Question about tidal forces and the Roche limitIs there any orbit at which the Roche limit can be “felt”?How Wide is Earth's Roche Limit?Roche limit - calculation with centrifugal forcesFilling the Roche LobeHow was Io not torn apart by tidal forces during its formation?Roche Limit for Earth-like body around Earth-like bodyHow can I calculate how the debris of an object ripped apart at the Roche limit will spread out?How does gradual crossing over of the Roche limit transform a planet or moon?The effect of gravitational wave is like tidal forces?What is the real position of the tidal bulge?Is the Roche limit used this way?Eventual outcome of tidal acceleration and decelerationRoche limit - calculation with centrifugal forcesIs there any orbit at which the Roche limit can be “felt”?

Does the 500 feet falling cap apply per fall, or per turn?

How to evaluate sum with one million summands?

Which other programming languages apart from Python and predecessor are out there using indentation to define code blocks?

Create less file for custom Theme

How are one-time password generators like Google Authenticator different from having two passwords?

Why is PerfectForwardSecrecy considered OK, when it has same defects as salt-less password hashing?

Ex-manager wants to stay in touch, I don't want to

Removing all characters except digits from clipboard

Is there a need for better software for writers?

Company stopped paying my salary. What are my options?

Why are parallelograms defined as quadrilaterals? What term would encompass polygons with greater than two parallel pairs?

How to select certain lines (n, n+4, n+8, n+12...) from the file?

Is this state of Earth possible, after humans left for a million years?

Is it bad writing or bad story telling if first person narrative contains more information than the narrator knows?

Two researchers want to work on the same extension to my paper. Who to help?

When quoting someone, is it proper to change "gotta" to "got to" without modifying the rest of the quote?

Was there a contingency plan in place if Little Boy failed to detonate?

Is it nonsense to say B -> [A -> B]?

Why does increasing the sampling rate make implementing an anti-aliasing filter easier?

Best species to breed to intelligence

Can 'sudo apt-get remove [write]' destroy my Ubuntu?

Why is the Sun made of light elements only?

Can the president of the United States be guilty of insider trading?

How to make a language evolve quickly?



Question about tidal forces and the Roche limit


Is there any orbit at which the Roche limit can be “felt”?How Wide is Earth's Roche Limit?Roche limit - calculation with centrifugal forcesFilling the Roche LobeHow was Io not torn apart by tidal forces during its formation?Roche Limit for Earth-like body around Earth-like bodyHow can I calculate how the debris of an object ripped apart at the Roche limit will spread out?How does gradual crossing over of the Roche limit transform a planet or moon?The effect of gravitational wave is like tidal forces?What is the real position of the tidal bulge?Is the Roche limit used this way?Eventual outcome of tidal acceleration and decelerationRoche limit - calculation with centrifugal forcesIs there any orbit at which the Roche limit can be “felt”?













2












$begingroup$


As we know, an object that is beyond the Roche limit doesn't disintegrate (obviously) because the tidal forces upon the object are weaker than the gravitational pull of the object towards its centre, so the planet remains intact.



My question is: if that's so, ¿why does the body deforms even before crossing the Roche limit?



If the gravitational pull of the particles in the object outweighs the tidal forces, ¿wouldn't the object have to stay totally round? It couldn't have been any deformation because the tidal forces are totally canceled out.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    I've added an answer, let me know if this is the kind of answer you are looking for, or if you'd like anything further clarified. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    2 hours ago















2












$begingroup$


As we know, an object that is beyond the Roche limit doesn't disintegrate (obviously) because the tidal forces upon the object are weaker than the gravitational pull of the object towards its centre, so the planet remains intact.



My question is: if that's so, ¿why does the body deforms even before crossing the Roche limit?



If the gravitational pull of the particles in the object outweighs the tidal forces, ¿wouldn't the object have to stay totally round? It couldn't have been any deformation because the tidal forces are totally canceled out.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    I've added an answer, let me know if this is the kind of answer you are looking for, or if you'd like anything further clarified. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    2 hours ago













2












2








2





$begingroup$


As we know, an object that is beyond the Roche limit doesn't disintegrate (obviously) because the tidal forces upon the object are weaker than the gravitational pull of the object towards its centre, so the planet remains intact.



My question is: if that's so, ¿why does the body deforms even before crossing the Roche limit?



If the gravitational pull of the particles in the object outweighs the tidal forces, ¿wouldn't the object have to stay totally round? It couldn't have been any deformation because the tidal forces are totally canceled out.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




As we know, an object that is beyond the Roche limit doesn't disintegrate (obviously) because the tidal forces upon the object are weaker than the gravitational pull of the object towards its centre, so the planet remains intact.



My question is: if that's so, ¿why does the body deforms even before crossing the Roche limit?



If the gravitational pull of the particles in the object outweighs the tidal forces, ¿wouldn't the object have to stay totally round? It couldn't have been any deformation because the tidal forces are totally canceled out.







tidal-forces roche-limit






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 4 hours ago







Carlos Vázquez Monzón

















asked 4 hours ago









Carlos Vázquez MonzónCarlos Vázquez Monzón

483313




483313











  • $begingroup$
    I've added an answer, let me know if this is the kind of answer you are looking for, or if you'd like anything further clarified. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    2 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    I've added an answer, let me know if this is the kind of answer you are looking for, or if you'd like anything further clarified. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    2 hours ago















$begingroup$
I've added an answer, let me know if this is the kind of answer you are looking for, or if you'd like anything further clarified. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– uhoh
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
I've added an answer, let me know if this is the kind of answer you are looking for, or if you'd like anything further clarified. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– uhoh
2 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

When we do mathematical calculations, sometimes terms cancel and we get to draw a line through them.



But in the real world cancellations and "total cancellations" don't really happen.



Forces just add. Often there's a big force and one or more little forces, and as long as the big force substantially dominates the little forces, we tend to notice only the big force. But it doesn't cancel, it just covers up the effects of the others to the casual observer.



Let's think about gravity. We are so used to moving around in 1 g of gravity that we don't notice it. You could say that our brain "cancels" out 1 g from our conscious awareness and we compensate for it automatically. We don't feel and notice the 1 g when we stand or sit or lay down, even though we make use of it to stay put.



However, get in an elevator or an amusement ride and add a little acceleration, and we notice it right away! That sinking feeling when a fast elevator starts accelerating downward for example watch (but don't listen to) the video The Equivalence Principle



The Equivalence Principle screenshots youtube.com/watch?v=m8iP5WsiSbc



The purpose of the above discussion is to discount the idea of "total cancellations". A bit of rock or soil on the surface of a body feels the gravitation of the rest of the body pulling down, the "centrifugal force pulling" it up if the body is rotating, and the gravitation of nearby bodies (e.g. Sun or Moon or planet) pulling up or down or sideways depending on orientation. It feels all of these all the time.



If the net force, the sum of all the forces, pulls up, then the body starts to disintegrate. If the net force is still down, it doesn't.



Think of it as a threshold, rather than a cancellation.




...if that's so, ¿why does the body deforms even before crossing the Roche limit?




As long as the body is made of material capable of deforming or flowing (which rock certainly is, especially when hot) then it will continue to move or flow until the sum of all the forces reaches zero. Gravity usually dominates, but it's the force of the compressed layer below pushing up that counters the sum of all the forces.



If the body is rotating, then the net force is weaker on the equator than at the poles, and so less pressure is needed to compensate. That means the higher pressure at the poles will cause some of the material to move to the equator.




To read more about several of the competing forces pulling on us all the time as we stand on the Earth, see:



  • @DavidHammen's cool table

  • my (sadly down-voted) calculation

  • all of the answers to Did the Mars rovers actually confirm the gravity of Mars?

Once you are comfortable with the idea of equilibrium, multiple forces adding and pressure, then have a look at all the interesting answers to these particular Roche limit-related questions:



  • Is there any orbit at which the Roche limit can be “felt”?

  • Roche limit - calculation with centrifugal forces

  • How Wide is Earth's Roche Limit?

  • Filling the Roche Lobe





share|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    1












    $begingroup$

    Slightly long for a comment, so I'll put it here.



    A comparison could be drawn to the equatorial bulge. A planet that rotates is fatter at the equator than the poles. Nothing "lifts" off the surface because the outward force from the rotation is generally much weaker than the gravity, but the planet still bulges because the forces get added together and the planet effectively has less gravitation on it's axis of rotation.



    Just as Earth's rotation, which on a person's weight might only be a fraction of a lb between equator and pole, that variation is still enough to give the Earth a 42 km tidal bulge.



    Equatorial bulge of the planets



    0.5% weight loss at the Equator vs North Pole. (note 80% of your equatorial weight loss is due to rotation, 20% is due to further distance from the center).



    The tidal force on Earth is quite a bit weaker than that and the bulge is measured in feet, not 21 km radius, but Earth being as large as it is, even a small force over the entire surface creates a bulge. Here's a fun answer on the tidal force calculated on the surface of Phobos.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "514"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31824%2fquestion-about-tidal-forces-and-the-roche-limit%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      3












      $begingroup$

      When we do mathematical calculations, sometimes terms cancel and we get to draw a line through them.



      But in the real world cancellations and "total cancellations" don't really happen.



      Forces just add. Often there's a big force and one or more little forces, and as long as the big force substantially dominates the little forces, we tend to notice only the big force. But it doesn't cancel, it just covers up the effects of the others to the casual observer.



      Let's think about gravity. We are so used to moving around in 1 g of gravity that we don't notice it. You could say that our brain "cancels" out 1 g from our conscious awareness and we compensate for it automatically. We don't feel and notice the 1 g when we stand or sit or lay down, even though we make use of it to stay put.



      However, get in an elevator or an amusement ride and add a little acceleration, and we notice it right away! That sinking feeling when a fast elevator starts accelerating downward for example watch (but don't listen to) the video The Equivalence Principle



      The Equivalence Principle screenshots youtube.com/watch?v=m8iP5WsiSbc



      The purpose of the above discussion is to discount the idea of "total cancellations". A bit of rock or soil on the surface of a body feels the gravitation of the rest of the body pulling down, the "centrifugal force pulling" it up if the body is rotating, and the gravitation of nearby bodies (e.g. Sun or Moon or planet) pulling up or down or sideways depending on orientation. It feels all of these all the time.



      If the net force, the sum of all the forces, pulls up, then the body starts to disintegrate. If the net force is still down, it doesn't.



      Think of it as a threshold, rather than a cancellation.




      ...if that's so, ¿why does the body deforms even before crossing the Roche limit?




      As long as the body is made of material capable of deforming or flowing (which rock certainly is, especially when hot) then it will continue to move or flow until the sum of all the forces reaches zero. Gravity usually dominates, but it's the force of the compressed layer below pushing up that counters the sum of all the forces.



      If the body is rotating, then the net force is weaker on the equator than at the poles, and so less pressure is needed to compensate. That means the higher pressure at the poles will cause some of the material to move to the equator.




      To read more about several of the competing forces pulling on us all the time as we stand on the Earth, see:



      • @DavidHammen's cool table

      • my (sadly down-voted) calculation

      • all of the answers to Did the Mars rovers actually confirm the gravity of Mars?

      Once you are comfortable with the idea of equilibrium, multiple forces adding and pressure, then have a look at all the interesting answers to these particular Roche limit-related questions:



      • Is there any orbit at which the Roche limit can be “felt”?

      • Roche limit - calculation with centrifugal forces

      • How Wide is Earth's Roche Limit?

      • Filling the Roche Lobe





      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$

















        3












        $begingroup$

        When we do mathematical calculations, sometimes terms cancel and we get to draw a line through them.



        But in the real world cancellations and "total cancellations" don't really happen.



        Forces just add. Often there's a big force and one or more little forces, and as long as the big force substantially dominates the little forces, we tend to notice only the big force. But it doesn't cancel, it just covers up the effects of the others to the casual observer.



        Let's think about gravity. We are so used to moving around in 1 g of gravity that we don't notice it. You could say that our brain "cancels" out 1 g from our conscious awareness and we compensate for it automatically. We don't feel and notice the 1 g when we stand or sit or lay down, even though we make use of it to stay put.



        However, get in an elevator or an amusement ride and add a little acceleration, and we notice it right away! That sinking feeling when a fast elevator starts accelerating downward for example watch (but don't listen to) the video The Equivalence Principle



        The Equivalence Principle screenshots youtube.com/watch?v=m8iP5WsiSbc



        The purpose of the above discussion is to discount the idea of "total cancellations". A bit of rock or soil on the surface of a body feels the gravitation of the rest of the body pulling down, the "centrifugal force pulling" it up if the body is rotating, and the gravitation of nearby bodies (e.g. Sun or Moon or planet) pulling up or down or sideways depending on orientation. It feels all of these all the time.



        If the net force, the sum of all the forces, pulls up, then the body starts to disintegrate. If the net force is still down, it doesn't.



        Think of it as a threshold, rather than a cancellation.




        ...if that's so, ¿why does the body deforms even before crossing the Roche limit?




        As long as the body is made of material capable of deforming or flowing (which rock certainly is, especially when hot) then it will continue to move or flow until the sum of all the forces reaches zero. Gravity usually dominates, but it's the force of the compressed layer below pushing up that counters the sum of all the forces.



        If the body is rotating, then the net force is weaker on the equator than at the poles, and so less pressure is needed to compensate. That means the higher pressure at the poles will cause some of the material to move to the equator.




        To read more about several of the competing forces pulling on us all the time as we stand on the Earth, see:



        • @DavidHammen's cool table

        • my (sadly down-voted) calculation

        • all of the answers to Did the Mars rovers actually confirm the gravity of Mars?

        Once you are comfortable with the idea of equilibrium, multiple forces adding and pressure, then have a look at all the interesting answers to these particular Roche limit-related questions:



        • Is there any orbit at which the Roche limit can be “felt”?

        • Roche limit - calculation with centrifugal forces

        • How Wide is Earth's Roche Limit?

        • Filling the Roche Lobe





        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$















          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          When we do mathematical calculations, sometimes terms cancel and we get to draw a line through them.



          But in the real world cancellations and "total cancellations" don't really happen.



          Forces just add. Often there's a big force and one or more little forces, and as long as the big force substantially dominates the little forces, we tend to notice only the big force. But it doesn't cancel, it just covers up the effects of the others to the casual observer.



          Let's think about gravity. We are so used to moving around in 1 g of gravity that we don't notice it. You could say that our brain "cancels" out 1 g from our conscious awareness and we compensate for it automatically. We don't feel and notice the 1 g when we stand or sit or lay down, even though we make use of it to stay put.



          However, get in an elevator or an amusement ride and add a little acceleration, and we notice it right away! That sinking feeling when a fast elevator starts accelerating downward for example watch (but don't listen to) the video The Equivalence Principle



          The Equivalence Principle screenshots youtube.com/watch?v=m8iP5WsiSbc



          The purpose of the above discussion is to discount the idea of "total cancellations". A bit of rock or soil on the surface of a body feels the gravitation of the rest of the body pulling down, the "centrifugal force pulling" it up if the body is rotating, and the gravitation of nearby bodies (e.g. Sun or Moon or planet) pulling up or down or sideways depending on orientation. It feels all of these all the time.



          If the net force, the sum of all the forces, pulls up, then the body starts to disintegrate. If the net force is still down, it doesn't.



          Think of it as a threshold, rather than a cancellation.




          ...if that's so, ¿why does the body deforms even before crossing the Roche limit?




          As long as the body is made of material capable of deforming or flowing (which rock certainly is, especially when hot) then it will continue to move or flow until the sum of all the forces reaches zero. Gravity usually dominates, but it's the force of the compressed layer below pushing up that counters the sum of all the forces.



          If the body is rotating, then the net force is weaker on the equator than at the poles, and so less pressure is needed to compensate. That means the higher pressure at the poles will cause some of the material to move to the equator.




          To read more about several of the competing forces pulling on us all the time as we stand on the Earth, see:



          • @DavidHammen's cool table

          • my (sadly down-voted) calculation

          • all of the answers to Did the Mars rovers actually confirm the gravity of Mars?

          Once you are comfortable with the idea of equilibrium, multiple forces adding and pressure, then have a look at all the interesting answers to these particular Roche limit-related questions:



          • Is there any orbit at which the Roche limit can be “felt”?

          • Roche limit - calculation with centrifugal forces

          • How Wide is Earth's Roche Limit?

          • Filling the Roche Lobe





          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          When we do mathematical calculations, sometimes terms cancel and we get to draw a line through them.



          But in the real world cancellations and "total cancellations" don't really happen.



          Forces just add. Often there's a big force and one or more little forces, and as long as the big force substantially dominates the little forces, we tend to notice only the big force. But it doesn't cancel, it just covers up the effects of the others to the casual observer.



          Let's think about gravity. We are so used to moving around in 1 g of gravity that we don't notice it. You could say that our brain "cancels" out 1 g from our conscious awareness and we compensate for it automatically. We don't feel and notice the 1 g when we stand or sit or lay down, even though we make use of it to stay put.



          However, get in an elevator or an amusement ride and add a little acceleration, and we notice it right away! That sinking feeling when a fast elevator starts accelerating downward for example watch (but don't listen to) the video The Equivalence Principle



          The Equivalence Principle screenshots youtube.com/watch?v=m8iP5WsiSbc



          The purpose of the above discussion is to discount the idea of "total cancellations". A bit of rock or soil on the surface of a body feels the gravitation of the rest of the body pulling down, the "centrifugal force pulling" it up if the body is rotating, and the gravitation of nearby bodies (e.g. Sun or Moon or planet) pulling up or down or sideways depending on orientation. It feels all of these all the time.



          If the net force, the sum of all the forces, pulls up, then the body starts to disintegrate. If the net force is still down, it doesn't.



          Think of it as a threshold, rather than a cancellation.




          ...if that's so, ¿why does the body deforms even before crossing the Roche limit?




          As long as the body is made of material capable of deforming or flowing (which rock certainly is, especially when hot) then it will continue to move or flow until the sum of all the forces reaches zero. Gravity usually dominates, but it's the force of the compressed layer below pushing up that counters the sum of all the forces.



          If the body is rotating, then the net force is weaker on the equator than at the poles, and so less pressure is needed to compensate. That means the higher pressure at the poles will cause some of the material to move to the equator.




          To read more about several of the competing forces pulling on us all the time as we stand on the Earth, see:



          • @DavidHammen's cool table

          • my (sadly down-voted) calculation

          • all of the answers to Did the Mars rovers actually confirm the gravity of Mars?

          Once you are comfortable with the idea of equilibrium, multiple forces adding and pressure, then have a look at all the interesting answers to these particular Roche limit-related questions:



          • Is there any orbit at which the Roche limit can be “felt”?

          • Roche limit - calculation with centrifugal forces

          • How Wide is Earth's Roche Limit?

          • Filling the Roche Lobe






          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 2 hours ago

























          answered 2 hours ago









          uhohuhoh

          8,53222279




          8,53222279





















              1












              $begingroup$

              Slightly long for a comment, so I'll put it here.



              A comparison could be drawn to the equatorial bulge. A planet that rotates is fatter at the equator than the poles. Nothing "lifts" off the surface because the outward force from the rotation is generally much weaker than the gravity, but the planet still bulges because the forces get added together and the planet effectively has less gravitation on it's axis of rotation.



              Just as Earth's rotation, which on a person's weight might only be a fraction of a lb between equator and pole, that variation is still enough to give the Earth a 42 km tidal bulge.



              Equatorial bulge of the planets



              0.5% weight loss at the Equator vs North Pole. (note 80% of your equatorial weight loss is due to rotation, 20% is due to further distance from the center).



              The tidal force on Earth is quite a bit weaker than that and the bulge is measured in feet, not 21 km radius, but Earth being as large as it is, even a small force over the entire surface creates a bulge. Here's a fun answer on the tidal force calculated on the surface of Phobos.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$

















                1












                $begingroup$

                Slightly long for a comment, so I'll put it here.



                A comparison could be drawn to the equatorial bulge. A planet that rotates is fatter at the equator than the poles. Nothing "lifts" off the surface because the outward force from the rotation is generally much weaker than the gravity, but the planet still bulges because the forces get added together and the planet effectively has less gravitation on it's axis of rotation.



                Just as Earth's rotation, which on a person's weight might only be a fraction of a lb between equator and pole, that variation is still enough to give the Earth a 42 km tidal bulge.



                Equatorial bulge of the planets



                0.5% weight loss at the Equator vs North Pole. (note 80% of your equatorial weight loss is due to rotation, 20% is due to further distance from the center).



                The tidal force on Earth is quite a bit weaker than that and the bulge is measured in feet, not 21 km radius, but Earth being as large as it is, even a small force over the entire surface creates a bulge. Here's a fun answer on the tidal force calculated on the surface of Phobos.






                share|improve this answer









                $endgroup$















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  Slightly long for a comment, so I'll put it here.



                  A comparison could be drawn to the equatorial bulge. A planet that rotates is fatter at the equator than the poles. Nothing "lifts" off the surface because the outward force from the rotation is generally much weaker than the gravity, but the planet still bulges because the forces get added together and the planet effectively has less gravitation on it's axis of rotation.



                  Just as Earth's rotation, which on a person's weight might only be a fraction of a lb between equator and pole, that variation is still enough to give the Earth a 42 km tidal bulge.



                  Equatorial bulge of the planets



                  0.5% weight loss at the Equator vs North Pole. (note 80% of your equatorial weight loss is due to rotation, 20% is due to further distance from the center).



                  The tidal force on Earth is quite a bit weaker than that and the bulge is measured in feet, not 21 km radius, but Earth being as large as it is, even a small force over the entire surface creates a bulge. Here's a fun answer on the tidal force calculated on the surface of Phobos.






                  share|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Slightly long for a comment, so I'll put it here.



                  A comparison could be drawn to the equatorial bulge. A planet that rotates is fatter at the equator than the poles. Nothing "lifts" off the surface because the outward force from the rotation is generally much weaker than the gravity, but the planet still bulges because the forces get added together and the planet effectively has less gravitation on it's axis of rotation.



                  Just as Earth's rotation, which on a person's weight might only be a fraction of a lb between equator and pole, that variation is still enough to give the Earth a 42 km tidal bulge.



                  Equatorial bulge of the planets



                  0.5% weight loss at the Equator vs North Pole. (note 80% of your equatorial weight loss is due to rotation, 20% is due to further distance from the center).



                  The tidal force on Earth is quite a bit weaker than that and the bulge is measured in feet, not 21 km radius, but Earth being as large as it is, even a small force over the entire surface creates a bulge. Here's a fun answer on the tidal force calculated on the surface of Phobos.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 38 mins ago









                  userLTKuserLTK

                  16.8k12248




                  16.8k12248



























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Astronomy Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31824%2fquestion-about-tidal-forces-and-the-roche-limit%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

                      Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

                      Ласкавець круглолистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Галерея | Примітки | Посилання | Навігаційне меню58171138361-22960890446Bupleurum rotundifoliumEuro+Med PlantbasePlants of the World Online — Kew ScienceGermplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN)Ласкавецькн. VI : Літери Ком — Левиправивши або дописавши її