38
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
38 points (95.2% liked)
Ask Science
11262 readers
1 users here now
Ask a science question, get a science answer.
Community Rules
Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.
Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.
Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.
Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.
Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.
Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.
Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.
Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.
Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.
Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.
Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.
Rule 7: Report violations.
Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.
Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.
Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.
Rule 9: Source required for answers.
Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.
By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.
We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There is no orbit altitude that requires more energy to maintain than a lower altitude.
Zone 1 requires more reboosting that 2, which requires more than 3, which requires more than 4. I dont know the exact relationship, (someone else might know), but we can consider it linear for simplification. The further away from earth, there will be less atmospheric drag, which means a longer stable orbit.
The travel distance doesn't really change anything, it doesn't affect the orbit stability.
Think of it like this spring. Your satellite can start at any point, and with no additional energy, Itll follow the path all the way down to the middle (earth). Start low, and itll reach ground quickly, start high, and itll take a lot longer. There is no energy required to stay on the spiral path. Once the sat is low enough, you may want to reboost, which is when you need to use energy to jump up to a higher point on the spiral, at which the path continues.
That spring is also a good visual to help illustrate what is meant by "gravity well".
That image and your description helped a ton. So there isn't a magic zone but more of a threshold after which things get easier to maintain.
Really should start playing Kerbal Space Program as someone before pointed out. You seem to have a great conceptual model of this. Thank you for engaging ๐
Outer Wilds is much more user friendly imo. Also the fact that some planets/comets are so small you can basically run and jump at orbital speeds really helps you to conceptualize the interaction of forces.
I spent a whole cycle jumping from north pole to south pole with just my jetpack on this neat binary planet system. The gravity on them is so low you can jump off one planet, boost straight up, and fall all the way to the other planet without your ship. It's really fun.
Not even a threshold, its a much more smooth transition, thats just the best picture I could find.
KSP will definitely help. Chuck your SATs into orbit, and you can see the orbits slowly decay away, almost imperceptibly. Its fun too :)