venus rotates opposite the other planets, it is posible it\ndid not originate with our system but is an intruder.Velichovshy suggested it was responsible for some of our solar system features being the way they are.
217720
Venus could be thought of as simply upside down. Something might have knocked it over. Current thinking in the field says that Venus was hit with a "mini planet" during formation and violently knocked over. Uranus might have suffered a similar blow (it is rotating perpendicular to the solar system, rolling on it's side). Crater evidence supports the existence of large mini-planets in the early days of our solar system. Some of these are the moons of the outer planets. Our own moon may be the result of such a collision with earth that flung material into orbit (everything may have been molten at this time). No one knows for sure. Venus also has a 3:2 rotational period with earth's orbit with the sun. Some think that this is due to a tidal resonance. Mercury also has a 3:2 proportion day to year. This resonance may also cause a wobble (earth wobbles due to the moon's tidal resonance), but it is unlikely this was strong enough to cause Venus's retrograde rotation.
517126
Our solar system- the Sun, planets, Kuiper belt and Oort cloud, everything orbiting the sun even many times further than the orbit of Pluto- is thought to have condensed from a vast cloud of interstellar gas some billions of years ago when that cloud was shocked or squeezed by a supernova explosion. The dust and grains that condensed out of the cooling solar gas aggregated to form larger fragments of rock. Chondritic meteorites are basically just such collections of grains and fragments that have been compacted together to form a larger piece of rock and eventually small planetary bodies. Such bodies are termed planetesimals when they become roughly as large as asteroids (several kilometres to a few hundred kilometres in dimension). The larger they grow, the greater the gravitational attraction that the planetesimals exert and hence the more effectively they sweep up additional particles and rock fragments while circling the Sun. (Britannica CD) \n\nBecause that initial shockwave came from a particular direction and because the cloud was not of uniform density, the particles had a net rotation around their center of gravity. Humans subsequently identified that direction as "counterclockwise as viewed from above the north pole of the sun". As the bodies of the solar system grew by accretion, particles swept up from different distances from the center of gravity (the sun) had different orbital velocities. Analogously, water swirling down a drain moves slower further and faster closer to the center. \n\nGalileo and Newton showed that rotational energy is conserved: The sun and planets ‘inherited' their spin from the orbits of their constituent particles, so to speak. Today, some five billion years later, all that rotational energy is still conserved in the rotations and revolutions of the bodies of the solar system. Our solar system is not unchanging, though. Because of gravitational interactions between moons and their planets, between the planets, meteors and comets themselves and interactions between the solar wind and the magnetospheres of the planets, rotational energy is still be ‘traded' back and forth: Mercury orbits in a 3:2 resonance with its rotation, our day is getting longer while the moon only shows one face towards us, the rings of the gas giants are temporary phenomena,... But that's another story.
71255
Planets do not follow the same exact pathway. They are farther away from the sun. However, they still do rotate around the sun. (If they were in the same line, the planets would collide) The farther out the planets are, the longer time it takes them to revolve around the sun. This is why pluto takes an extremely long time to revolve once around, while the Earth year is only 365 days. Mercury has a year even SHORTER than the earth@
445981
(i did an online reading for u and ur partner based on the info u gave)\n\n\nInter-planetary aspects\n\nThese concern the possible relationships between two charts: especially the emotional relationship , but also those on the social, intellectual and spiritual levels.\n\n302 Conjunction Sun - Mercury\n\nPositive aspect: Good understanding between the two persons and intellectual interests in common, the same type of curiosity. They are made to go well together, to appreciate each other.\n\n242 Conjunction Sun - Mercury\n\nPositive aspect: Good understanding between the two persons and intellectual interests in common, the same type of curiosity. They are made to go well together, to appreciate each other.\n\n237 Trine Moon - Moon\n\nPositive aspect: They know exactly how to interpret the other person, to see how they feel, to understand them.\n\n138 Conjunction Sun - Uranus\n\nPositive aspect: The Sun will be enriched by this relationship with Uranus, which will lead to the discovery of a new world, original and full of change. They will go well together, but Uranus is unstable and certainly too independent to enter into marriage.\n\n-129 Opposition Sun - Jupiter\n\nNegative aspect: While they get on well when they first meet, sharing the same ideas and tastes, with the years their ideas change and they do not develop in the same way. They will no longer understand each other and could split up because they no longer love each other, have nothing more in common.\n\n-123 Square Mars - Mars\n\nNegative aspect: Life together, if this happens, will be full of aggression and conflict.\n\n-112 Square Venus - Neptune\n\nNegative aspect: The attraction is certainly there, but the relationship will only last a short time. Venus misunderstands the other and will, without a doubt, be the only one who really is in love. Neptune will be unfaithful.\n\n103 Conjunction Moon - Jupiter\n\nPositive aspect: They go well together, understand and have confidence in each other, develop side-by-side in the same way, and will have many joint projects. They will have a happy family, where their children will grow up in a pleasing atmosphere.\n\n92 Conjunction Mercury - Pluto\n\nPositive aspect: Favorable union.\n\n45 Trine Saturn - Neptune\n\nPositive aspect: Favorable union. Neptune brings dreams to Saturn, who lacks them, and Saturn brings common sense to Neptune, who is totally without it.\n\n\n(hope this helps!)
153895
Well it's impossible to see stars when the sun is up, and Venus is the only planet visible during the day, so there is no way all those bodies could have been visible at the same time. There might have been some sort of alignment, but it would only have been calculated, not observed.
632437
Look up "disk accretion", a popular theory about the formation of our solar system.  This theory explains that as the cloud of dust and gas that formed our system was condensing, it's rotational motion caused an effect similar to centrifugal force which flattened the spinning cloud into a spinning disk.  \n\nI should note that the system isn't exactly flat, a couple of the outer planets have taken on orbits that are quite askew to the disk that the inner planets are aligned with.\n\nThe following web site has some simplified explanations of solar system formation:\nhttp://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/our_solar_system/formation.html\n\nand more in-depth info at:\nhttp://www.dtm.ciw.edu/akir/Seminar/seminar.html
587140
It is a theoretical planet. There have been numerous reports of finding it. It is most likely the same kind of thing as Pluto, which is an asteroid that gets lightly caught in the suns gravity. They are actually starting to think there are a lot of little asteroids that are "mini-planets" like that out past Pluto.
511686
ahhh more swamp gas refracting off venus with a strange cloud formation, is what they'll have you believe.\nfollow it up at http://www.ufoevidence.org/ \nGood luck
342700
Fresh Prince is OK.\n\nI will add to his (a) answer that both Venus and Triton suffer from a severe greenhouse effect.  Even though the clouds on Venus reflect a lot of sunlight, they also trap whatever solar heat does make it in.  The surface of Venus is very, very hot -- hotter than it would be without this greenhouse effect.\n\nTriton is a lot farther from the Sun.  It is cold (the surface is covered with ice) but it is not as cold as it should be.  The ice acts just as the panes of glass do in a greenhouse: let the sun in, keep the heat from escaping.\nThe mantle of Triton is actually melted.  True, most of the energy came from the tidal friction generated when Triton was captured and its orbit became circular; still, the energy would have dissipated faster if it were not for the greenhouse effect.
48474
The direction of draining water is no different in either of Earth's hemispheres. This is a perpetual myth that has no basis in scientific fact. This website provides a good discussion about the whole thing, plus lots of information about the Coriolis Effect itself --\nhttp://www.ems.psu.edu/~fraser/Bad/BadCoriolis.html
623021
You need to do a lot of studying to learn about many things.  Venus is different colors depending on where it is and we are.  We do not get anything from the planet.  No person has been there yet.  It is so hot there we would melt.
43940
I think the current theory is that it comes from the origin of the solar system as a spinning mass of material. This material had a certain angular momentum, which was retained as the material coalesced into the sun and the planets and moons and other bodies. So there are only a few planets and moons whose orbital and rotational angular momentum vectors are not aligned with each other (like Neptune, and Venus, Triton and a few of the smaller, more distant moons of Jupiter and Saturn).
267688
Your teacher.\n\nThe sun is the center of our solar system (thus the terminology), and all of the planets circle around the sun.\n\nJust to clarify on one point...The sun is not the center of the universe.  It is the center of our solar system.  There are thousands of solar systems in our universe, and our sun is not at the center of these.
26002
If the sun were part of a binary system, it would revolve around the barycenter of the binary system. We would be able to dected this movment by comparing the Sun's position to other nearby stars and to more distant stars. Since we don't dectect any such movement around the barycenter, that means that any such compainion star must be very very small, making the barycenter close to the sun's positon, or very far away, making the motion of the sun about the barycenter very slow. \n\nNeither of these conditions are true of any other binary star system we see, so no.
387174
because of the moon! Venus is too close to the sun so all of its water evaporated into space and mars has no large moon to deflect comets and asteroids into it and add water that are in most comets and some asteroids! and the gravity of a large moon creates friction in the tectonic plates by pulling strongest on the crust causing them to melt and release water vapor and lava from volcano's  like our moon does and if the moon did have water then it would evaporate and fall down to its closest neighbor, namely, earth. and if the moon had  oceans it would be pulled up [or down] depending on your point of view because of the enormous tidal forces of earth on them ! and if it where farther out than mars the oceans would be froze on top like the moons of the outer planets because of lack of sunlight!
283553
The correct option is 'rotation of the earth'. When earth revolves, some part of it is directly facing the sun, and the other part is not. That explains the presence of day in one part of the world, and night in the other.
62432
Except for stars nearest the Pole Star, all stars move in one single direction all the time --- east to west. This isn't because the stars are moving but instead because Earth is rotating.\n\nIf you're seeing stars moving 'rapidly' and 'sporadically' you're either not observing stars, or you should tell me where you're gettin' that good stuff :)