A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

'Oumuamua



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 4th 17, 04:41 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Mike_Duffy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 'Oumuamua

On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 07:38:01 -0700, Chris L Peterson wrote:

Not sure what you mean by this. There is no course change


It was poor phrasing. What I called 'course change' is the angle between
the incoming & outgoing straight-line approximations of the hyperbola.
  #12  
Old December 4th 17, 06:50 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Paul Schlyter[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,344
Default 'Oumuamua

On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 10:41:45 -0500, Mike_Duffy
wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 07:38:01 -0700, Chris L Peterson wrote:


Not sure what you mean by this. There is no course change


It was poor phrasing. What I called 'course change' is the angle

between
the incoming & outgoing straight-line approximations of the

hyperbola.

And that follows directly from elementary celestial mechanics,
nothing suspicious here.
  #13  
Old December 4th 17, 10:39 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Mike_Duffy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 'Oumuamua

On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 18:50:12 +0100, Paul Schlyter wrote:

And that follows directly from elementary celestial mechanics,
nothing suspicious here.


What is suspicious was that the course change was acute vs obtuse. In other
words, a random distribution of incoming velocities would give greater
chance of objects passing so far from the Sun that their trajectory in and
out are almost co-linear. (i.e their velocity is barely affected.)

The consenus here seems to be that such objects are, in fact, more
prevalent. We just cannot observe them unless they do pass close to the
sun.
  #14  
Old December 5th 17, 12:39 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris L Peterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,007
Default 'Oumuamua

On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 16:39:39 -0500, Mike_Duffy
wrote:

The consenus here seems to be that such objects are, in fact, more
prevalent. We just cannot observe them unless they do pass close to the
sun.


We're more likely to observe them if they're brighter, and being
closer to the Sun helps in that regard. But generally, no, it
shouldn't make any difference if they're particularly close to the
Sun. Just being in the inner part of the Solar System (roughly, inside
the orbit of Jupiter) should be all that really makes much difference.
  #15  
Old December 5th 17, 10:05 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Paul Schlyter[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,344
Default 'Oumuamua

On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 16:39:39 -0500, Mike_Duffy
wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 18:50:12 +0100, Paul Schlyter wrote:


And that follows directly from elementary celestial mechanics,
nothing suspicious here.


What is suspicious was that the course change was acute vs obtuse.

In other
words, a random distribution of incoming velocities would give

greater
chance of objects passing so far from the Sun that their trajectory

in and
out are almost co-linear. (i.e their velocity is barely affected.)


The consenus here seems to be that such objects are, in fact, more
prevalent. We just cannot observe them unless they do pass close to

the
sun.


Sure - but there's still nothing to be suspicious about.
 




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
Oumuamua passes Earth Hägar Misc 1 November 28th 17 12:37 AM
'Oumuamua Richard D. Saam Research 3 November 27th 17 10:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:44 PM.


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.