<p>The speed and direction of objects in a binary system continuously changes over time and are governed by the net gravitational force exerted on them. The closer the objects are the greater the gravitational forces.</p>

<p>In a purely binary system where the gravitational effects of other bodies are insignificant the bodies would normally fall into a regular pattern orbiting each other around the centre of mass. If the orbits are circular the orbital speed will be constant and the direction will change at a regular rate.</p>

<p>As the orbit becomes more elliptical and eccentric the speed of the objects will become increasingly variable with the fastest speed occurring at the closest approach and the slowest at the furthest distance. At the most extreme the planets will approach so closely that they collide.</p>

<p>If one of the objects is significantly larger than the other the smaller one will be accelerated to a greater extent.</p>

<p>Although speed and direction vary they do so in a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erKViZx8Qsc" rel="nofollow noreferrer">smooth and continuous manner</a>. There are no sudden jerks or discontinuities. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T17:24:32.203Z
What about a very very tiny periodicity, but still noticeable? Even a smooth and continuous manner down to smallest possible scale must have some wave-like pattern to it. And, based on clockwork harmony, that pattern should repeat itself. I'm thinking something like hundreds of periods per orbit. Not sudden jerks, but still if looking with enough detail "tugs".
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T17:47:09.740Z
Whether or not it is negotiable is irrelevant, what is relevant is what is objectively true. Those calculations deal with generalizations of binary orbits. If there is any periodicity to adjustments in orbits, is not what it addresses. Even a smooth and continuous manner down to smallest possible scale (like that article does but with different focus) must have some wave-like pattern to it.
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T18:05:17.220Z
Yes objective truth. The definition of science, and natural science. Good that you have a "we" who do that, but, science is neutral, and a protocol. Here this question is in theoretical context. Even a smooth and continuous adjustment when reduced down to the smallest possible scale must have some wave-like pattern to it.
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T19:00:42.153Z
yes, all of that, for the purpose of finding the accurate model. neutrality. "peer review" has nothing to do with scientific method, it is just a resource allocation mechanism for record-keeping. but, not surprised that you conflate practicalities and trends for how to solve them with the actual protocol science.
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T20:42:45.900Z
I think we are drifting off topic here
Slarty
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T20:46:55.763Z
I am looking for that there should be a "tug of war" pattern, even if it is very small, and that is sometimes a bias. It still seems to be that even a smooth and continuous manner, when taken down to the smallest possible scale, must have some wave-like pattern to it, action and reaction.
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T21:15:13.993Z
At the smallest possible scale there might or might not be some wave-like pattern to gravitation but we don't know what happens to gravity with certainty at the smallest possible scale. It’s unlikely that we will until quantum mechanics and relativity are fully reconciled
Slarty
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T21:25:13.390Z
not just gravitation, I mean, action and reaction, the momentum of object reacting to other object moving.
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T17:14:06.480Z
2019-12-14T17:14:06.480Z
Slarty
<p>The speed of objects orbiting in a binary system, like Pluto and Charon, is the speed and direction of the objects smooth, or, do the objects make adjustments that are in some ways like a "tug of war" and measurable, showing up as changes in speed or periodic adjustments of direction?</p>

<p>Reasoning: object has momentum, as other objects moves, that momentum remains, while gravitational pull direction changes. Two possible models, either smooth orbit, or, periodic adjustments a bit like a "tug of war".</p>

<p>A poor illustration of the concept of momentum + adjustments showing a periodicity.</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/xlhXp.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/xlhXp.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>Even a smooth and continuous manner down to smallest possible scale must have some wave-like pattern to it. And, based on clockwork harmony, that pattern should repeat itself.</p>

<p>Other drawing, greatly exaggerated,</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/SoTHZ.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/SoTHZ.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T15:42:05.770Z
As far as priorities go, I think this question comes pretty far down the list. So would guess it is pretty hard to find answer to, as models tend to generalize.
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T16:23:16.407Z
No I mean, literally, as each object has momentum and the other object moves, do they adjust to that in a smooth way, or are there periodic "tugs" that can be measured.
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T16:34:09.297Z
they're not interrelated. they were different approaches. rather than chat room, if the movement of binary systems is smooth and not having, as I reasoned, from momentum and then adjusting to the other object moving, some periodicity, then the answer would be pretty much No and that is that.
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-14T16:35:46.910Z
social cognition in humans reads people based on seeing that everything is always interrelated. look at politics and how well that works out. objectivity is better. if the answer to this question is a resounding No, then that is that. feel free to provide that No answer, I'm still open to that momentum + movement of other object causes some periodic adjustment pattern.
Kornelia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-15T09:32:21.220Z
The answer is no.
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-17T07:29:47.107Z
I think this is an interesting question, but it might not be suited to Astronomy SE only because it is about a more fundamental concept in physics, and not specifically about astronomy. I can get some of the idea here and if we were implementing the orbit in a simple computer simulation we might see something a little bit this if we chose a poorly written physics engine. But as far as it's known, this kind of wiggle doesn't happen because each object is continuously responding.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-12-17T07:32:15.523Z
Wiggles or oscillations happen in physical systems especially when you have a sudden transit or when there are restoring forces (simple case would be a pendulum) but in the example given there are none to produce wiggles. If you applied quantum mechanics instead of classical mechanics, you could define a [matter wave](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave) or de Broglie wave for each object whether or not it was interacting with another, but that's a whole 'nuther ball of wax.
uhoh
<orbital-mechanics>
In binary systems, does the speed of the objects vary as they adjust to the movement of the other object?
Kornelia
# In binary systems, does the speed of the objects vary as they adjust to the movement of the other object?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-12-14)

The speed of objects orbiting in a binary system, like Pluto and Charon, is the speed and direction of the objects smooth, or, do the objects make adjustments that are in some ways like a "tug of war" and measurable, showing up as changes in speed or periodic adjustments of direction?

Reasoning: object has momentum, as other objects moves, that momentum remains, while gravitational pull direction changes. Two possible models, either smooth orbit, or, periodic adjustments a bit like a "tug of war".

A poor illustration of the concept of momentum + adjustments showing a periodicity.

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/xlhXp.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/xlhXp.png)

Even a smooth and continuous manner down to smallest possible scale must have some wave-like pattern to it. And, based on clockwork harmony, that pattern should repeat itself.

Other drawing, greatly exaggerated,

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/SoTHZ.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/SoTHZ.png)

**Tags:** orbital-mechanics
> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: As far as priorities go, I think this question comes pretty far down the list. So would guess it is pretty hard to find answer to, as models tend to generalize.  
> **username_0**: No I mean, literally, as each object has momentum and the other object moves, do they adjust to that in a smooth way, or are there periodic "tugs" that can be measured.  
> **username_0**: they're not interrelated. they were different approaches. rather than chat room, if the movement of binary systems is smooth and not having, as I reasoned, from momentum and then adjusting to the other object moving, some periodicity, then the answer would be pretty much No and that is that.  
> **username_0**: social cognition in humans reads people based on seeing that everything is always interrelated. look at politics and how well that works out. objectivity is better. if the answer to this question is a resounding No, then that is that. feel free to provide that No answer, I'm still open to that momentum + movement of other object causes some periodic adjustment pattern.  
> **username_1**: The answer is no.  
> **username_2**: I think this is an interesting question, but it might not be suited to Astronomy SE only because it is about a more fundamental concept in physics, and not specifically about astronomy. I can get some of the idea here and if we were implementing the orbit in a simple computer simulation we might see something a little bit this if we chose a poorly written physics engine. But as far as it's known, this kind of wiggle doesn't happen because each object is continuously responding.  
> **username_2**: Wiggles or oscillations happen in physical systems especially when you have a sudden transit or when there are restoring forces (simple case would be a pendulum) but in the example given there are none to produce wiggles. If you applied quantum mechanics instead of classical mechanics, you could define a [matter wave](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave) or de Broglie wave for each object whether or not it was interacting with another, but that's a whole 'nuther ball of wax.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2019-12-14. Score: 1

The speed and direction of objects in a binary system continuously changes over time and are governed by the net gravitational force exerted on them. The closer the objects are the greater the gravitational forces.

In a purely binary system where the gravitational effects of other bodies are insignificant the bodies would normally fall into a regular pattern orbiting each other around the centre of mass. If the orbits are circular the orbital speed will be constant and the direction will change at a regular rate.

As the orbit becomes more elliptical and eccentric the speed of the objects will become increasingly variable with the fastest speed occurring at the closest approach and the slowest at the furthest distance. At the most extreme the planets will approach so closely that they collide.

If one of the objects is significantly larger than the other the smaller one will be accelerated to a greater extent.

Although speed and direction vary they do so in a [smooth and continuous manner](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erKViZx8Qsc). There are no sudden jerks or discontinuities.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: What about a very very tiny periodicity, but still noticeable? Even a smooth and continuous manner down to smallest possible scale must have some wave-like pattern to it. And, based on clockwork harmony, that pattern should repeat itself. I'm thinking something like hundreds of periods per orbit. Not sudden jerks, but still if looking with enough detail "tugs".  
> **username_0**: Whether or not it is negotiable is irrelevant, what is relevant is what is objectively true. Those calculations deal with generalizations of binary orbits. If there is any periodicity to adjustments in orbits, is not what it addresses. Even a smooth and continuous manner down to smallest possible scale (like that article does but with different focus) must have some wave-like pattern to it.  
> **username_0**: Yes objective truth. The definition of science, and natural science. Good that you have a "we" who do that, but, science is neutral, and a protocol. Here this question is in theoretical context. Even a smooth and continuous adjustment when reduced down to the smallest possible scale must have some wave-like pattern to it.  
> **username_0**: yes, all of that, for the purpose of finding the accurate model. neutrality. "peer review" has nothing to do with scientific method, it is just a resource allocation mechanism for record-keeping. but, not surprised that you conflate practicalities and trends for how to solve them with the actual protocol science.  
> **username_3**: I think we are drifting off topic here  
> **username_0**: I am looking for that there should be a "tug of war" pattern, even if it is very small, and that is sometimes a bias. It still seems to be that even a smooth and continuous manner, when taken down to the smallest possible scale, must have some wave-like pattern to it, action and reaction.  
> **username_3**: At the smallest possible scale there might or might not be some wave-like pattern to gravitation but we don't know what happens to gravity with certainty at the smallest possible scale. It’s unlikely that we will until quantum mechanics and relativity are fully reconciled  
> **username_0**: not just gravitation, I mean, action and reaction, the momentum of object reacting to other object moving.  

---

