APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 31)

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) :ssmile: :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol2: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :roll: :wink: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen:
View more smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 31)

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by MargaritaMc » Tue Apr 01, 2014 9:38 am

Anthony Barreiro wrote: It must be difficult to write brief captions that are engaging and accessible to a casual reader without any specialized knowledge or jargon, but that will also stand up to the scrutiny of readers armed with an abundance of both knowledge and jargon.
RJN has posted recently regarding this in the Handbook
http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=33201

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by neufer » Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:24 am

metamorphmuses wrote:
I wrote:
{snip}it's actually for farthest perihelion.{snip}
... a while back, and then it had to be hashed out back and forth anyway... :roll:
There is still the debate on whether it is the farthest perihelion or the furthest perihelion.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by metamorphmuses » Tue Apr 01, 2014 6:52 am

I wrote:{snip}it's actually for farthest perihelion.{snip}
... a while back, and then it had to be hashed out back and forth anyway... :roll:

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Nitpicker » Tue Apr 01, 2014 6:06 am

ronherren wrote:Ok, so if the distance we can see is increasing, all we know for certain is that there are objects at those distances that give off light. Maybe it tells us when we were created, but has no bearing on when the universe became.
I was with you right up to the first comma.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by ronherren » Tue Apr 01, 2014 5:36 am

Ok, so if the distance we can see is increasing, all we know for certain is that there are objects at those distances that give off light. Maybe it tells us when we were created, but has no bearing on when the universe became.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by neufer » Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:40 pm

Anthony Barreiro wrote:
That makes sense. It must be difficult to write brief captions that are engaging and accessible to a casual reader without any specialized knowledge or jargon, but that will also stand up to the scrutiny of readers armed with an abundance of both knowledge and jargon.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Anthony Barreiro » Mon Mar 31, 2014 7:39 pm

RJN wrote:
neufer wrote: The text should make clear that it is the furthest known perihelion.
OK I updated the text again (but not the title). The second sentence now makes "orbit" more clear, in the context of the explanation and title, by starting "In terms of how close it will ever get to the Sun..."

- RJN
That makes sense. It must be difficult to write brief captions that are engaging and accessible to a casual reader without any specialized knowledge or jargon, but that will also stand up to the scrutiny of readers armed with an abundance of both knowledge and jargon.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Chris Peterson » Mon Mar 31, 2014 7:07 pm

neufer wrote:The Sun can be said to have multiple rings;
No, it can't. There's no reasonable justification to call the asteroid belt (or components of the asteroid belt) rings. Likewise for the scattered disc, or anything else. Three things characterize ring systems: high density, very high radius-to-thickness ratio, and zero-eccentricity components. Nothing in the Solar System comes close to having those features with respect to the Sun.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by neufer » Mon Mar 31, 2014 6:59 pm

BMAONE23 wrote:
MarkBour wrote:
Does the Sun have rings?
Both the Main Asteroid Belt and Kuiper Belt might be viewed as Rings around the Sun with Jupiter and Neptune as shepherding Planets maintaining their respective Outer and Inner boundaries anthough they are more Toroids than Rings
  • The Sun can be said to have multiple rings; e.g.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesta_family wrote:
[img3="The Vesta or Vestian family of asteroids is a large & prominent grouping of mostly V-type asteroids ("vestoids") in the inner asteroid belt in the vicinity of 4 Vesta."]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... family.png[/img3]
<<The Vestian asteroids consist of 4 Vesta, the second-most-massive of all asteroids (mean diameter of 530 km), and many small asteroids below 10 km diameter. The brightest of these, 1929 Kollaa and 2045 Peking, have an absolute magnitude of 12.2, which would give them a radius of about 7.5 km assuming the same high albedo as 4 Vesta. The family originated from an impact on asteroid 4 Vesta, with the giant south-polar crater the likely impact site. The family are thought to be the source of the HED meteorites. The Vesta family also includes a few J-type asteroids (related to the V-type), which are thought to have come from the deeper layers of Vesta's crust, and are similar to the diogenite meteorites. In August 2007, a study of zircon crystals in an Antarctic meteorite believed to have originated from 4 Vesta suggested that it, and by extension the rest of the asteroid belt, had formed rather quickly, within ten million years of the Solar System's origin.

The Zappala 1995 analysis found 235 core members. A search of a recent proper-element database (AstDys) for 96944 minor planets in 2005 yielded 6051 objects (about 6% of the total) lying within the Vesta-family region.>>

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Chris Peterson » Mon Mar 31, 2014 6:41 pm

neufer wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census wrote:
<<A census is the procedure of systematically acquiring and recording information about the members of a given population. The word is of Latin origin; during the Roman Republic, the census was a list that kept track of all adult males fit for military service.

A census is often construed as the opposite of a sample as its intent is to count everyone in a population rather than a fraction. However, population censuses relies on a sampling frame to count the population. This is the only way to be sure that everyone has been included as otherwise those not responding would not be followed up on and individuals could be missed. The fundamental premise of a census is that the population is not known and a new estimate is to be made by the analysis of primary data.>>
I think my meaning was clear. But if you'd prefer, I can say that Gaia will not provide an adequate sampling frame to allow us to count the members of the Solar System.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by neufer » Mon Mar 31, 2014 6:37 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
neufer wrote:
BDanielMayfield wrote:
What will it take to get a reasonably complete census of our Sun’s planetary family?
Gaia (with its magnitude +20 sensitivity)
should do a good senseless census job for:
It will certainly add to the data. But it doesn't come close to allowing a complete statistical census of the Solar System.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census wrote:
<<A census is the procedure of systematically acquiring and recording information about the members of a given population. The word is of Latin origin; during the Roman Republic, the census was a list that kept track of all adult males fit for military service.

A census is often construed as the opposite of a sample as its intent is to count everyone in a population rather than a fraction. However, population censuses relies on a sampling frame to count the population. This is the only way to be sure that everyone has been included as otherwise those not responding would not be followed up on and individuals could be missed. The fundamental premise of a census is that the population is not known and a new estimate is to be made by the analysis of primary data.>>

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Chris Peterson » Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:42 pm

who?me? wrote:
neufer wrote:
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Gaia/Spinning_in_space wrote:
[..]
To achieve its mission the spacecraft is spinning slowly, sweeping its two telescopes across the entire celestial sphere to make four complete rotations per day. Gaia’s telescopes point at two different portions of the sky, separated by a constant 106.5°. Therefore, objects arrive in the second field of view 106.5 minutes after they are observed in the first.

[..]
Huh? Wouldn't that be 106'30" * 240 minutes / 360' = 71 minutes?
It makes one complete revolution in 1/4 day. Its rotation rate is 360° x 4 / day, or 1° per minute. If the orientation is such that the two telescopes sweep the same line through the sky (which is the case), a 106.5° separation means a 106.5 minute difference.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by who?me? » Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:34 pm

neufer wrote:
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Gaia/Spinning_in_space wrote:
[..]
To achieve its mission the spacecraft is spinning slowly, sweeping its two telescopes across the entire celestial sphere to make four complete rotations per day. Gaia’s telescopes point at two different portions of the sky, separated by a constant 106.5°. Therefore, objects arrive in the second field of view 106.5 minutes after they are observed in the first.

[..]
Huh? Wouldn't that be 106'30" * 240 minutes / 360' = 71 minutes?

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by BMAONE23 » Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:14 pm

Both the Main Asteroid Belt and Kuiper Belt might be viewed as Rings around the Sun with Jupiter and Neptune as shepherding Planets maintaining their respective Outer and Inner boundaries anthough they are more Toroids than Rings

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by RJN » Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:12 pm

neufer wrote: The text should make clear that it is the furthest known perihelion.
OK I updated the text again (but not the title). The second sentence now makes "orbit" more clear, in the context of the explanation and title, by starting "In terms of how close it will ever get to the Sun..."

- RJN

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Chris Peterson » Mon Mar 31, 2014 4:26 pm

MarkBour wrote:Does the Sun have rings?
No.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by MarkBour » Mon Mar 31, 2014 4:21 pm

Does the Sun have rings?

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Chris Peterson » Mon Mar 31, 2014 3:22 pm

neufer wrote:Gaia (with its magnitude +20 sensitivity) should do a good senseless census job for:
It will certainly add to the data. But it doesn't come close to allowing a complete statistical census of the Solar System.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by neufer » Mon Mar 31, 2014 3:16 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
BDanielMayfield wrote:
What will it take to get a reasonably complete census of our Sun’s planetary family?
More data. We haven't found enough bodies beyond Pluto yet to use statistics to estimate the actual count. And we're still lacking in the technology to collect that data, since the Oort Cloud remains largely beyond our capability to detect. That will require large, space-based IR telescopes. So we're probably still looking a few decades from now.
Gaia (with its magnitude +20 sensitivity) should do a good senseless census job for:
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Gaia/Spinning_in_space wrote: <<Gaia’s mission relies on the systematic and repeating observation of star positions in two fields of view. As the detectors repeatedly measure the position of each celestial object, they will detect any changes in the object’s motion through space.

To achieve its mission the spacecraft is spinning slowly, sweeping its two telescopes across the entire celestial sphere to make four complete rotations per day. Gaia’s telescopes point at two different portions of the sky, separated by a constant 106.5°. Therefore, objects arrive in the second field of view 106.5 minutes after they are observed in the first.

Meanwhile its spin axis precesses around the Sun with a period of about 63 days, allowing different parts of the sky to be scanned. This scanning strategy builds up an interlocking grid of positions, providing absolute – rather than relative – values of the stellar positions and motions.

The spacecraft spin axis makes an angle of 45° with the Sun direction, ensuring that the payload is shaded from the Sun, but that the solar arrays can still produce electricity efficiently.>>

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by neufer » Mon Mar 31, 2014 3:02 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
RJN wrote:
The APOD text has been updated to say that 2012 VP113 has the furthest known orbit in the Solar System. Of natural bodies that is. I apologize for the oversight. - RJN
I'm not really sure how to interpret "orbit" here. Furthest known aphelion or perihelion? And certainly, we know of many comets with more distant aphelions than 2012 VP113. It's hard to be terse and still deal accurately with the many classes of Solar System bodies orbiting the Sun.
The text should make clear that it is the furthest known perihelion.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Chris Peterson » Mon Mar 31, 2014 2:30 pm

RJN wrote:The APOD text has been updated to say that 2012 VP113 has the furthest known orbit in the Solar System. Of natural bodies that is. I apologize for the oversight. - RJN
I'm not really sure how to interpret "orbit" here. Furthest known aphelion or perihelion? And certainly, we know of many comets with more distant aphelions than 2012 VP113. It's hard to be terse and still deal accurately with the many classes of Solar System bodies orbiting the Sun.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by RJN » Mon Mar 31, 2014 2:18 pm

The APOD text has been updated to say that 2012 VP113 has the furthest known orbit in the Solar System. Of natural bodies that is. I apologize for the oversight. - RJN

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Chris Peterson » Mon Mar 31, 2014 2:07 pm

BDanielMayfield wrote:What will it take to get a reasonably complete census of our Sun’s planetary family?
More data. We haven't found enough bodies beyond Pluto yet to use statistics to estimate the actual count. And we're still lacking in the technology to collect that data, since the Oort Cloud remains largely beyond our capability to detect. That will require large, space-based IR telescopes. So we're probably still looking a few decades from now.

Re: APOD: 2012 VP113: A New Furthest Known in... (2014 Mar 3

by Keyman » Mon Mar 31, 2014 1:50 pm

Kepler, who was Brahe's assistant during his time in Prague, believed that the comet's behavior and existence was proof enough to displace the theory of celestial spheres, although this view turned out to be overly optimistic about the pace of change.
Can we all chip in and buy Wikipedia a sarcasm font... :wink:

Iacta est alea

by neufer » Mon Mar 31, 2014 1:15 pm

WolfmanSF wrote:
geckzilla wrote:
pkr wrote:
Isn't Voyager 1 [at a distance of about 127.22 AU] the furthest known object in the Solar System?
You could get nitpicky on this. Voyager 1 has been declared to have entered interstellar space. You could say some other man made probe is the farthest known object, sure. But in this context we are only interested in natural bodies orbiting the sun.
Although their perihelion is only 38.3 AU, Eris and Dysnomia are currently the most distant known [natural] bodies in the Solar System (aside from comets) at 96.4 AU.
  • Comets, Popular Culture, and the Birth of Modern Cosmology By Sara J. Schechner wrote:
    Queen Elizabeth's court astrologer John Dee warned her NOT to gaze upon the Great COMET of 1577;
    Elizabeth boldly declared "Iacta est alea" and approached the window.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Comet_of_1577 wrote: <<The Great Comet of 1577 (official designation: C/1577 V1) was a comet that passed close to Earth during the year 1577 AD. It was viewed by people all over Europe, including the famous Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe and Turkish astronomer Taqi ad-Din. From his observations of the comet, Brahe was able to discover that comets and similar objects travel above the Earth's atmosphere. The best-fit using JPL Horizons suggests that the comet is currently about 320 AU from the Sun (based on 24 of Brahe's observations spanning 74 days from 13 November 1577 to 26 January 1578).

Tycho Brahe, who is said to have first viewed the comet slightly before sunset on November 13 after having returned from a day of fishing, was the most distinguished observer and documenter of the comet's passing. Sketches found in one of Brahe's notebooks seem to indicate that the comet may have travelled close to Venus. These sketches depict the Earth at the centre of the solar system, with the sun and moon in orbit and the other planets revolving around the Sun. Despite these misconceptions on Brahe's part, Brahe left behind thousands of very precise measurements he made of the comet's path, and these findings contributed to Johannes Kepler's theorising of the laws of planetary motion and realisation that the planets moved in elliptical orbits. Kepler, who was Brahe's assistant during his time in Prague, believed that the comet's behavior and existence was proof enough to displace the theory of celestial spheres, although this view turned out to be overly optimistic about the pace of change.

Brahe's discovery that the comet's coma faced away from the sun was also significant. One failing Brahe had in his measurements was in exactly how far out of the atmosphere the comet was, and he was unable to supply meaningful and correct figures for this distance; however, he was, at least, successful in proving that the comet was beyond the orbit of the moon about the Earth, and, further to this, was probably near three times further away. He did this by comparing the position of the comet in the night sky where he observed it (the island Hven, near Copenhagen) with the position observed by Thadaeus Hagecius (Tadeáš Hájek) in Prague at the same time, giving deliberate consideration to the movement of the Moon. It was discovered that, while the comet was in approximately the same place for both of them, the Moon was not, and this meant that the comet was much further out.

Brahe's finding that comets were heavenly objects, while widely accepted, was the cause of a great deal of debate up until and during the seventeenth century, with many theories circulating within the astronomical community. Galileo claimed that comets were optical phenomena, and that this made their parallaxes impossible to measure. However, his hypothesis was not accepted.>>

Top