|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
| |
||
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
Dev Hardware Forums Sponsor:
|
|
|
August 19th, 2006, 11:40 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'd say if it has a natural sattelite, it's a planet.
Otherwise it's just a satellite of a star.....which is technically what "planets" are.
__________________
 ...yeah you know you like that
|
|
August 19th, 2006, 09:18 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
What do you call a natural object that obits a moon?
A moon-moon?
__________________
Asus model G50Vt SP. Laptop with Vista OS 64/32/(XP soon), Intel Centrino 2 Duo Mobile processor p8400 2.26GHz, Nvidia’s GeForce 9800M GT Graphics Card , RAM 4G 800 Mhz RAM and 2 HDDs 320G 7200RPM 
|
|
August 19th, 2006, 09:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
got any in existence?
Probably the natural sattelite of a moon. "moon" is just a term used to define anything that orbits a plenet. that's not mane-made of course. makes it easier for joe schmoe to say "moon" then "satellite". sa-tah-wha? moon. aaah, that's easier.
|
|
August 20th, 2006, 04:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
What about asteroids? A lot of them have moons also. See partial list below. Note 1: Pluto is now known to have 3 moons. Note 2: Asteroids and comets are hard to distinguish. Many asteroids are probably comets in a dormant state. A comet may just be an asteroid with a certain composition and density. Note 3: Besides Pluto two asteroids have at least two moons. Code:
Name of Diameter of Name of Diameter of Semimajor Orbital
Asteroid Asteroid (km) Moon Moon (km) Axis (km) Period (days)
Pluto 2,320 Charon 1,206 19,640 6.387
Hydra 130 64,780 38.207
Nix 100 ` 48,700 24.856
26308) 1998 SM165 238 S/2001 (26308) 1 78 11,310 130
(47171) 1999 TC36 379 S/2001 (47171) 1 142 7,720 50.4
(66391) 1999 KW4 1.2 S/2001 (66391) 1 0.36 2.6 0.758
2003 EL61 1,400 S/2005 (2003 EL61) 1 310 49,500 49.12
S/2005 (2003 EL61) 2 170 39,300 34.7
90 Antiope A 110 90 Antiope B 110 170 0.689
1862 Apollo 1.7 S/2005 (1862) 1 0.08 3
3749 Balam 7 S/2002 (3749) 1 1.5 310 110
1313 Berna 15 S/2004 (1313) 1 15 16 1.061
107 Camilla 223 S/2001 (107) 1 9 1,235 3.71
4492 Debussy 10 S/2004 (4492) 1 10 1.109
3671 Dionysus 1.5 S/1997 (3671) 1 0.4 2.2 1.155
130 Elektra 182 S/2003 (130) 1 4 1,252 3.92
283 Emma 148 S/2003 (283) 1 12 596 3.36
1509 Esclangona 12 S/2003 (1509) 1 4 140 12
45 Eugenia 215 Petit-Prince 13 1,190 4.766
854 Frostia 14 S/2004 (854) 1 15 1.572
69230 Hermes 0.4 S/2003 (69230) 1 0.4 1 0.579
121 Hermione 240 S/2002 (121) 1 18 768 2.582
379 Huenna 92 S/2003 (379) 1 7 3,400 80.8
243 Ida 60 Dactyl 1.6 108 1.54
22 Kalliope 181 Linus 38 1,065 3.59
809 Lundia 15 S/2005 (809) 1
Patroclus 122 Menoetius 113 680 4.283
Pulcova 137 S/2000 (762) 1 20 810 4
87 Sylvia 287 Remus 7 706 1.379
Romulus 18 1,356 3.65
1089 Tama 11 S/2003 (1089) 1 8 11 0.685
__________________
ASUS M4N82 Deluxe | AMD Phenom II X4 955 | Corsair TWIN2X4096-6400C5 (2x2GB) | PNY GeForce GTS 250 (1GB) | Seagate 300GB/750GB | Memorex 20x DVD/RW | Windows 7 Ultimate ASUS A7N8X Deluxe | Athlon XP 2800+ | Zalman CNPS7000A-Cu | 2x512MB Corsair XMS PC2700 | GeForce FX5900 | Maxtor 200/250GB | LiteOn 52x CD/RW | Memorex 16x DVD/RW | Windows XP Pro SP3
|
|
August 20th, 2006, 04:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
And does not one of the moons of jupiter have a moon?
|
|
August 20th, 2006, 05:06 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Jupiter SHOULD have been a star. It's not big enough though.
Then how about calling classefied things as planets, then as whatever they used to be. Like calling everyone human (their general name, like asteroid or satellite) but then with races like African or Japanese (planet).
|
|
August 20th, 2006, 05:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Not that I know of. It would be difficult to maintain with all the perturbations in the existing Jupiter system. Currently Jupiter has at least 63 moons. An interesting thing I did not mention in my previous post was how astronomers were able to make such strides in finding the moons of the asteroids. The Hubble Space Telescope helped a little but the majority of the work was done using ground-based telescopes. In the last few decades astronomers have been using what is called adaptive optics. Astronomers use lasers to sample to atmosphere above the telescope to find out what the perturbations are. They use this information in real-time to move actuators underneath the telescopes main mirror to change its shape to cancel out the distortions from atmospheric turbulance. This has worked out so well that many times the largest earth-based telescopes are able to outperform even the Hubble Space Telescope for solar system observations.
|
|
August 20th, 2006, 05:16 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Besides, isn't hubble scanning the Americ- I mean the terrorists?
|
|
August 20th, 2006, 05:40 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The Hubble can not be used for ground observations. However there are many other spy satellites that have similar optics that are designed for such work. An example is the KH-12 reconnaissance satellite. It is 4.5 meters in diameter and is over 15 meters long. Its mirror is probaly as large or larger than the Hubbles' 2.4 meter mirror. It has a maximum resolution somewhere between 4 and 6 inches.
|
|
August 20th, 2006, 06:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I rather loved Enemy of the State...
But we digress.
|
|
August 20th, 2006, 06:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The easiest way to fix this whole mess is to make a rule that says that:
1. Any natural object that has a primary orbit around a Star and is larger than Mercury the first planet of our Solar System is a Planet. 1a. Any natural object that has a primary orbit around a Star and is smaller than Mercury the first planet of our Solar System is a Asteroid ( includes comets as there is no difference ) 2. Any natural object that has a primary orbit around a Planet and with a diameter of greater than 100km is a Moon, objects smaller classed as space debris. 3. Any natural object that has a primary orbit around a Moon and with a diameter of greater than 100km is a Moon-let of that Moon objects smaller classed as space debris. Last edited by CYMARTINDALE : August 20th, 2006 at 06:09 PM.
|
|
August 20th, 2006, 06:04 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
mars is 4th, and rather cold because of it .
__________________
Everyone seems to have one of these nower days...
 
|
|
August 24th, 2006, 10:20 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Final outcome--
The IAU therefore resolves that planets and other bodies in our Solar System be defined into three distinct categories in the following way: (1) A planet is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. (2) A dwarf planet is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, (c) has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit, and (d) is not a satellite. (3) All other objects orbiting the Sun shall be referred to collectively as "Small Solar System Bodies". Pluto would be considered a dwarf planet under the above resolution, and similar objects called "plutonian objects."
__________________
Ask Questions the Smart Way  "In front of a monitor is a dangerous place from which to view the world." --Terri Wells Enable BSOD: Control Panel/Systems, Advanced Tab, hit the Settings button under Startup and Recovery, and under the System Failure area, uncheck the Automatically Restart checkbox.
|
|
August 24th, 2006, 10:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Sounds good. I didn't even think about gravity in calling something a planet.
|
|
August 24th, 2006, 11:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Wait, shouldn't the planet be the one that is not the sattelite, and not the other way around? I'm guessing that you got that reversed, otherwise I'm confused. lol
I do have one question, though: what is a sattelite. This means we have defined Pluto and Charon as sattelites, if we now consider it a dwarf planet. In any case, it's a good definition in my very humble opinion
__________________
 Have a computer? Want to save lives? It's easier than you think! Join DevHardware's Folding team today!
|
|
| Viewing: Dev Hardware Forums > GENERAL GooSH!™ > Science > So... how many planets, again? |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Del.icio.us
Digg
Google
Spurl
Blink
Furl
Simpy
Y! MyWeb
Linear Mode
