3 ms·
Here are a few basic thoughts given some physics and geometry arguments. First off, the ring-shadow would be seasonal. On the northern Summer Solstice, the ri
by mindviews 17y ago
Here are a few basic thoughts given some physics and geometry arguments.
First off, the ring-shadow would be seasonal. On the northern Summer Solstice, the ring-shadow would fall on the southern hemisphere to the fullest extent. Near the Equinoxes the rings would be lit mostly edge-on. (For the math types, think about the sun's angle at noon wrt the Equator over the year as a sine wave. Then change in position is the derivative of sin(x) which is just cos(x).) In short, the sun's angle changes the slowest near the Solistices and fastest nearest the Equinoxes. That means locations near the Equator should be minimally affected by a few yearly ring-shaded days while low-mid latitude locations would have a significant number of mostly ring-shaded days each year.
Given the ring width in the video, it looks like most ring-shaded locations would have at least part of the day in direct sunlight. Also, because the shaded days occur around the winter solstice, plants already in hibernation shouldn't have a problem with the lack of direct sunlight. So, temperature would probably be the main concern for life. The ring-shadow should make winter colder and start cold weather earlier in the year. I would suspect weather patterns to be affected, but I couldn't even begin to predict those sorts of changes. However, at a global scale we're talking about blocking some reasonable percentage of incoming sunlight (10% per day near the solstice maybe?) so global temperature would almost have to be lower with an impact that large.
One other note. The ring system wouldn't be stable with our moon - tidal forces would distort the ring shape until ring particles hit the atmosphere and fall out of orbit. So I'm afraid we'd have to choose one or the other. As pretty as a ring system would be, I think it would be bad for our satellites and make it that much harder to send people into space. So, my personal vote is that we keep the moon.
- castis 17y agoI dont know why but this has been my favorite post on HN.
- Retric 17y agoI suspect we could have a ring system in the same orbital plain as the moon, by adding a one or more smaller moons to both stabilize and replenish the system.
- rbanffy 17y ago"So I'm afraid we'd have to choose one or the other" We could terraform Mars and turn Deimos and Phobos into a nice ring. By the time we finish, I guess we will have fast and cheap interplanetary travel, so, you could live on Mars with rings and spend your weekend on Earth, with a nice moon. And while we are at it, we could also terraform Venus, increase its rate of rotation, give it a magnetic field (we would have the same problem on Mars - read http://thelazysci-fiauthor.blogspot.com/2007/04/ding.html http://thelazysci-fiauthor.blogspot.com/2007/04/ding.html). We could use repeated impacts to increase the rotation and build a ring out of the ejecta at the same time. Planetary sculpture will be a hot hobby in the coming million years...