Sedna is NOT 2004 DW!

So after the dust has settled somewhat we now know that there are
_two_ new large beyond Pluto objects:

2003 VB 12 - 'Sedna',
2004 DW - not named?

And they are both 1800 km in diameter or thereabout???
Sedna is much futher out, up to 900 AU and on a much more elliptical
orbit.
The BIG question now is; are there now two new planets in the solar
system, or still 9??

Still somewhat confused,
Bjørn Sørheim


--------------------------------------------------------
Anti-spam: Replace 'geo' with 'online' for direct e-mail
--------------------------------------------------------

In article , ( Bjørn
Sørheim ) wrote:

The BIG question now is; are there now two new planets in the solar
system, or still 9??

Still only 8 planets, Mercury through Neptune. Pluto, Sedna, Quoar,
etc all formed from different mechanism and in a different places than
the classical planets.

There are two questions here, how many objects larger than some size
orbit the sun? That answer is not know for the smaller sizes. The
other question, "How many existing large objects formed using the same
mechanism and in the same location ( neo-solar accretion disk ) as the
Earth" has a well known answer, eight.

Dark skies,

tom

--
We have discovered a therapy ( NOT a cure )
for the common cold. Play tuba for an hour.

"Tom Kirke" a écrit dans le message de
...
In article , ( Bjørn
Sørheim ) wrote:

The BIG question now is; are there now two new planets in the solar
system, or still 9??

Still only 8 planets, Mercury through Neptune. Pluto, Sedna, Quoar,
etc all formed from different mechanism and in a different places than
the classical planets.

There are two questions here, how many objects larger than some size
orbit the sun? That answer is not know for the smaller sizes. The
other question, "How many existing large objects formed using the same
mechanism and in the same location ( neo-solar accretion disk ) as the
Earth" has a well known answer, eight.

Dark skies,


Dark Tom. Quite dark. We know nothing about
those places, so far away from us. It is dark
out there.

How much mass is there? The Pioneer spacecraft
sensed a very light drag. Maybe there is gas out
there, not only planets.

In message , jacob navia
writes


Dark Tom. Quite dark. We know nothing about
those places, so far away from us. It is dark
out there.

How much mass is there? The Pioneer spacecraft
sensed a very light drag. Maybe there is gas out
there, not only planets.

It did? If you're referring to the "anomalous acceleration", the Pioneer
results can't be explained by simple drag, and the limits on the amount
of dust and gas have come down recently, though there's still room for a
lot of Sedna's.
--
Save the Hubble Space Telescope!
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

In article , "jacob navia"
wrote:

How much mass is there? The Pioneer spacecraft
sensed a very light drag. Maybe there is gas out
there, not only planets.

There is certainly some gas and lots of other little things in
trans-Neptonian space.

Does anybody have a recent estimate ( & reference ) for the total
mass of the Kuiper belt? For the Oort cloud? I suspect that both
will total less than the classical planets.

Dark skies,

tom

PS Does anybody have a reference to where the density of the
outer solar system matches the local ISM?

--
We have discovered a therapy ( NOT a cure )
for the common cold. Play tuba for an hour.

"Jonathan Silverlight" a
écrit dans le message de ...
In message , jacob navia
writes


Dark Tom. Quite dark. We know nothing about
those places, so far away from us. It is dark
out there.

How much mass is there? The Pioneer spacecraft
sensed a very light drag. Maybe there is gas out
there, not only planets.

It did? If you're referring to the "anomalous acceleration", the Pioneer
results can't be explained by simple drag,

Well the author of the article said that it was a
possibility. He never spoke about it again

Why not?

It is traveling outwards, and the acceleration
opposes its movement what corresponds (maybe)
with a very rarefied gas stationary in the
sun reference frame. It is traveling at
27 000 km/hour. Each atom that hits it, slows
it down a bit.

and the limits on the amount
of dust and gas have come down recently, though there's still room for a
lot of Sedna's.

Gas is not so easily retained by low gravity bodies,
but since it is so cold, it could be very loosely
bounded to more massive objects.

Stars are born in cocoons made of gas. The
rests of it continue to travel with the star?

"Sedna" is not the name of a Roman god.

Why can't NASA follow naming conventions?

( Bjørn Sørheim ) wrote in message ...
So after the dust has settled somewhat we now know that there are
_two_ new large beyond Pluto objects:

2003 VB 12 - 'Sedna',
2004 DW - not named?

And they are both 1800 km in diameter or thereabout???
Sedna is much futher out, up to 900 AU and on a much more elliptical
orbit.
The BIG question now is; are there now two new planets in the solar
system, or still 9??

Still somewhat confused,
Bjørn Sørheim


--------------------------------------------------------
Anti-spam: Replace 'geo' with 'online' for direct e-mail
--------------------------------------------------------

March 15, 2004

Tom Kirke wrote:

In article , ( Bjørn
Sørheim ) wrote:


The BIG question now is; are there now two new planets in the solar
system, or still 9??



Still only 8 planets, Mercury through Neptune. Pluto, Sedna, Quoar,
etc all formed from different mechanism and in a different places than
the classical planets.

So you claim KBOs did not accrete from the solar nebula in solar orbit.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9906143

I don't think so.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

(P. Ussyliquor) wrote in
om:

"Sedna" is not the name of a Roman god.

Why can't NASA follow naming conventions?


NASA don't have the authority to name asteroids. They are named by the MPC,
which is a section of the IAU. I notice that Sedna is not on the list on
the MPC website. They do list Quaoar.

LK

SNIP

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:17:51 +0000, P. Ussyliquor wrote:

"Sedna" is not the name of a Roman god.

Why can't NASA follow naming conventions?

Why Roman Gods must have a monopoly on the names of the planets ? Varuna &
Quaoar are not Roman Gods either.


--

Gautam Majumdar

Please send e-mails to