#11
|
|||
|
|||
'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
|
|||
|
|||
'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
|
|||
|
|||
'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
|
|||
|
|||
'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
|
|||
|
|||
'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 | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Oumuamua passes Earth | Hägar | Misc | 1 | November 27th 17 11:37 PM |
'Oumuamua | Richard D. Saam | Research | 3 | November 27th 17 09:08 PM |