Yesterday, I think I was wrong, as always, I told you that I had talked about the Yarkovsky effect a long time ago and, although the principle I commented on is the same I did not really refer to.
The Yarkovsky effect, named after the engineer Ivan Osipovich Yarkovsky, talks about the absorption and emission of radiation in a body and how it can modify the trajectories of the body.
In short it tells us that a body in space can alter its orbit due to the thrust of the electromagnetic radiation that falls on it.
This with an example looks better. If we have a piece of earth in a constant, elliptical, precious orbit, orbiting an element that generates electromagnetic radiation, for example a star; This object will absorb that radiation (let, for example, light, photons) that are energetic. The absorption or the radiation that heats the object when transformed into heat energy (radiation, energy, you know) at a point that, when rotated, is expelled in the area where it does not receive such radiation.
That is, it uses the radiation ejected as a thrust, which causes it to modify the orbit or, rather, the path of the piece of earth.
The modification of the orbit depends on the rotation of said piece of earth, being able to make it parabolic or diminish its eccentricity (we will modify the eccentricity until, with great luck, convert the orbit into a parabola.
Therefore the Yarkovsky effect has a few variables: The distance to the point of emission of radiation, that the object is made to see how much radiation absorbs, the type of radiation that absorbs (and therefore emits and arrives), the rotation speed of the object and the rotation itself (the direction).
All objects are subject to this effect, all, another story is, with the variables mentioned above, what affects them and, therefore, how much they have to modify the path to maintain it.
So, something else you know (if you did not know that I doubt it) although, most do not care at all.