Saturn's rings, stupid question?

[Fordos Moon]

Wasn't sure which forum to post this in. Why are the rings around Saturn on one plane as opposed to more than one?

[estwing]

..everyone know's that one...it's really simple..

[long_arms]

The formation of the rings is debated a little but here's something that explains the rings.

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=420

The moons are on roughly the same plane for the same reason the planets are roughly on the same plane in the solar system.

Dan

[estwing]

see i told you....hey where's that indepth post i just wrote explaining it all? o well

[Fordos Moon]

Hey even I know now that's a great explanation thanks Dan. No-one I knew knew it ;-)

[Knight of Clear Skies]

The formation of the rings is debated a little but here's something that explains the rings.

http://curious.astro....php?number=420

That's a good explanation, and easier to understand than others I've heard; the same principle applies to many other systems such as galaxies, protoplanetary discs and planet/moon systems. In a molecular cloud collapsing under the force of gravity, gas and dust particles have random orbits around the centre, but the whole system has an net angular momentum around a particular axis. Collisions and gravitational interactions average out this random motion over time, and the cloud evolves into a disc. This is why the planets all orbit close to the plane of the ecliptic.

[starman1969]

The formation of the rings is debated a little but here's something that explains the rings.

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=420

The moons are on roughly the same plane for the same reason the planets are roughly on the same plane in the solar system.

Dan

Interesting article. Thanks for posting.

[spurius]

Its because gravity has a greater effect at the planets plane of angular velocity, in other words its equator. This is why most things orbit other things around their equators. Obviously there are exceptions but the rings are not.

[bomberbaz]

Long arms combined with spurious's answer are the right ones.

[Stargazer_00]

The same could be said or rather asked why all the planets in the solar system formed up on the same plane It's the same physics.

Extrapolate that out some more and you have yourself a galaxy.

Makes you think if there isn an even higher structure conforming to the same physics but it's so big, or we're so small, we can't perceive it.

[Stargazer_00]

What makes me think is how a planet ends up in a counter rotational spin to it's orbit...

[long_arms]

I think Galaxy formation and evolution is pretty interesting. Obviously stars in elliptical galaxies dont orbit the same plane (result of a galaxy merger).

Also if you accept the bottom up theory of galaxy formation and the existence of population III stars then I really would love to know what came first; Stars/black holes or galaxies. I understand the idea of proto-galaxy formation but could there have been single population III stars in their own proto-galaxy disk of gas floating around? Hmm, shame there aren't young galaxies forming now eh.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but I think venus' retrograde orbit is usually attributed to a collision event, same goes for Uranus.

Dan

[Stargazer_00]

Retrograde spins must be all chance. Earth was hit by a significant body, the moon. I guess it's just down to which side got hit. All planets have rotation and most spin in the same direction as they orbit. I assume that the material that makes up the solar system had some rotation at the point of accretion and that is why the majority of matter rotates in the same spin. I am not sure if our spin matches or is aligned to the galactic spin or if we counter it. It's utterly amazing if you think about it. How The smallest of influences of gravity over eons power the formation of everything and set in stone the physical properties of relative motion for all objects. It's a snowball principle at the nth extrapolation. Beautiful.

[spurius]

Its because gravity has a greater effect at the planets plane of angular velocity, in other words its equator. This is why most things orbit other things around their equators. Obviously there are exceptions but the rings are not.

OMG I was actually given a like for this post. Now given how stupid I am could someone clarify to me that the like was given based on my humerous intent rather than that the like was given that I just happened to be correct? Gravitational strength is based on mass regardless of the objects rotation as far as I know. This is why I have never heard of polar orbits "slowly drifting" into equatorial orbits if you see what I mean. Im kinda drunk so its hard to explain what im getting at.

[Kropster]

Debris which does not lie in the plane of rotation is presumably drawn to the planet..... hoovered up. Debris rotating fast enough, that in the plane, stays in orbit...maybe?