Comet Holmes in Outburst (APOD 26 Oct 2007)
- orin stepanek
- Plutopian
- Posts: 8200
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
- Location: Nebraska
Comet Holmes in Outburst (APOD 26 Oct 2007)
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071026.html
I wonder why no Tail? Doesn't the solar winds normally create the cometary tail? Must be something different about this comet's atmosphere.
Orin
I wonder why no Tail? Doesn't the solar winds normally create the cometary tail? Must be something different about this comet's atmosphere.
Orin
Orin
Smile today; tomorrow's another day!
Smile today; tomorrow's another day!
Re: Comet Holmes in Outburst (APOD 2007 Oct 26)
As NASA's orbit diagram shows, the comet is approximately in opposition, so the tail will be mostly at the 'backside' of the comet. This one might not get the long sideways pointing tail. Its distance from the sun is growing, so I think the tail should be shortening with time.orin stepanek wrote:I wonder why no Tail?
- orin stepanek
- Plutopian
- Posts: 8200
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
- Location: Nebraska
This is a JAVA driven webpage that shows the comet's orbital path and current respective location. It appears to be an asteroid belt comet.
http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi?sstr=17P&orb=1
http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi?sstr=17P&orb=1
- orin stepanek
- Plutopian
- Posts: 8200
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
- Location: Nebraska
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071029.htmlJohnD wrote:Second Comet Holmes APOD, 29th Oct.
See link to "sunglasses" in last line.
Is this a hack, or has APOD a GSoH?
John
Think it will get that bright? Nice song though!
Orin
Orin
Smile today; tomorrow's another day!
Smile today; tomorrow's another day!
-
- Asternaut
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 2:06 pm
Collision?
I know this is a long-shot, but is there any possibility that it increased in brightness due to a collision? Given that it orbits in the asteroid belt, surely this is a possibility?
- Chris Peterson
- Abominable Snowman
- Posts: 18596
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
- Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
- Contact:
Re: Collision?
Of course it is possible, but I think in this case very unlikely. Collisions are rare in any case (even in the asteroid belt, where the density of objects is still extremely low), but since we know that this is at least the second time 17P/Holmes has undergone an outburst, it seems far more likely we are seeing something related to its structure or composition.mjmurraype wrote:I know this is a long-shot, but is there any possibility that it increased in brightness due to a collision? Given that it orbits in the asteroid belt, surely this is a possibility?
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
the bloody thing hit something
the bloody thing hit something. Bet you a an ice cold one. rare collisions does not imply no collisions.
Wolf Kotenberg
- Chris Peterson
- Abominable Snowman
- Posts: 18596
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
- Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
- Contact:
Re: the bloody thing hit something
I don't know how to collect on that bet! But if hitting something at all is rare, doing so twice in a century is truly unlikely. And there are perfectly reasonable mechanisms that can explain outbursts like this without requiring any sort of collision.ta152h0 wrote:the bloody thing hit something. Bet you a an ice cold one. rare collisions does not imply no collisions. :P
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
Re: the bloody thing hit something
If it did collide with an asteroid, then it's orbit will be slightly changed, and since we have been observing it for more than 40 years (8 or so orbits) it should be relatively easy to determine if it was perturbed by an asteroidal collision event. Now, on the other hand, a meteroid impact might be a possible cause as well.Chris Peterson wrote:I don't know how to collect on that bet! But if hitting something at all is rare, doing so twice in a century is truly unlikely. And there are perfectly reasonable mechanisms that can explain outbursts like this without requiring any sort of collision.ta152h0 wrote:the bloody thing hit something. Bet you a an ice cold one. rare collisions does not imply no collisions.
which part of the pulverised rock would you orbit
Which part of the pulverised rock would you follow the orbit of ? that decision could become crucial in the future if an object similar choses the earth as a target and future generations will have to deal with it.
Wolf Kotenberg
orin stepanek wrote:http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071026.html
I wonder why no Tail?
I am wondering why it appears so symmetrical, circular evenCase wrote:As NASA's orbit diagram shows, the comet is approximately in opposition, so the tail will be mostly at the 'backside' of the comet.
(although spaceweather.com calls it spherical, dunno how they know that in 3d !? )
I have read of various possibilities such as impact/collision and collapsing sink-holes/caverns but would that not require the coincidence of 'it' happening right up its 'backside' as we are viewing it ? If you see what I mean !
Would a 'side' impact still create such a circular cloud of debris ?
PS. The bad news was that I was looking at that area of the sky just the night before it all happened, nothing seen, then we had cloud and rain for several days , the good news is that it is now, finally, clear in SW England and I finally got to see the spectacle just a few days late
- Chris Peterson
- Abominable Snowman
- Posts: 18596
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
- Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
- Contact:
A spherical cloud is what you would expect from ordinary diffusion. A high velocity impact would probably produce a directed debris stream. But some sort of surface collapse, or a low speed collision (as would be expected from co-orbiting debris) would simply release material at a low speed. The low speed, especially given a rotating nucleus, would favor a spherical cloud.MalcolmP wrote:I am wondering why it appears so symmetrical, circular even
(although spaceweather.com calls it spherical, dunno how they know that in 3d !? )
I have read of various possibilities such as impact/collision and collapsing sink-holes/caverns but would that not require the coincidence of 'it' happening right up its 'backside' :-? as we are viewing it ? If you see what I mean !
Would a 'side' impact still create such a circular cloud of debris ?
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
First clear night since the news broke for me, too. Lovely sight! If friday is clear too, I might get a glimpse through a 30 cm (12") f/5 Newton.MalcolmP wrote:we had cloud and rain for several days, the good news is that it is now, finally, clear in SW England and I finally got to see the spectacle just a few days late
Chris : thanks for good explanation, I'm understanding your high vs. low speed impacts.
So far so good, but I still have a bit of a problem with the spherical theory,
if stuff is ejected (or diffuses out) at low speed it would still have the orbital velocity of the comet superimposed, so it should be ellipsoidal/sausage shaped, elongated fore and aft, but with a circular crossection as viewed from behind ?? or am I still not getting a grip on this thing ?
It is remarkably symmetric though for something that is not gravitationally bound, like a gas giant for example.
Perhaps another glass of beer might help me visualise
Case : Lucky you ! I am presently limited to 10x50 and 32x50 binos. my homemade 6" Newt is badly in need of realuminising
I'll keep my fingers and everything crossed for you for Friday !
So far so good, but I still have a bit of a problem with the spherical theory,
if stuff is ejected (or diffuses out) at low speed it would still have the orbital velocity of the comet superimposed, so it should be ellipsoidal/sausage shaped, elongated fore and aft, but with a circular crossection as viewed from behind ?? or am I still not getting a grip on this thing ?
It is remarkably symmetric though for something that is not gravitationally bound, like a gas giant for example.
Perhaps another glass of beer might help me visualise
Case : Lucky you ! I am presently limited to 10x50 and 32x50 binos. my homemade 6" Newt is badly in need of realuminising
I'll keep my fingers and everything crossed for you for Friday !
- Chris Peterson
- Abominable Snowman
- Posts: 18596
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
- Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
- Contact:
It is precisely because it carries the orbital velocity of the comet that the coma is spherical. If you take the center of the nucleus as your frame of reference, the particles move away from it in all directions but at a constant speed. Of course, the path of the nucleus is an ellipse, not a straight line, so given enough time you would expect material to be distributed along the orbit (each particle enters its own orbit, slightly faster or slower than the nucleus), but in the few days this comet has been outgassing, there hasn't been enough movement to show much asymmetry. But the nucleus does appear to be offset from the center of the coma, which may be related to its motion.MalcolmP wrote:So far so good, but I still have a bit of a problem with the spherical theory,
if stuff is ejected (or diffuses out) at low speed it would still have the orbital velocity of the comet superimposed, so it should be ellipsoidal/sausage shaped, elongated fore and aft, but with a circular crossection as viewed from behind ??
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
- orin stepanek
- Plutopian
- Posts: 8200
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
- Location: Nebraska
-
- Commander
- Posts: 807
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 2:57 pm
- Location: On a boat near Tacoma, WA, usa
- Contact:
- orin stepanek
- Plutopian
- Posts: 8200
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
- Location: Nebraska
Thanks, brill. explantion yes I see.Chris Peterson wrote:It is precisely because it carries the orbital velocity of the comet that the coma is spherical. If you take the center of the nucleus as your frame of reference, the particles move away from it in all directions but at a constant speed...
/offers Chris a pint of homebrew beer
- JohnD
- Tea Time, Guv! Cheerio!
- Posts: 1593
- Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:11 pm
- Location: Lancaster, England
Today's APOD (3/11/7) makes the point that the comet is receding, tail first, and happens to have the tail pointing directly away from Earth.
Many comets have two tails, one dust, the other plasma (?- electrically charged, anyway) that curves. If we can't see that curving tail, then Holmes doesn't have one. What does this tell us about Holmes?
JOhn
Many comets have two tails, one dust, the other plasma (?- electrically charged, anyway) that curves. If we can't see that curving tail, then Holmes doesn't have one. What does this tell us about Holmes?
JOhn