780
Say hello to Bary (mander.xyz)
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] LarsIsCool@lemmy.world 171 points 5 days ago
[-] mEEGal@lemmy.world 29 points 5 days ago

Jokes aside : being right for the wrong reasons is being wrong

[-] Droggelbecher@lemmy.world 92 points 5 days ago

The way this is phrased makes it sound like there's a certain threshold where this starts happening. That's not right. Even a grain of dust wouldn't orbit the sun, they still orbit their common barycenter. A less misleading way of phrasing would be that Jupiter is massive enough that the barycenter of it and the sun actually lies outside the sun, which is still a cool fun fact.

[-] BillBurBaggins@lemmy.world 38 points 5 days ago

I mean that's literally the point the image is trying to make. The last sentence says the point is outside the sun for Jupiter.

I don't think nitpicking the title achieves anything and it's not even misleading unless it's only taken in isolation.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 19 points 5 days ago

Orbiting a point within the sun is still orbiting the sun.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] essell@lemmy.world 141 points 5 days ago

I believe that's the same for every planet. And every moon. For every orbit.

Its just that the barycenter is inside the more massive object when one is much more massive than the other. Not that this makes much of a difference to anything.

[-] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 63 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Correct.

I also believe that one of the criteria for a binary planet is that the barycenter is outside either body. Like Pluto/Charon.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Eranziel@lemmy.world 122 points 5 days ago

The barycenter is sometimes outside the diameter of the sun. Not always, and I believe not even usually.

Yes, today I'm being that guy. Still a cool factoid.

[-] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 36 points 5 days ago

I'm kinda stunned that it's EVER outside the sun.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] setInner234@lemmy.ml 15 points 5 days ago

Well, while we are being 'that guy', factoid is one of those words which has changed its meaning by being used wrongly for so long that the original meaning has all but vanished.

A factoid is technically supposed to be something resembling fact, but not actual fact. (The Greek suffix '-oid' normally being used for that purpose, like in paranoid, "like knowledge" or asteroid, "like a star").

The best thing about factoid, is that factoid is now a factoid. Because it resembles what it is not lol...

Anyway, nowadays, you are allowed to use it the way you did, at least in the descriptivist world view. The prescriptivists may disagree, however. And those people are often 'that guy' ;)

[-] TipsyMcGee@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 days ago

Since definitions are not facts, the word factoid itself being a factoid is a factoid

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WraithGear@lemmy.world 55 points 5 days ago

i mean, with that logic, nothing orbits anything

[-] pixeltree 55 points 5 days ago

For most bodies the barycenter, while not the same as the center of mass, is still inside the sun. This one isn't, making it notable

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 28 points 5 days ago

No, this is actually really relevant. This is part of the logic applied to labeling Pluto a dwarf planet. Pluto and it's moon do this, Earth and our moon do not. Yes, obviously the center of mass of the two isn't the exact center of the earth but it's still within the earth.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Asking a physicist about the center of an object is like asking a Tumblr user about thr color of the sky. The only response will be "which one?" And a sigh of exhaustion

Center of volume ≠ center of mass ≠ center of systemic gravity ≠ center of lift…

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago

You're not wrong. Everything orbits the center of mass of the system, meaning the mass of the star and the body in orbit. And that is handy for astronomers, many exoplanets have been found using the Doppler spectroscopy method. Doppler spectroscopy measures the Doppler shift in the star's light as it is pulled towards and away from us by planets in orbit. The newest spectrographs are sensitive enough to detect a star's wobble caused by an Earth sized body in orbit. The barycenter is still within the star, but not at the center of the star's mass.

[-] fedditter@feddit.org 14 points 5 days ago

Fun fact: You actually pull the Earth up with the same force it pulls you down.. Newton’s Third Law.

[-] vic_rattlehead@lemmy.world 15 points 4 days ago

I've been told that certain peoples mothers happen to pull the earth with a bit more force than others.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Thorry@feddit.org 54 points 5 days ago

Your mom's so fat, she pushes the barycenter of the solar system outside of the diameter of the Sun

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nuko147@lemmy.world 61 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

[Solarsystembarycenter]

So the Sun is wobbling arround, because of the 3 giants. Fascinating.

[-] ItemWrongStory@midwest.social 34 points 5 days ago

Well, mostly Jupiter and a little bit of Saturn.

[-] yogurtwrong@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago

Like a brick in a washing machine

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] bennypr0fane@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 4 days ago

Do all the planets also orbit around that same barycenter, or does each planet have a different one?

[-] untorquer@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

All the solar system matter contributes to an object's orbital center but that's constantly moving as the system moves.

I think (?) most planets have their barycenter inside the sun's surface

The gravitational pull of system matter pales in comparison to the sun so you don't need to consider it for amateur purposes.

You can try KSP (Vanilla) versus Kopernicus mod if you want to feel the difference.

Also called n-body

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 4 days ago

Technically speaking, no celestial body in our solar system orbits around a single point. The barycenter thing only works with two bodies. When there are more than two bodies, such as in our solar system, the orbits become chaotic. Granted, the influence between planets is small, so they all appear to orbit their barycenters with the sun, but there are small perturbations to the orbits caused by the locations and masses of all the other bodies in the solar system.

[-] saimen@feddit.org 3 points 4 days ago

Isn't that the 3-body-problem? That already with 3 bodies affecting each other a system is chaotic.

[-] badcommandorfilename@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I guess they all orbit around the solar system's center of mass (negligibly affected by the universal CoM), but that CoM probably moves around as the planets themselves move.

Relative to what, you might ask? That depends who you're asking 😉

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 10 points 4 days ago

This is true about any 2 objects with mass.

[-] jsomae@lemmy.ml 25 points 4 days ago

No, it is not true in general that the barycenter lies outside both objects.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] kerrigan778 10 points 4 days ago
[-] SippyCup@feddit.nl 7 points 4 days ago

It was outside the environment.

[-] OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

A wave hit it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 25 points 5 days ago

In a field of study where it’s not just acceptable, but prudent to round pi to “1” because the numbers are that big….

I gotta say, it’s close enough to say Jupiter orbits Sol. Just saying.

[-] dmention7@midwest.social 21 points 5 days ago

Nah, there is no way any astronomer studying orbital mechanics in our solar system is rounding pi to 1. There is virtually no practical calculation you could do on the mechanics of the sun or planets where rounding a known constant by a factor of 3 would yield any useful result whatsoever.

Rounding pi to 1 only makes sense when the uncertainty in the numbers is large, not the magnitude of the numbers, and we know the masses and distances of the objects in our solar system to an amazing level of precision!

Plus, the fact that Jupiter is massive enough to actually exert an influence that large on the sun is pretty fucking cool!

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 24 points 5 days ago

The reason being, that once you go large enough, a multiplier of three is irrelevant, and they only really care about orders of magnitude. You might be tempted to argue that that doesn't happen inside the solar system, and you'd be right. Mostly.

Except that astronomy doesn't concern itself with just our system. So yes. Astronomers do frequently round to 1 because it really doesn't matter that much in the scheme of things. (particularly talking about distances.) it's even more so for cosmology.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] s@piefed.world 22 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Is it more true to say that Jupiter (and the other planets and asteroid belts and dust clouds in our solar system) orbits the Sun, and the Sun orbits the barycenter? The barycenter that the sun revolves around is influenced (marginally) by the other bodies in the solar system and not just Jupiter. If the definition of a barycenter is to be interpreted as this image suggests, that would mean that no material object orbits another material object and they instead orbit their collective center of mass somewhere in space.

Edit: to clarify, I understand the physics and motion at play. The phrasing just seems misleading/incorrect to me.

[-] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 21 points 5 days ago

no material object orbits another material object and they instead orbit their collective center of mass somewhere in space.

That’s exactly what happens. Why do you think this is incorrect?

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] SCmSTR 7 points 5 days ago

Jeeezzz...Gravity is relentless.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] vestigeofgreen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 5 days ago

I found it super helpful to have the Sun's center of mass labeled!

I only wish Jupiter's center of mass was also labeled in this graphic. I've been trying to puzzle it out myself, but I'm stumped!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2025
780 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

16622 readers
887 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS