For Sci-Fi Writers: A Model of the Inner Solar System

Also, the asteroid belt is largely arranged along a flat plane with the inner solar system, so if you create an orbit that is along a different plane, you can generally avoid most of the asteroids. There is a way to orbit between the sun and Jupiter on a highly eccentric escape velocity such that as you orbit back around the sun and are heading back out to deep space, you reconnect with Jupiter, using it to slingshot you back into the inner solar system. Until we discover some type of novel propulsion system that can mitigate G-forces on people, we'll most likely have to set up permanent orbital trade routes like these so that goods can be exchanged via sudden acceleration between the Jupiter trade route and the inner solar system.

Honestly, I hope we have a huge leap forward in technology before we enter a proper space age, because as it stands, life in space would be very lonely, very boring and very dangerous. I guess if we can perfect virtual technology, it won't matter all that much.

Actually, that's it, that's what I think this reality is. We are all voyagers on a sleeper ship and we've engaged in this rebirth process to pass the time until we reach our destination. ;p

a reply to: Nechash

Looks like a toilet flushing, which would explain a lot LOL

Sorry. Very cool, though. I wonder if the planets' elliptical orbits would change in relation to each other also. In this animation, they all stay in the same position.

a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

Yeah, I'm sure it is a very dynamic system. I favored this because it shows how the larger asteroids move in relationship to one another. Most sci-fi writers either treat an asteroid belt like a densely populated chaotic mess (Star Wars), or end up treating it as if all of the asteroids remain in a fixed position to one another. Neither of these models are accurate. The asteroid belt, as far as I have read is still largely empty space if you are out in it, and while the major asteroids do orbit in a predictable manner, their relationship to one another shifts dramatically over time so that two mining colonies established on neighboring asteroids would lose each other pretty quickly.

There are $600B dollars worth of mineral resources per human alive today in our nearest asteroid belt. Why companies aren't absolutely dying for the space age to dawn is beyond me.

a reply to: Nechash

I always wondered why they always chose to fly through an asteroid field rather than simply go above it or below it, since it would stand to reason that this animation illustrates a typical asteroid field.

a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

Well, Jupiter definitely makes ours unique. Maybe the Oort cloud would be more typical? I've not studied asteroid fields in other solar systems well enough to know this for sure. Considering we still have a hard time finding other earth sized planets, that might be beyond our abilities right now outside of computer modeling.

It does seem that most solar systems are arranged along a plane. I think the oscillations from different bodies orbiting around a fixed object tend to cancel each other out, thus leading towards harmonization over time. There could be other reasons for this, but even very large objects like galaxies tend to seem to be orbiting along a relatively narrow plane.

I really like the helical model of the solar system.
It really should be the one that is taught in schools in this day and age.

I believe the OOrt cloud is what's left of our Sun's formation and the planets that formed during the time.

All the remaining dust, debree and giant space rocks, they might circle the Sun in a spherical way, not just in an elliptical orbit... Since they have been thrown out, or blown out into all directions, and do not have any source of gravity around that could cause them to form a planet like orbit. They just circle the the massive gravitational pull of the Sun... which isn't that great anymore, half way past Proxima Centauri.

a reply to: GodEmperor

That is technically more accurate if you use theoretically stationary space as a frame of reference, but for teaching things like transferring between planetary bodies, it would make things kind of confusing, I'd think. It is kind of like our atomic model. I doubt anyone thinks atoms really look like we imagine them in those simplistic terms, but it is useful for teaching the basics of chemistry and then later on getting into more complicated orbital notation and things like that. Heck, I'd hate to see some of the systems they use in quantum physics. I'm sure to someone at the forefront of their field, our atomic model is probably humorous.