No.
This is a case of "correlation does not imply causation". In our solar system, the planets closest to the star are terrestrial planets and the planets farther from the star are gas giants. After the gas giants are the dwarf planets which are also terrestrial. That order can easily be changed. In other solar systems it is quite possible that the gas giants would be the planets closest to the star at roughly the same distances as the terrestrial planets are in our solar system.
because the sun is far away from Pluto the planets suface would be ice i hope that helped you.
You might expect a planet to be hotter if it's nearer the Sun. This is true apart from Venus, which is the exception. Venus has a higher average surface temperature than Mercury. We believe this is because of the "greenhouse effect" of the atmosphere of Venus.
because it's a planet like all but it is the biggest
globe ++big ++ surfacs
NO why would you even care
because the sun is far away from Pluto the planets suface would be ice i hope that helped you.
You might expect a planet to be hotter if it's nearer the Sun. This is true apart from Venus, which is the exception. Venus has a higher average surface temperature than Mercury. We believe this is because of the "greenhouse effect" of the atmosphere of Venus.
because it's a planet like all but it is the biggest
globe ++big ++ surfacs
globe ++big ++ surfacs
It is the third largest planet in our Solar system.
There is no necessary connection between mass and distance. The mass of a planet does not affect its orbital speed, for example. However the "giant planets" are further from the Sun than the less massive "terrestrial planets". The outer (more massive planets) contain a lot of gases. So, they would surely lose a lot of their mass if they were nearer the Sun. (In fact, we have found planets called "hot Jupiters" orbiting other stars. These are Jupiter type planets, but they orbit very close to their star.)
globe ++big ++ surfacs
NO why would you even care
The relationship is given by Kepler's Third Law.
In a way, size does not effect a planet's "gravity", its mass does. The more mass a planet has, the stronger its gravitational force.But the "surface gravity" is affected by the radius of the planet. That's because it depends on the distance of the surface from the center of the planet.The important equation here is based on Newton's Law of Gravitation:Gravitational Force = G x M x m / d x d (where G is the Gravitational constant,M is the planet's mass, m is the mass of an object being attracted, and d is thedistance between the centers of the masses).
Yes, its all to do with Kepler's third law of planetary motion, which describes the relationship between the orbital period of the plant and the distance of that planet from the sun. Kepler found that the square of the period, P, is proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis, a (P2 = ka3). The planets orbit the sun in an ellispse, the semi major axis is the `longest radius` within this ellipse. Kepler found that a constant `k` was needed in the equation - this was later found to relate to the mass of the objects. The planets mass is usually a lot less than the star its orbiting, so can often be dropped from the equation.