Pluto and Neptune

Since Pluto crosses Neptunes orbit in 2 places, is it possible that at some
point Neptune
will directly influence Pluto gravitationally in a big way and actually
change it's orbit?

MA-MA wrote:
Since Pluto crosses Neptunes orbit in 2 places, is it possible that at some
point Neptune
will directly influence Pluto gravitationally in a big way and actually
change it's orbit?

Seems possible. Seems likely in the vast amount of time these two have
been circling Sol that this has already happened. Someone with time on
their hands could probably work these two backward in time to the last
time this happened.

Meanwhile, insignificant little specks of protein on the 3rd large body
from the sun have succeeded in rendering Pluto a planet without so much
as laying a finger on it. Amazing.

MA-MA wrote:
Since Pluto crosses Neptunes orbit in 2 places, is it possible that at some
point Neptune
will directly influence Pluto gravitationally in a big way and actually
change it's orbit?

No. They are interlocked in a resonant period for their orbits.

Andrea T.

MA-MA wrote:
Since Pluto crosses Neptunes orbit in 2 places, is it possible that at
some point Neptune will directly influence Pluto gravitationally in a
big way and actually change it's orbit?


Try not to be so stooopid Mick!


See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto#D...e_from_Neptune

Pluto's orbit is often described as 'crossing' that of Neptune. In fact,
Pluto's nodes (the points at which the orbit crosses the ecliptic) are
both situated outside Neptune’s orbit and are separated by a distance
of 6.4 AU (that is, over six times the distance of the Earth from the Sun).

Furthermore, due to the orbital resonance between them, Pluto executes
2 full cycles while Neptune makes 3; this means that when Neptune
reaches the 'closest' point on the orbit, Pluto remains far behind and
when Pluto in turn reaches that point, Neptune is far (over 50°) ahead.
During the following orbit of Pluto, Neptune is half an orbit away.
Consequently, *Pluto never gets closer than 30 AU to Neptune* at this point
in its orbit.

Sammy. You're a complete idiot. You should have known that rather than
rather than pointing to WIKI


"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:ZiIJg.118552$FQ1.51006@attbi_s71...
MA-MA wrote:
Since Pluto crosses Neptunes orbit in 2 places, is it possible that at
some point Neptune will directly influence Pluto gravitationally in a big
way and actually change it's orbit?

In article qJHJg.173$Hr1.129@clgrps12, MA-MA wrote:

Since Pluto crosses Neptunes orbit in 2 places,

...."crosses" os not the correct word here. "Passes above" is a more
appropriate description.

is it possible that at some point Neptune will directly influence Pluto
gravitationally in a big way and actually change it's orbit?

That's already happened, a very long time ago. Because of that, Pluto is
now in a 3:2 resonance with Neptune, and never gets close to Neptune.



"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:ZiIJg.118552$FQ1.51006@attbi_s71...
MA-MA wrote:
Since Pluto crosses Neptunes orbit in 2 places, is it possible that at
some point Neptune will directly influence Pluto gravitationally in a
big way and actually change it's orbit?

Sammy. You're a complete idiot. You should have known that rather than
rather than pointing to WIKI


In those two short sentences, you committed two gross errors:


1. Sam is far from that "complete idiot" you accuse him of being. Listen
to him, and you may learn something. If you're interested in learning,
that is.... (and if you're not interested in learning, at least shut
up, instead of insulting people).


2. Don't put down the Wikipedia! It's actually quite good in its science
articles - almost as good as the Encyclopedia Britannica. Read this
article from the respected science journal Natu

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...l/438900a.html

Perhaps you now consider me a "complete idiot" who trusts Nature... g

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

Paul Schlyter wrote:
snip

2. Don't put down the Wikipedia! It's actually quite good in its science
articles - almost as good as the Encyclopedia Britannica. Read this
article from the respected science journal Natu

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...l/438900a.html

Most of the articles I have read on Wiki have been quite good, but
Wikipedia is only as good as those who write the artilces. Where there
is disagreement on a topic, it's often only as good as those who shout
the loudest (because their opinion is in the article).

I've seen some really stupid stuff on there. The article on Bicycle
Lighting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_lighting) has been
edited over 500 times, sometimes several times a day as two or more
people fight to have their personal, view prevail.

Wikipedia is good, but you have to look below the surface.

Austin

On 1 Sep 2006 06:47:53 -0700, "AustinMN"
wrote:

Wikipedia is good, but you have to look below the surface.

Which is, of course, true for any reference.

IMO where Wikipedia does best is with scientific and technical entries-
largely because there is much less room for opinion. Facts are facts and
evidence is evidence. Very, very few scientific theories are actually
controversial, and the handful of nutcases with alternative views can't
really influence Wikipedia articles. I don't recall ever seeing a
Wikipedia article on a scientific topic that I found to have serious
problems.

An article on bicycle lighting will likely contain much more opinion.
Even so, looking through the article you link suggests that most of the
edits are minor and involve adding information, not changing it. Because
of the frequent updates and corrections, this may be the best article on
bicycle lighting on Earth! Certainly, no printed encyclopedia stands a
chance of competing with a subject like this. Hundreds of edits is a
good thing, not bad.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

In article . com,
AustinMN wrote:
Paul Schlyter wrote:
snip

2. Don't put down the Wikipedia! It's actually quite good in its science
articles - almost as good as the Encyclopedia Britannica. Read this
article from the respected science journal Natu

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...l/438900a.html

Most of the articles I have read on Wiki have been quite good, but
Wikipedia is only as good as those who write the artilces. Where there
is disagreement on a topic, it's often only as good as those who shout
the loudest (because their opinion is in the article).

Such articles are often marked as a controversial subject.

I've seen some really stupid stuff on there. The article on Bicycle
Lighting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_lighting) has been
edited over 500 times, sometimes several times a day as two or more
people fight to have their personal, view prevail.

Wikipedia is good, but you have to look below the surface.

Of course! What I objected against was the assumtion that everything
on Wikipedia is garbage. That's not the case. And in particular,
it wasn't the case for the article pointing out why the orbits of
Neptune and Pluto never get close to one another.

Austin

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

"Paul Schlyter" wrote in message
...
In article qJHJg.173$Hr1.129@clgrps12, MA-MA wrote:

Since Pluto crosses Neptunes orbit in 2 places,

..."crosses" os not the correct word here. "Passes above" is a more
appropriate description.

is it possible that at some point Neptune will directly influence Pluto
gravitationally in a big way and actually change it's orbit?

That's already happened, a very long time ago. Because of that, Pluto is
now in a 3:2 resonance with Neptune, and never gets close to Neptune.



"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:ZiIJg.118552$FQ1.51006@attbi_s71...
MA-MA wrote:
Since Pluto crosses Neptunes orbit in 2 places, is it possible that at
some point Neptune will directly influence Pluto gravitationally in a
big way and actually change it's orbit?

Sammy. You're a complete idiot. You should have known that rather than
rather than pointing to WIKI


In those two short sentences, you committed two gross errors:



Listen, maybe you don't understand. Sam never aswers questions and queries
himself, he always
poinst to other sources. Anyone can do that.