Big-orbit Object Confounds Dynamicists
Source: Sky & Telescope Magazine
Published: Thursday, April 5 2001 Author: J. Kelly Beatty
Posted on 04/07/2001 11:46:54 PDT by vannrox
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3acf609e1367.htm
Giant Kuiper Belt planetoid Sedna may have formed far beyond Pluto
Physics Org (http://www.physorg.com/) | January 24, 2005 | Southwest Research Institute
Posted on 10/22/2005 4:05:39 PM EDT by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1507383/posts
Hey, this is kinda cool:
http://www.seb.cc/spacializer/
If my conversion from kilometers to miles is correct this "supercomet" is about 248 miles across.
Planet XPlanet X could exist provided it is... [f]ar enough away and/or small enough to exert no measurable gravitational deflections on the planets, comets or spacecraft in the outer solar system... [and f]ar enough away and/or small enough to have escaped detection by any of the all-sky surveys having sensitivity to moving objects that have been conducted to date.
by David Jewitt
Last updated 2005 Aug
What this means is that a planet of Earth's mass could exist undetected if it were more than a few 100 AU away, and even a Jupiter (300 Earth mass planet) could exist at distances only slightly greater. The sun could have a companion brown dwarf or even a star if far enough away! It's a nice thought but it will be very tough to do anything about it unless we are lucky. The Pan STARRS telescope now under development in Hawaii will provide the best constraints in the forseeable future. Will we get lucky? Stay tuned to find out... There is no convincing evidence for Planet X but "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Such an object could exist provided it is sufficiently far away.
The PlutinosA surprising result of the new observational work is that many of the distant objects are in or near the 3:2 mean motion resonance with Neptune. This means that they complete 2 orbits around the sun in the time it takes Neptune to complete 3 orbits. The same resonance is also occupied by Pluto... Probably, the 3:2 resonance acts to stabilize the Plutinos against gravitational perturbations by Neptune. Resonant objects in elliptical orbits can approach the orbit of Neptune without ever coming close to the planet itself, because their perihelia (smallest distance from the sun) preferentially avoid Neptune... Approximately 1/4 of the known trans-Neptunian objects are Plutinos. A few more are suspected residents of other resonances (e.g. 1995 DA2 is probably in the 4:3). By extrapolating from the limited area of the sky so far examined, we have estimated that the number of Plutinos larger than 100 km diameter is 1400, to within a factor of a few, corresponding to a few % of the total... [S]ome researchers are unsure whether Neptune moved out as opposed to in, and question the distance this planet might have moved. They also assert that the inclination of Pluto is larger than typical of the objects in Malhotra's simulations (and notice that the inclination of 1995 QZ9 is still larger than that of Pluto).
by David Jewitt
Feb 2004
If it hits, it will be Bush's fault.
Now we know where the DUmmies came from *¿*
just some additional info:
2000 CR105 and Planet X
Science Frontiers #136, Jul-Aug 2001
William R. Corliss
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf136/sf136p04.htm
“History seems to be repeating itself with 2000 CR105. Astronomer B. Gladman proposes that 2000 CR105 was forced into its present eccentric orbit by an encounter with a Mars-size Planet X that now orbits the sun at a distance about 15 times that of Neptune. From the standpoint of celestial mechanics, this perturbation of 2000 CR105’s orbit is certainly within the realm of possibility.”
Evidence for an Extended Scattered Disk?
by B. Gladman, M. Holman, T. Grav, J. Kavelaars,
P. Nicholson, K. Aksnes, and J-M. Petit
http://www.oca.eu/gladman/cr105.html
http://www.obs-nice.fr/gladman/Extended.ps
“The numerical simulations seem to show that it is possible for perihelia to eventually reach distances as far away as 40 AU. However, CR105’s perihelion if 4.3 AU farther out than that (almost the distance from the Sun to Jupiter!) Therefore, the simulations do not seem to produce objects like this, and we believe that for the moment 2000 CR105 should NOT be classed as an SDO.”
A comet’s odd orbit hints at hidden planet
Ron Cowen
Science News
Week of April 7, 2001; Vol. 159, No. 14 , p. 213
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20010407/fob4.asp
“The astronomers concede that feeble and random pushes from Neptune could have slowly nudged 2000 CR105 into its current orbit. However, preliminary analysis suggests this scenario isn’t likely, note Gladman, Matthew Holman of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass., and their collaborators... According to one theory, Neptune and Uranus first formed between the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn and were then flung out to greater distances from the sun. If that kick propelled Neptune into the Kuiper belt before the planet settled into its current nearly circular orbit, its gravity could have caused the orbits of several objects like 2000 CR105 to stretch into elongated trajectories. Alternatively, the comet’s orbit could be the handiwork of an as-yet-unseen planet whose mass lies somewhere between that of Earth’s moon and Mars, the researchers say. It’s likely that such an object would have coalesced in the outer solar system from the same debris that formed Neptune, Uranus, and the cores of Jupiter and Saturn, Holman notes... If the proposed planet is as massive as Mars, it would have to lie some 200 AU from the sun — about 7 times Neptune’s distance — Holman calculates. Were it closer, observers would have spotted it.”
[Five] Scenarios for the Origin of the Orbits of the Trans-Neptunian Objects 2000 CR105 and 2003 VB12 (Sedna)2004 The Astronomical Journal 128 2564-2576 Â doi:10.1086/424617
Alessandro Morbidelli and Harold F. Levison
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1538-3881/128/5/2564
http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1538-3881/128/5/2564/204131.web.pdf
