Why are all the planets in the solar system on the same orbital plane?

conservation of angular momentum. deviations from the plane seen among most planets are due to the fact that the Sun is not a perfect point mass among other things. Orbital resonance also throws it off.

Comets and other objects captured by the Sun's gravitation don't necessarily orbit in the plane (eg. Oort Cloud)

Because they form from an asymmetric cloud of gas, which collapses in the shortest direction first; it contracts inwards but winds up spinning around the center, with planets forming from imperfections in that young disk of matter. They all wind up orbiting in the same plane, separated only by a few degreesat most from one another.

They're not even, not exact no. They're close on a cosmic scale which is more than accurate enough for the size and scale we're depicting.

A body enters orbit. Doesn't matter what plane. Another enters or is created. They will clash gravitationally over billions of years. They push, pull, and grind each other into a similar orbit. When it's planets off axis they jerk at each other as they pass correcting each other into a similar plane.

With two, the third joins quickly into the same plane. So on.

It's the physics of lowest order. But with enough time, proximity and mass they coordinate.

Miss me yet?

Attached: pluto.jpg (2090x1080, 132K)

youtube.com/watch?v=uG7wKcB63rY

youtube.com/watch?v=MTY1Kje0yLg

a semi-plane is created in space by the pure gravitational force of the sun combined by its rotation

fucking hivemind faggots

youtu.be/Aj6Kc1mvsdo
youtu.be/tmNXKqeUtJM
Never make this thread again

They aren't. There are no planets and the Earth is flat.

user, you are missing the point. The rotation of the solar system has more to do with when our planets were just dust in a nebula. The sun formed and molecules started bonding; gravity pushing and pulling off each other, this is the rotation that resulted.

Methane molecules may be felchted off Pluto and re condense on Charon

Oh, right. So what are those blinky things in the sky at night? Bar Mitvah night lights?

It would be a lot weirder if they were all completely random, how exactly would you explain that?

Stop worshiping CGI pictures, goy.

Attached: math.jpg (954x661, 70K)

So assuming it's flat, user, what say you about the gravitational pull of the "flat universe?" Are you in agreement that there is not outside force pulling the objects within the universe in any direction? That they are free to affect their own gravity in their own space?

Attached: index.jpg (275x183, 10K)

Everything is mathematically flat, we exist in a sense on a taught sheet, the mass of the earth and othe planets pull this sheet down and around us giving the appearance of a globe, but really it is always flat to the observer, but it is still a circle. Just like moon looks "flat" but its also a circle at the same time.

Attached: 1536747108061.gif (652x562, 626K)

That all sounds very reasonable and logical, but, couldn't we just attribute it to a magic, invisible, floating faggot in the sky?

Of course not.

>I'm retarded and can't into math
you don't say, burger

(((solar system)))

>big heavy cunt follows a certain orbit and pulls the smaller planets into a similar one over time

Good point I wonder what the orbital planes of the planets in other solar systems are like.

If you start with a big gravitationally bound cloud of matter, a disc is what you end up with even if all the particles have completely random momentum. Opposite momenta will cancel out via friction until its down to a 2-dimensional remainder, naturally forming a spinning disc. Most of the matter will form a star at the center, and what little remains forms the planets. At the edges, matter will clump together as an Oort cloud or leave a thin gas bubble. Small variations in the orbital and rotation angles are expected because the angular momentum is not necessarily dispersed perfectly throughout the cloud, and weird cases such as planets with opposite rotation are interesting exceptions that came about through extrasolar capture or collisions with foreign objects etc.

Everything in the system affecting one another (some more than others) just eventually creates an equilibrium

Kind of like if you smash your hand into a pool of water, the ripples will eventually become stillness

Because it was in god's plan to allow us easy travel between our planets as practice for reaching other stars.

Attached: kisspng-christianity-pol-television-communism-4chan-christ-chan-gun-5b4631a0193b16.69726326153132688 (900x800, 109K)

And remember, our sun is moving. So it actually looks like this

Attached: vortice.jpg (568x332, 31K)

>When your entire solar system looks like an ultimate dragonball z attack

Only good answer has zero responses
>the earth is flat like a disc
>ergo planets must be flat
>ergo the orbit must be flat
PhD Jow Forums U. Class of 2012

And this guy.
>he knows the earth is also flat due to the spinning mass.

>it spins only in one way
>planets spin the wrong way
>moons spin the wrong way
>debris spins the wrong way

Oh vey, quickly delete the conservation of momentum, goy!

Oh, for a serious answer it is because gravity is a meme and something more similar to what we call magnetism is at play.

Being this retarded I can only surmise that you are an Abbo who somehow got online and found someone else to type for you. They are not on the same plane, they are relatively in the same plane with a high degree of variance. The objects that are entirely out of plane negate your asinine assertion completely.

Fun fact, that eccentricity in the moon allows for eclipses to be visible throughout all the most populated zones of the earth!

What a coincidence.

Holy fuck.

Attached: 82066D9C-3CC1-4ADC-AFAA-85994CC69D45.jpg (550x543, 92K)

You can’t be fucking serious. Right?

Look at this absolute genius here, already completely understands planetary motion without ever having a question, fuck off you NPC wanker.

>Ozzy tantalized by the flatness of orbits
>Ozzy cannot into physics

Conservation of angular momentum.

Attached: 1516440647466.jpg (1600x999, 91K)

>venus

Attached: FC1A11DB-1EA3-4A67-B3CE-061E524EDDD6.jpg (250x250, 17K)

This

I'm sure if a flat solar system was very strange our simulations would have shown us that already

>why has saturn a ring?

That spins the wrong way*

Yah yah yah except none of that solar disc on same plane stuff works very well when you consider theres "supposed" to be a Black Hole in the center of every galaxy that makes everything go round n round.
HERES my issue... If a black hole is so powerful that light can not escape why is it rotating in a disc configuration ? Whats up with the gravitational pull 360 degrees? It should be pulling in debris from above not just around the sides.
Or magic gravity ONLY exists on a flat plane.

The flatness of our planetary orbits is dictated by the mass of our sun, our suns mass just happens to be so massive that it over rides the other masses acting on the orbits, this isn't the case with our moon and isn't the case in other solar systems with smaller stars. I tend to think of Jupiter and Saturn as gas giants, they're more like midgets.

this
how can you even know?
Did you study the behavior of mass in a gravity field?
no?
then just fuck off

Attached: 1a43a641a840bcf3f25c41150385f20c0199aedacd24992ae008088639bc3cff.gif (489x301, 1.53M)

>I reckon their must be some force that has caused these planets to all near enough be on the same plane, like your bowl, only not your bowl.

Like gravity?

yeah our simulations which work with input from US would totally just show us where OUR thinking is flawed, Billy - nice thinking

this is by the way why every AI gets Racist over time - cause the source where it gets its input is always a little racist

Space is a meme

It might help to first recognize the black holes, like over 90% of our “known universe” are fundamentally unobservable phenomena required to make the math work.

>Is the solar system, dare I say it, Flat?
Yes - because of dark matter

>Pluto

Attached: 532A5800-4239-4791-BDFC-C29DBEB110EA.png (416x435, 120K)

It's not a plane, its a vortex.

Hey that's a great example except planets aren't fucking marbles so nothing you said holds any relevance..

Memes are a meme.

Attached: 157A3FA7-65C2-46E2-A406-9D75E400B01C.gif (220x169, 1.08M)

Post evidence of dark matter

Attached: 2A44A6B2-1C9D-4C1A-A3A0-D47B47F93F2F.jpg (1129x1200, 128K)

grab a skirt or dress (or ask your female friend) and try spinning and ask your self why the dress lift up, spins along with you and stick to a single plane. or balls with strings attached and spin it and see how it spins on the same plane.
its the same principle, now replace the the force exerted by your hand or your self with the gravity of the sun, and imagine the fabric of your beautiful dress as the planets or asteroids.

What if the various planets are all Earth at different stages in the Past and Future?

also traps aren't gay

Attached: giphy (2).gif (480x202, 2.03M)

Stop with these gay ass analogies

Yeah Pluto is far enough out and has a low enough mass that there are other forces affecting its orbital plane. That and Disney.

They're all over the place, but still in flat planes like ours.

That depends entirely on your frame of reference. It looks weird as fuck if you use the earth as your reference point that doesn't move.

>They're all over the place, but still in flat planes like ours.
Proofs.

Attached: hitleryod.jpg (450x462, 58K)

He’s trying to reference a video shown earlier. A professor throws an uneven marbles in opposite directions and then claims “see! They always end up going the same direction” after some collisions occur.

Of course, he doesn’t repeat the experiment or control the variables (that would be damn near actual science for god’s sake) and just moves on through the ivy-league kindergarten demonstration.

Fun fact, many heavenly bodies rotate in ways that violate the conservation of angular momentum. Notably Venus, as well as saturns rings and only some of Jupiter’s moons.

Wierd!

we have leafs in this thread, i have to explain in a way that they can understand as well

underrated

But the men who fuck them are.

Or the races that evolved in isolation for millions of years could be different? Your logic is pathetic, kraut.

So imagine a huge cloud of dust floating in space. Over time it begins to fall inwards toward its center because of gravity, but not perfectly into a single point. Instead each particle revolves around the total center of mass, faster and faster and in one direction as it pulls inward, kind of like water around a drain.

Over time this forms a tight ball but because of the centrifugal force as it spins, a disc of material still remains stretched out in a flat plane. The central ball forms into a star and the disc is left to circle it, eventually clumping together into large objects as their gravity draws in the rest of the debris.
The resulting planets still generally move in the same plane as the original disc.

>everything except the things that don’t behave how I’ve been told.

Attached: 3B708020-1D4E-4B5B-BE8B-A3BF88E38762.png (246x205, 7K)

But, I'm not confident you have any idea what you're talking about either and trying to use a mundane terrestrial example to explain an interplanetary phenomenon is just lame as fuck.

So take a fucking astronomy class or at the very least ask /sci/ instead of just circlejerking here and saying “but why it do dat? My brain thinky it no do dat.”

It started off as a spinning ball of dust that condensed. And as such when it finally started forming planets it was disc shaped because of the spin and thus putting the planets on the same plane more or less.

Attached: _slow.png (408x450, 34K)

Attached: 1533236469368.jpg (500x676, 67K)

That was 6000 years ago though, there has been plenty of time for other forces to act on the planets orbits.

speed kills

Of course spaceniggers will probably not come here, but:
Given your explanation shouldn’t we expect a conical arrangement of planets since the sun itself has a high velocity?
To argue otherwise would require all the planets to have equal parallel velocity to the sun, thus making a planar arrangement nigh impossible.

Space is a vacuum

There is no drag to create a 'conical arrangement'.

Good thing I already covered that, retard: the possibility all the planets had the same parallel velocity to the sun... which you obviously believe... which doesn’t explain how or why the planets settled into a planar arrangement.

Fuck spacefags are retarded.

stop bumping your garbage

Also, you seem to be grossly confused with what it means for the sun to have a velocity.

The sun was formed in a gas cloud created by a supernova. That entire gas cloud had its own particular velocity and it maintained that, roughly, while the solar system was forming.

The sun didn't coalesce and then magically planets appeared out of nowhere - the planets come from the same gas cloud the sun did. Everything has the same general velocity and direction to start with.

Hey nigger, don't go calling people retards while you're the brainlet who can't wrap his head around simple physics.

go fuck yourself tripfag

The whole system was moving at the same velocity by the time it condensed and there would be nothing in space to speed up the sun or slow down the planets. So they stay at the same position relative to each other, apart from their orbital motion of course. It's the same reason astronauts float around in zero G relative to their spacecraft once the engines are cut off.

Also, there's no reason to assume the solar system is moving perpendicular to its rotational plane at all. In fact its velocity is in a completely different direction depending on what you're comparing its position to, be it the center of the galaxy or another galaxy entirely.

have you folks considered using google? It is really handy I tell ya'

Attached: orbital autism.png (917x656, 174K)

Where's the fun in that?

>a 102 mile span on Earth would have a 6990 foot drop

This isn't complicated math, folks. The drop would be just 62 feet. Say one side of the bridge was Point A and the other end of the bridge 102 miles away was Point B, and you drew a line through the earth from Point A to Point B. The halfway point would be 51.5 miles. From that midsection, draw a line up to the surface of the earth. That height would be about 62 feet. Pythagorean Theorem. Now, we are being sloppy with the 102 mile distance because the 102 miles the bridge is said to be is actually measured around the curvature of the earth and not from Point A to Point B. In reality, Point A to Point B is actually a bit shorter than 102 miles, which means the actual height (the so-called spherical drop in the pic) is even less than 62 feet.

Attached: 1513727683078.jpg (696x1024, 159K)

What did they say?