NKTgLaw

NKTgLaw

Building a Computational Model of Planetary Motion (NKTg) and Validating It with NASA Mercury Data

1. Problem Statement

Can planetary motion be simulated using only fundamental quantities such as:

  • Position (x)

  • Velocity (v)

  • Mass (m)

without explicitly using force equations?

This post presents a computational implementation of the NKTg model, where orbital velocity is derived from a target constant:

NKTg₁ = x × p
where p = m × v

The model is validated using publicly available data from NASA JPL Horizons for Mercury.


2. Reference Dataset (NASA 2024)

Actual orbital data of Mercury in 2024:

Date x (m) v (m/s) m (kg) p = m·v
1/1/2024 5.16E+10 5.33E+04 3.30E+23 1.76E+28
4/1/2024 6.97E+10 3.90E+04 3.30E+23 1.29E+28
7/1/2024 5.36E+10 5.20E+04 3.30E+23 1.72E+28
10/1/2024 6.95E+10 3.92E+04 3.30E+23 1.30E+28
12/31/2024 4.64E+10 5.81E+04 3.30E+23 1.92E+28

From this dataset, the target constant is established:

NKTg₁ = 8.90E+38 NKTm


3. Model Definition

Given:

  • x (orbital position)

  • m (mass)

  • Target constant NKTg₁

We compute:

p=NKTg1xp = \frac{NKTg₁}{x}p=xNKTg1​​v=pmv = \frac{p}{m}v=mp​

No force expressions are used in the computation.

The model also integrates mass variation:

dm/dt = -0.5 kg/s

This produces:

NKTg2=(dm/dt)×pNKTg₂ = (dm/dt) × pNKTg2​=(dm/dt)×p

which remains negative throughout the orbit.


4. 2025 Simulation (NKTg Model)

Date x (m) v (m/s) m (kg) p = m·v
1/1/2025 5.16E+10 5.22E+04 3.301E+23 1.72E+28
4/1/2025 6.97E+10 3.87E+04 3.301E+23 1.28E+28
7/1/2025 5.49E+10 4.91E+04 3.301E+23 1.62E+28
10/1/2025 6.83E+10 3.95E+04 3.301E+23 1.30E+28
12/31/2025 4.61E+10 5.85E+04 3.301E+23 1.93E+28

5. Actual NASA Data (2025)

Date x (m) v (m/s) m (kg)
1/1/2025 5.16E+10 5.34E+04 3.30E+23
4/1/2025 6.97E+10 3.89E+04 3.30E+23
7/1/2025 5.49E+10 5.04E+04 3.30E+23
1/10/2025 6.83E+10 3.98E+04 3.30E+23
12/31/2025 4.61E+10 5.89E+04 3.30E+23

6. Numerical Comparison

Date v – NKTg v – NASA Relative Error (%)
1/1/2025 5.22E+04 53400 -2.15461
4/1/2025 3.87E+04 38900 -0.562786
7/1/2025 4.91E+04 50400 -2.561981
1/10/2025 3.95E+04 39800 -0.819213
12/31/2025 5.85E+04 58900 -0.707806

Average relative error: 1.3%


7. Observations from a Computational Perspective

  • The system is fully defined by interaction between x, v, and m.

  • No force expressions are required in the computation process.

  • The model is deterministic and reproducible across platforms.

  • Error remains within ~1.3% compared to NASA JPL data.


8. Discussion

From a software engineering perspective, this approach represents:

  • A constant-driven orbital simulation model.

  • A reduced-parameter dynamical system.

  • A reproducible computational experiment based on publicly available data.

The implementation can be reproduced in any language supporting floating-point arithmetic.


If anyone is interested, I can share a minimal reproducible implementation (Python / C++ / Go) for benchmarking and independent validation.

Where Next?

Popular General Dev topics Top

AstonJ
The obligatory speed test thread :smiley: Check here: https://www.speedtest.net When complete, click on the share link and copy and pas...
New
siddhant3030
I’m thinking of buying a monitor that I can rotate to use as a vertical monitor? Also, I want to know if someone is using it for program...
New
AstonJ
Want to plug where you work? Here’s your chance! Perhaps you could also mention what kind of stuff you’re working on? :nerd_face:
New
AstonJ
Inspired by this tweet by @dasdom Even if you take out all the damage being done by humans, our planet has about 50B years before bein...
New
finner
When you are under pressure to deliver you ideally want your Pull Request to be reviewed, approved and merged as quick as possible. So do...
New
AstonJ
Do the test and post your score :nerd_face: :keyboard: If possible, please add info such as the keyboard you’re using, the layout (Qw...
New
AstonJ
The dev world doesn’t sit still, in fact it is probably one of the fastest paced industries around - meaning to stay current we are conti...
New
jamiedumont
This is all going to be a bit hand-wavey and straight off the top of my head, so bear with me, but it’s a thought/debate that’s been ratt...
New
AstonJ
Just wondering whether you have a preference (I know I do!) poll
New
New

Other popular topics Top

Devtalk
Reading something? Working on something? Planning something? Changing jobs even!? If you’re up for sharing, please let us know what you’...
1062 22827 403
New
New
PragmaticBookshelf
Machine learning can be intimidating, with its reliance on math and algorithms that most programmers don't encounter in their regular wor...
New
PragmaticBookshelf
Ruby, Io, Prolog, Scala, Erlang, Clojure, Haskell. With Seven Languages in Seven Weeks, by Bruce A. Tate, you’ll go beyond the syntax—and...
New
AstonJ
You might be thinking we should just ask who’s not using VSCode :joy: however there are some new additions in the space that might give V...
New
AstonJ
poll poll Be sure to check out @Dusty’s article posted here: An Introduction to Alternative Keyboard Layouts It’s one of the best write-...
New
DevotionGeo
The V Programming Language Simple language for building maintainable programs V is already mentioned couple of times in the forum, but I...
New
AstonJ
If you want a quick and easy way to block any website on your Mac using Little Snitch simply… File > New Rule: And select Deny, O...
New
New
DevotionGeo
I have always used antique keyboards like Cherry MX 1800 or Cherry MX 8100 and almost always have modified the switches in some way, like...
New