Jupiter, Jupiter would probably be considered a terrestrial planet. Temperature differences are actually what led to the formation of the different types of planets, as this determines how the different elements of each planets condense. Jupiter would be a lot smaller since it takes a higher temperature to condense rock and metal.

4

4. How would you expect the solar system and its bodies to be different if the gas and dust had persisted for much longer than we think it did in the solar system? a. If gas and dust was able to persist longer in the solar system than it does now, our solar system would probably take WAY longer to form. The first step in solar system formation is the collapse of gas and dust with the gravitational influence of the many other gas and dust particles pulling cool gas and dust closer together.

5...