A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Solar
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Sun <==> Alpha Centauri gravity interactions



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 12th 04, 05:57 AM
Mike Williams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wasn't it AA Institute who wrote:
Mike Williams wrote in message news:Q9MYRBANsrQBFwP
...
Wasn't it AA Institute who wrote:

Could it be that Alpha Centauri (A+B+C) and the Sun are
gravitationally *locked* together and share a common proper motion
around the galaxy?


To be gravitationally locked, their relative velocity would need to be
less than the escape velocity of one from the other. A quick calculation
shows the relevant escape velocity to be about 81 metres/second at this
distance. The radial component of the relative velocity is about 26400
metres per second, so they're not gravitationally locked.


According to a formula I found in my spherical astronomy notes for
proper motion, the 'transverse velocity' (component of total velocity
projected *across* our line of sight) is given by:

v = 4.74 * (proper motion / parallax) km/sec, so for Alpha Centauri, v
= 4.74 * (3.7 / 0.74) = 23.7 km/sec = 5.0 AUs per year. Translating
the star's given radial velocity of -24.6 km/sec to AUs per year =
-5.5 AUs/year


Are you certain that your values for "proper motion" and "parallax" have
the correct units for the equation you're using? I use a more direct
method and get a vastly different answer.

I started with the fact that the proper motion is RA: -7.54775
acsecs/year, Dec: +0.48180 arcsecs/year and the distance is 4.3 light
years.

A light year is 9.46e15 metres.
-7.54775 arcsecs/year of RA is -0.000549399 radians/year
0.48180 arcsecs/year of Dec is 2.33583e-06 radians/year
(Note a complete circle is 24h of RA but 360d of Dec)

The transverse motions are Distance * sin(Angle), giving
-2.23484e+13 and 9.5017e+10 metres/year. Divide by the number of seconds
in a year and combine the two velocities by Pythagoras and I get the
transverse motion to be 710 km/sec = 150 AU/year.

--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure
  #12  
Old September 12th 04, 07:49 AM
AA Institute
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Grimble Gromble" wrote in message ...
"AA Institute" wrote in message
m...
So if the transverse velocity of Alpha Cen is 5.0 AUs/yr and the
radial velocity is -5.5 AUs/yr, does this mean that in 50,000 years
(272,000 AUs current distance / 5.5 AUs radial velocity) Alpha
Centauri is going to be very close to us?! Probably not, since due to
gravitational interaction with the Sun, Alpha Centauri might describe
a 'curved' trajectory as opposed to a linear one.

I've not checked your figures but assuming them to be correct: since the
transverse velocity is of the same order as the radial velocity, then by the
time the radial velocity 'would' have closed the distance between Alpha
Centauri and the Sun, the transverse velocity would have carried it just as
far at right angles and it will end up a similar distance away. The closest
approach would then be about 0.7 times the current distance.

Thanks Grim, silly me for not seeing the wood for the trees...
So the closest approach point for Alpha Centauri (around 3 LY) is
still yet to come? Hoooorrrraaayyy!!!

This could be the ideal interstellar *launch window* for the Aster-Com
starship. A future generation of Earth might face the challenging
choice of either taking this window of opportunity or declining the
offer in anticipation of another star passing by the Sun. But that's
gonna be a long, long time coming...

It would be so much easier to visualise the whole thing in a 3D diagram.

There are programs available for plotting just such things in 3D. I remember
mentioning Mathcad not too long ago! You can even allow a term for the
gravitational interaction between the stars and convince yourself that it
has little effect. I'd do it for you except I have more interesting projects
I would rather spend my time working on (no offence meant).


That's fair comment. Hey, what's the big deal with a 50,000 year
voyage inside some hollowed out gigantic boulder rolling across in the
deep, dark ocean of space toward some unknown destination
pre-programmed by your great great great grand parents? It sucks...

Also referring to memory, which, as I always remind everyone, is very dodgy,
I have a vague recollection that when the velocities of nearby stars are
compared, the stars essentially fall into two groups. Stars in our group
move pretty much in the same direction and speed as the Sun, while the other
group of stars travel in a direction and speed that is common to them and
different from ours. I believe there were other factors such as age and
composition that distinguished the two groups? I apologise if this is not
the case, however, like most things, I cannot remember my source.


No probs, really appreciate your thoughts.

One final question: interstellar navigation - how can I do it whilst
drifting in this great interstellar ocean where the shores reach out
to near eternity in every direction?

"In the extreme circumstance where no new bodies are found for meeting
projected resource requirements, the ship can turnaround and back
track towards previously charted bodies using emergency reserves. With
no magnetic fields, no bright planets, no "GPS" for relative
referencing, the minute positional shifts of nearby stars may be the
only method of interstellar navigation in the surrounding darkness of
3D space."

How can I precisely chart the *absolute* positions and ship-relative
velocities of icy comets encountered on a forward pass... then try to
re-intercept them on a reverse pass, having turned my ship around?

Abdul
  #13  
Old September 12th 04, 08:50 AM
AA Institute
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

(Brian Tung) wrote in message ...

Yes. We've said that a number of times, now.


Thanks Brian, that's awfully clear now.

What about extrasolar planet detection efforts around Alpha Centauri,
to your knowledge?


To my knowledge, such efforts have been unsuccessful in detecting planets
around alpha Centauri A, B, or C. That doesn't mean that there aren't
any planets around any of those stars--only that if there are, they are
too small (or, just conceivably, in an orbital plane that is too close to
perpendicular to our line of sight) to have been detected yet.


I've heard it once mentioned that a planet orbiting one of the stars
of a binary system can receive large doses of radiation from two stars
as opposed to one and that 'flaring' between the two suns of the
system could be common place.

Take our Sun for instance and the recent high levels of solar activity
we've seen, sending massive amounts of charged particles toward the
Earth. Now imagine if Alpha Centauri B was orbiting somewehere around
where Uranus or Neptune is in our solar system, how much of an effect
would the additional radiation from this secondary sun add to our
every day lives?

If solar type flaring occurs on Alpha Centauri A and B, I wonder if
the gravitational interactivity between the two stars would increase
this flaring disproportionately. In other words, if the two stars were
isolated and not confined in a binary setup then (radiation from A +
radiation from B) would be less than that where the two stars are
gravitationally bound as in the case of Alpha Centauri? Is it
possible that the invisible gravitational flux lines (if that's the
right way to put it?) could induce too much flaring and cause harm to
any life evolving around a planet orbiting either star?

If such flaring caused *minute* variability to the overall
brightnesses of each star, surely that would vary across the 80 year
orbital period of the system and we should perhaps see an increase
towards the periastron passage time when the stars are closest
together? I wonder if such tiny variations could in fact be tracked by
photometric equipment carried on space telescopes in orbit around
Earth like the Canadian MOST mission. etc...

Thanks,
Abdul
  #14  
Old September 12th 04, 09:33 AM
Grimble Gromble
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"AA Institute" wrote in message
om...
Take our Sun for instance and the recent high levels of solar activity
we've seen, sending massive amounts of charged particles toward the
Earth. ...

My god; it's shooting at us!
Grim


  #15  
Old September 12th 04, 09:33 AM
Grimble Gromble
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"AA Institute" wrote in message
om...
How can I precisely chart the *absolute* positions and ship-relative
velocities of icy comets encountered on a forward pass... then try to
re-intercept them on a reverse pass, having turned my ship around?

That isn't necessary. Just plant a small transmitter on the comet; that will
give you directional information. If the transmissions and receptions are
accurately timed (pulsars make excellent clocks available to all) then the
distance to the comet can be easily calculated.
Grim


  #16  
Old September 12th 04, 02:28 PM
AA Institute
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mike Williams wrote in message

Are you certain that your values for "proper motion" and "parallax" have
the correct units for the equation you're using? I use a more direct
method and get a vastly different answer.

I started with the fact that the proper motion is RA: -7.54775
acsecs/year, Dec: +0.48180 arcsecs/year and the distance is 4.3 light
years.

A light year is 9.46e15 metres.
-7.54775 arcsecs/year of RA is -0.000549399 radians/year
0.48180 arcsecs/year of Dec is 2.33583e-06 radians/year
(Note a complete circle is 24h of RA but 360d of Dec)

The transverse motions are Distance * sin(Angle), giving
-2.23484e+13 and 9.5017e+10 metres/year. Divide by the number of seconds
in a year and combine the two velocities by Pythagoras and I get the
transverse motion to be 710 km/sec = 150 AU/year.


My equation is from page 250, "Spherical Astronomy" by W.M. Smart (a
very old book from the 1960s). On page 251, he gives an example using
the star Capella, where the annual proper motion is 0.439 arc sec,
parallax 0.075 arc sec, giving a transverse velocity of 27.7 km/sec.

On that basis, I think I've got it right... unless the 3.7 arc
sec/year total proper motion figure for Alpha Centauri I'm using is
wrong?

Considering also the Sun moves through space at roughly 20 km/sec, I
think your number is a bit on the high side.

Abdul
  #17  
Old September 12th 04, 06:14 PM
Ernie Wright
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mike Williams wrote:

Are you certain that your values for "proper motion" and "parallax"
have the correct units for the equation you're using? I use a more
direct method and get a vastly different answer.


There are two errors in your calculation, both of which inflate the
component of motion in right ascension.

-7.54775 arcsecs/year of RA is -0.000549399 radians/year
(Note a complete circle is 24h of RA but 360d of Dec)


It isn't necessary to convert -7.54775 from hours:minutes:seconds to
degrees:minutes:seconds. It's already expressed as arcseconds in the
d:m:s system.

But you do have to multiply it by the cosine of Alpha Centauri's
declination. To see why, consider the surface of the Earth. Degrees
latitude (north-south) always correspond to a surface distance of about
110 km, but the surface distance for a degree of longitude depends on
the latitude. It's 110 km at the equator, where cos(lat) = 1, but
smaller than 110 km by the factor cos(lat) at other latitudes.

The declination of Alpha Centauri is -60° 50', and cos(-60° 50') is
about 0.487.

So your figure for radians/year in RA is too big by a factor of about
30: (360 / 24) * (1 / cos(-60° 50')).

The formula Abdul used is pretty standard, and simpler to apply. You
can divide by the parallax (in arcseconds) or multiply by the distance
(in parsecs).

4.74 is just a constant of proportionality that converts between AU/year
and km/s. An object at a distance of 1 parsec with a proper motion of 1
arcsecond/year has a transverse motion of 1 AU/year, or 150 million
km/year, or 4.74 km/s.

- Ernie http://home.comcast.net/~erniew

  #18  
Old September 12th 04, 07:44 PM
AA Institute
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Grimble Gromble" wrote in message ...
"AA Institute" wrote in message
om...
How can I precisely chart the *absolute* positions and ship-relative
velocities of icy comets encountered on a forward pass... then try to
re-intercept them on a reverse pass, having turned my ship around?

That isn't necessary. Just plant a small transmitter on the comet; that will
give you directional information. If the transmissions and receptions are
accurately timed (pulsars make excellent clocks available to all) then the
distance to the comet can be easily calculated.
Grim


Thanks! That's a sound idea, but I think we will be *certain* of a
nice trail of comets stretching all the way to Alpha, long before the
mission is due for launch... projected at round 2200 AD... by which
time we will have filled all the interim experience gaps necessary
with adventures on the Moon and Mars!

Now, I was going to turn this thing into a cracking BIG SCREEN MOVIE,
if only I could present my script to some 'movie' agency!

Grim, you wouldn't happen to know of any contacts in the movie
business by any chance would you? I'll share the royalties if it
helps...! LOL..

Abdul
  #19  
Old September 12th 04, 09:29 PM
Grimble Gromble
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"AA Institute" wrote in message
m...
Grim, you wouldn't happen to know of any contacts in the movie
business by any chance would you? I'll share the royalties if it
helps...! LOL..

I don't know anybody in anything.
Grim


  #20  
Old September 13th 04, 08:02 AM
AA Institute
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ernie Wright wrote:

The formula Abdul used is pretty standard, and simpler to apply. You
can divide by the parallax (in arcseconds) or multiply by the distance
(in parsecs).

4.74 is just a constant of proportionality that converts between AU/year
and km/s. An object at a distance of 1 parsec with a proper motion of 1
arcsecond/year has a transverse motion of 1 AU/year, or 150 million
km/year, or 4.74 km/s.


Oh, so that's where the 4.74 came from, I wasn't sure of its origins.

So to depart toward Alpha Centauri on a hypothetical voyage, one has
to leave the ecliptic plane of our solar system going south towards
-60° 50' declination.
Is there an easy calculation to work out how many degrees that
direction is off the ecliptic plane of our solar system?

Abdul
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sun <==> Alpha Centauri gravity interactions AA Institute Misc 50 November 1st 04 03:28 AM
Gravity as Falling Space Henry Haapalainen Science 1 September 4th 04 04:08 PM
AMBER ALPHA STAR CESAM stellar model harlod caufield Space Shuttle 0 December 27th 03 09:12 PM
AMBER ALPHA STAR CESAM stellar model harlod caufield Policy 0 December 27th 03 09:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.