by iamlucky13 » Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:21 pm
The vivacity of the time-lapse video is definitely a different perspective on comets than I'm used to. It's pretty cool to see the tail "billowing" in the solar wind. Plus the "clouds" of presumably solar particles streaming past. Wow.
ian wrote:A friend just posed the question: if each frame in the movie spans 45 minutes then how come there is not more parallax 'drift' between the comet and the background stars?
Is it just a fortunate configuration of the comet's orbit, the spacecraft's orbit and the rotation of the spacecraft to track the comet?
I think it's simply because of the distances involved. The comet is roughly the same distance from the earth as the sun, so it takes a fair amount of motion to translate into a significant angular change. Plus, the motion of STEREO spacecraft around the sun may roughly match that of the comet, reducing the background drift. The odds of the motion being constructive rather than destructive are 50-50 (comet traveling in the same direction around the ecliptic plane as the spacecraft).
If you watch the video closely, you'll notice that not only does the comet move vertically with respect to the background stars, but it also moves horizontally relative to the saturation line, apparently reversing directions on that axis.
Also, remember that the tail of a comet does not stream behind it in the direction of travel, but rather away from the sun. As a comet makes its closest approach to the sun, the tale and the trajectory are actually 90 degrees different. The motion of the comet is deceptive.
The vivacity of the time-lapse video is definitely a different perspective on comets than I'm used to. It's pretty cool to see the tail "billowing" in the solar wind. Plus the "clouds" of presumably solar particles streaming past. Wow.
[quote="ian"]A friend just posed the question: if each frame in the movie spans 45 minutes then how come there is not more parallax 'drift' between the comet and the background stars?
Is it just a fortunate configuration of the comet's orbit, the spacecraft's orbit and the rotation of the spacecraft to track the comet? [/quote]
I think it's simply because of the distances involved. The comet is roughly the same distance from the earth as the sun, so it takes a fair amount of motion to translate into a significant angular change. Plus, the motion of STEREO spacecraft around the sun may roughly match that of the comet, reducing the background drift. The odds of the motion being constructive rather than destructive are 50-50 (comet traveling in the same direction around the ecliptic plane as the spacecraft).
If you watch the video closely, you'll notice that not only does the comet move vertically with respect to the background stars, but it also moves horizontally relative to the saturation line, apparently reversing directions on that axis.
Also, remember that the tail of a comet does not stream behind it in the direction of travel, but rather away from the sun. As a comet makes its closest approach to the sun, the tale and the trajectory are actually 90 degrees different. The motion of the comet is deceptive.