Talk:Planetary ring

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Solar System (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Solar System, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Solar System on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
For more information, see the Solar System importance assessment guideline.
WikiProject Astronomy (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Planetary ring is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Roche Limit[edit]

It is not true that material on the surface of moons orbiting within their fluid Roche limit will float off into the rings. This doesn't happen until the moon passes within its rigid Roche limit (in fact, it's effectively the definition of the rigid Roche limit). The Roche limit article doesn't mention any such moons... are there any? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.142.4.173 (talk) 09:15, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Is this purely a gas giant phenomenon? Or can rocky planets accrete a disk? — Jack · talk · 02:48, Monday, 9 April 2007

Yes they can. It is assumed the Earth had a ring system after the impact with Theia.

Age?[edit]

Seems that the Saturnian system is now thought to be ancient, not ephemeral as stated in this article. kwami 12:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Formation[edit]

This article does not mention the underlying physics behind ring formation. Why is a disk formed, and what is it aligned to?

This is one theory:

The rings are formed within the equatorial plane of the planet because the gravitational attraction is greater there, do to a bulge in the planet at its equator caused by the planet's rotation. Additionally, debris outside the ring will be robbed of its initial momentum and fall within this plane, due to collision with the material already within the plane.[1]

Source: http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/faq/saturn.cfm

GodGnipael February 19, 2008

This is a second theory:

Ring simulation experiment using fine-particle plasmas Yokota, T. Plasma Science, IEEE Transactions on Volume 29, Issue 2, Apr 2001 Page(s):279 - 282 Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/27.923708

We can create a ring structure around a magnetized miniature sphere which is immersed in a fine-particle plasma and rotated around its magnetic dipole axis. Aluminum fine particles generated by a boat method acquire charges by UV light irradiation and are converted to a fine-particle plasma. When the magnetized sphere was rotated in the fine-particle plasma, a ring appeared around the equatorial plane under certain conditions. Unipolar induction can reveal some of ring creation mechanisms of the ring; that is, the rotation frequency matches a theoretical simulating condition, and the location of the ring almost fits with the peak position of potential, which is two to three times the sphere radius. This experiment reveals one of mechanisms why the outer planets such as the Saturn, have rings. It indicates the fact that the unipolar induction plays an important role for the creation of the outer planets in the early stage of the solar system formation

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel5/27/19971/00923708.pdf?arnumber=923708

They're proposing that the ice is Saturn's rings was a plasma?? kwami (talk) 19:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


I'll reiterate that the article needs more discussion of formation and of stability. It isn't at all obvious why they'd make such nice disks. After reading about the instability of Mars's inner moon, I wonder if some of the stability is due to tidal forces -- that something in geosynchronous orbit has no tidal forces, and as an extension, anything orbiting off of the equatorial plane (even at geosynchronous altitude) will experience a little tidal force... but that doesn't really explain a thin flat disk. —Ben FrantzDale (talk) 13:24, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Expansion[edit]

I think this article needs to be expanded. I expected a lengthy diatribe on the orbital mechanics of rings and how they remain stable. All I got was a page or two. Additionally, what about rings around moons? I found an article saying Rhea might have one: [1] Mathwhiz90601 (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Rings of the Earth[edit]

Theres been much debate as of late of the earth's own rings, both natural and ideas for a man made outfit-

  • A ring around the earth during pleistocene [2]
  • Space Ring Could Shade Earth and Stop Global Warming[3]
  • Ring around the Earth? [4]
  • Would a saturn-like ring around the earth hold stable? [5]
The answer is "no" because Abdul Ahad said so [6] and they had the audacity to delete his page FIVE times. If you can prove that he isn't overturning a 400 year belief in western science, then I agree he should be excluded from WP for non-notable bio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingkong77 (talkcontribs) 12:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I thought we should add this if it made sense. Kingkong77 (talk) 14:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Compare with asteroid belt?[edit]

In this article is it worth comparing and contrasting planetary rings with the asteroid belt, Kuiper belt and other Circumstellar disks - or even with galactic disks? Are these all basically equivalent structures on different scales? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.43.37 (talk) 16:33, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Section removed[edit]

Just providing a notification to this page's editors that I just removed the article's section about Earth's rings. The topic seems notable enough to support such a section, but what was here was copied virtually verbatim from the following article: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1219723046054&pagename=Zone-English-HealthScience%2FHSELayout

The article itself seems to suggest some good sources that someone could use to find information that would allow for restoration of the section in a form that would no longer constitute be a copyright violation. Mwelch (talk) 20:33, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Time to remove "planetary"?[edit]

I suggest that the discovery of a ring system around asteroid 10199 Chariklo suggest that the word "planetary" should be removed from the title of this article. The text of the article should be revised to say that rings are most commonly found around planets, but that 10199 Chariklo shows that rings may also form around smaller objects.

Comments? 71.197.166.72 (talk) 16:32, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Given that Chariklo could be a dwarf planet, I am not sure that is beneficial. -- Kheider (talk) 16:49, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Are minor planets like the asteroids or centaurs like 10199 Chariklo, not "planetary"?--Asikal1 (talk) 20:22, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Minor planets include everything natural that orbits the Sun, except comets and the planets. This means that "minor planet" also includes dwarf planets such as Pluto. --JorisvS (talk) 20:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
What would we replace it with? There are also rings/halos around stars and galaxies, so we need to constrain it somehow. The rings around Chariklo are not conceptually different than those around the planets. — kwami (talk) 04:25, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
BTW, has anyone tried doing occultations of Rhea? — kwami (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2014 (UTC)