Starship Asterisk*

neufer wrote:

Click to play embedded YouTube video.

.

Chris Peterson wrote:
As a rule,

the more bodies you throw into the system,
the less stable it becomes.

ta152h0 wrote:well, flying to such a rare opportunity alignment path that doesn't repeat itself very often, a case for two space vehicles with different instruments, I would have been happy spending tax dollars to do so. Who knows what is over there.

ta152h0 wrote:
well, flying to such a rare opportunity alignment path that doesn't repeat itself very often,

ta152h0 wrote:
I would have been happy spending tax dollars to do so. Who knows what is over there.

ta152h0 wrote:getting dangerous to fly thru that system.

ta152h0 wrote:
too bad only one went on the epic trip. Something changed since the decision to build Viking 1 and Viking 2

ta152h0 wrote:
getting dangerous to fly thru that system. There are no brakes on New Horizons, right ?

Ron-Astro Pharmacist wrote:
Speaking about stable systems, I’ve never understood Lagrangian points. Do moons cause them or are they an interaction between then planet and the moon? Since we like to put satellites in orbit at them, it seems like a place where matter might accumulate. They seem like a very unusual place in the space around us. Ron

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point wrote:

[b][color=#FF0000][size=150]The New Horizons Nominal Trajectory will pass close to the [/size][/color][/b][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilda_family][b][color=#FF0000][size=150]unstable L3 Lagrangian point.[/size][/color][/b][/url]

---

<<The Lagrangian points (also Lagrange points, L-points, or libration points) are the five positions in an orbital configuration where a small object affected only by gravity can theoretically be part of a constant-shape pattern with two larger objects (such as a satellite with respect to the Earth and Moon). The Lagrange points mark positions where the combined gravitational pull of the two large masses provides precisely the centripetal force required to orbit with them. L1, L2, and L3 positions are as stable as a ball balanced on the tip of a wedge would be stable: any disturbance will toss it out of equilibrium. The L4, and L5 positions are stable as a ball at the bottom of a bowl would be stable: small perturbations will move it out of place, but it will drift back toward the center of the bowl. The Earth–Moon L4 and L5 points lie 60° ahead of and 60° behind the Moon as it orbits the Earth. They may contain interplanetary dust in what is called Kordylewski clouds; however, the Hiten spacecraft's Munich Dust Counter (MDC) detected no increase in dust during its passes through these points.>>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_sign wrote:

<<What by the 21st century is the internationally recognized symbol for peace was originally designed in 1958 for the British nuclear disarmament movement by Gerald Holtom. Holtom, an artist and designer, made it for a march from Trafalgar Square, London to the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment at Aldermaston in England.

The symbol is a combination of the semaphore signals for the letters "N" and "D," standing for "nuclear disarmament". In semaphore the letter "N" is formed by a person holding two flags in an inverted "V," and the letter "D" is formed by holding one flag pointed straight up and the other pointed straight down. Superimposing these two signs forms the shape of the centre of the peace symbol. Holtom later wrote to Hugh Brock, editor of Peace News, explaining the genesis of his idea in greater depth:

"I was in despair. Deep despair. I drew myself: the representative of an individual in despair, with hands palm outstretched outwards and downwards in the manner of Goya's peasant before the firing squad. I formalised the drawing into a line and put a circle round it".

Ken Kolsbun, a correspondent of Holtom's, says that the designer came to regret the symbolism of despair, as he felt that peace was something to be celebrated and wanted the symbol to be inverted. Eric Austen is said to have "discovered that the 'gesture of despair' motif had long been associated with 'the death of man', and the circle with 'the unborn child'." Some time later, Peggy Duff, general secretary of CND between 1958 and 1967, repeated this interpretation in an interview with a US newspaper, saying that the inside of the symbol was a "runic symbol for death of man" and the circle the "symbol for the unborn child".

Ken Kolsbun in his "biography" of the peace symbol wrote that, "In an attempt to discredit the burgeoning anti-war movement, the John Birch Society published an attack on the peace symbol in its June 1970 issue of American Opinion", calling the symbol "a manifestation of a witch's foot or crow's foot", supposedly icons of the devil in the Middle Ages. A national Republican newsletter was reported to have "noted an ominous similarity to a symbol used by the Nazis in World War II".>>

Chris Peterson wrote:
As a rule,

the more bodies you throw into the system,
the less stable it becomes.

Bergerac wrote:The Pluto-Charon association involves a binary system in which primary and secondary are locked in mutual synchronous orbit about a common center - the same side of each body faces the other perpetually. Existence of numerous moons accompanying the association clearly indicates that a binary system can remain in equilibrium while supporting an extended satellite structure.

rstevenson wrote:

nstahl wrote:
"Mythology"; an interesting word. I guess it gets used when the subscribers to the religion-become-mythology are few enough or civilized enough to not react wildly. I can't imagine getting away with a public reference to "Christian mythology" or "Muslim mythology". Maybe in five hundred years.

We're not allowed to discuss Christian mythology or Muslim mythology here at the Asterisk. But I think I may say that I've used both those phrases verbally without getting the slightest reaction. (But there are places in the world where I wouldn't say them out loud. )

http://allthingsmaine.blogspot.com/2007/03/capt-hanson-gregory-doughnut-innovator.html wrote:

---

<<The ring-shaped doughnut was allegedly invented in about 1847 by a man from Camden, Maine. In The Washington Post of Mar. 26, 1916, Captain Hanson Gregory claimed to have had his brainstorm while aboard a lime-trading ship at the age of 16.

"Now in them days we used to cut the doughnuts into diamond shapes, and also into long strips, bent in half, and then twisted. I don't think we called them doughnuts then—they was just 'fried cakes' and 'twisters.'

"Well, sir, they used to fry all right around the edges, but when you had the edges done the insides was all raw dough. And the twisters used to sop up all the grease just where they bent, and they were tough on the digestion."

"Well, I says to myself, 'Why wouldn't a space inside solve the difficulty?' I thought at first I'd take one of the strips and roll it around, then I got an inspiration, a great inspiration.

"I took the cover off the ship's tin pepper box, and—I cut into the middle of that doughnut the first hole ever seen by mortal eyes!"

"Were you pleased?"

"Was Columbus pleased? Well, sir, them doughnuts was the finest I ever tasted. No more indigestion—no more greasy sinkers—but just well-done, fried-through doughnuts."

Upon returning to Camden, Gregory taught his mother the trick. She sent several panfuls to Rockland, where they were an instant hit.

A plaque near Clam Cove in the present town of Rockport marks Captain Gregory's birthplace, which is now the parsonage of the Nativity Lutheran Church. Captain Gregory lived his last years at Sailors' Snug Harbor in Quincy, Mass., and was buried there beneath a prominent headstone in 1921.>>

nstahl wrote:"Mythology"; an interesting word. I guess it gets used when the subscribers to the religion-become-mythology are few enough or civilized enough to not react wildly. I can't imagine getting away with a public reference to "Christian mythology" or "Muslim mythology". Maybe in five hundred years.

SLYMAN69 wrote:Funny how there can be five moons to 'no planet'. You might want to make up your minds on this one. Is Pluto a planet with moons or not?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%2815810%29_1994_JR1 wrote:

[b][color=#0000FF][size=150]Diagram of generic quasi-satellite orbit[/size][/color][/b]

---

<<(15810) 1994 JR1 is a minor planet that moves around the Sun in an orbit entirely located beyond Neptune. It is the first object that was confirmed to be a quasi-satellite of Pluto.

(15810) 1994 JR1 was discovered on May 12, 1994 by M. J. Irwin and A. Zytkow with the 2.5 m Isaac Newton Telescope at the Roque de los Muchachos Observatory in the island of La Palma. It is a plutino, so it is trapped in a 2:3 mean motion resonance with Neptune, similarly to dwarf planet Pluto (the largest known plutino). It has a perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) of 34.753 AU and an aphelion (farthest distance from the Sun) of 43.722 AU, so it is moving in a relatively eccentric orbit entirely beyond Neptune. It is about 127 km in diameter.

(15810) 1994 JR1 is currently following a quasi-satellite loop around Pluto. In contrast with the cases of 2002 VE68 or (309239) 2007 RW10, the quasi-satellite state of (15810) 1994 JR1 is mainly the result of resonances with Neptune not caused by a discrete close encounter with another body. This dynamical behavior is recurrent, the object becomes a Plutonian quasi-satellite every 2 Myr and remains in that phase for nearly 350,000 years.

(15810) 1994 JR1 is moving in a very stable orbit, likely as stable as Pluto's. This suggests that it may be a primordial plutino formed around the same time Pluto itself and Charon came into existence. It is unlikely to be relatively recent debris originated in collisions within Pluto’s system or a captured object.

(15810) 1994 JR1 is currently one of Pluto's closest neighbors. In 2017, it will be only 2.7 AU from Pluto. It is currently the best known target for a flyby by the New Horizons spacecraft after its Pluto flyby in 2015, but it is hoped that still better targets will be found by then.>>