Freethought & Rationalism Archive

David Bowden · 09-11-2002, 10:32 AM

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2251386.stm" target="_blank">Just too cool.</a>

(And just so everybody knows, Fox will be airing a special next spring, exposing the upcoming Cruithne landing as a hoax...)

-David

Abacus · 09-11-2002, 11:02 AM

Holy cow! I never realized that the Earth had more than one natural satellite. Time to rev up the Apollo program again!

Abacus · 09-11-2002, 01:00 PM

Ah, I see. I did some research. Cruithne is an asteroid in a 1:1 resonance orbit with the Earth. Not really a satellite.

[ September 11, 2002: Message edited by: Abacus ]</p>

echidna · 09-11-2002, 05:26 PM

I don�t see why it isn�t a satellite. From the Merriam Webster �

2 a : a celestial body orbiting another of larger size

Strange, somehow I�d always assumed that there were dozens of these natural asteroids orbiting Earth. I�m surprised this is the first.

Brian Thompson · 09-11-2002, 06:40 PM

"That's no moon.....that's a space station. Let's get out of here!"

<a href="http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/" target="_blank">Here are some details</a> from NASA's Near-Earth Object or NEO page. Most likely a Saturn V third stage:

Analysis of J002E3's pre-capture orbit about the Sun shows that the object was always inside the Earth's orbit, and that it may have come within the Earth's vicinity in the early 1970s or late 1960s.

The future motion of J002E3 is also very interesting. A similar orbital analysis which takes into account the current orbit uncertainties shows that the object has a surprisingly large 20 percent chance of impacting the Moon in 2003. Such a lunar impact would not be unprecedented: NASA intentionally impacted five Apollo S-IVB stages on the Moon from 1970 through 1972 (Apollos 13 through 17), as an experiment to study the interior structure of the Moon.

It would be very cool if it was a captured asteroid and settled in a stable orbit. Its orbit is currently 50 days, not much more than the moon's. Forget Apollo: nowadays you could possibly send a manned crew there using a few beefed-up el cheapo Souyzes for a few hundred million dollars.

Oh no, maybe it's <a href="http://cebul.spittingangels.com/nibiru.htm" target="_blank">Niribu</a>!

Edited to complete quote from unknown source

, add second last paragraph, add Niribu link.

[ September 11, 2002: Message edited by: Brian Thompson ]</p>

gabalski · 09-12-2002, 09:39 AM

Will the real Cruithne please stand up.

Now I'm confused. I've read about Cruithne before here: <a href="http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/second_moon_991029.html" target="_blank">http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/second_moon_991029.html</a>
which says it's in a horseshoe shaped 770 year orbit around the Earth.

When I saw Abacus' second message above, I decided to refresh my memory and found this site: <a href="http://burtleburtle.net/bob/physics/cruithne.html" target="_blank">http://burtleburtle.net/bob/physics/cruithne.html</a>
which says Cruithne is an asteroid orbiting the sun in 1:1 resonance with Earth.

Are they 2 different "heavenly" bodies with the same name? Someone please clarify.

Mike

[Edited to Add]

Please ignore the above question.

I found the following site which describes in great detail the very complicated orbit of Cruithne. It is apparently a combination of the two orbit I listed above.

<a href="http://www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/3753.html" target="_blank">http://www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/3753.html</a>

[ September 12, 2002: Message edited by: gabalski ]</p>

B. H. Manners · 09-12-2002, 05:34 PM

If Cruithne's orbit extends all the way out to Mars (in the demos) why has Mars not captured it (or Mercury for that matter)?

Is it possible that Cruithnes may have been Neith and or Vulcan, the supposed moons of Venus and mercury that astronomers back in the nineteenth century spent a lot of time trying to find?

Brian Thompson · 09-13-2002, 12:08 PM

Cruithne shares Earth's orbit around the sun hence the term "co-orbital" to describe its motion, but it can't really be called another moon of Earth's. Sometimes Cruithne is on the opposite side of the sun and cannot even be seen from Earth.

Moons orbit planets. It's that simple.

ajm51987 · 09-13-2002, 02:39 PM

Three moons?? Dang I dident even know we had two!

American Agnostic · 09-14-2002, 12:48 PM

Acutually, NASA now thinks that the newly disvocered "moon" is just a spent thrid stage form the Apollo Program (probibly from Apollo 12)

<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/09/13/mistaken.moon/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/09/13/mistaken.moon/index.html</a>

09-11-2002, 10:32 AM	#1
David Bowden Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Everywhere I go. Yes, even there. Posts: 607	Do YOU know how many moons the earth has? <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2251386.stm" target="_blank">Just too cool.</a> (And just so everybody knows, Fox will be airing a special next spring, exposing the upcoming Cruithne landing as a hoax...) -David

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-11-2002, 11:02 AM	#2
Abacus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Dakota Posts: 2,214	Holy cow! I never realized that the Earth had more than one natural satellite. Time to rev up the Apollo program again!

09-11-2002, 01:00 PM	#3
Abacus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Dakota Posts: 2,214	Ah, I see. I did some research. Cruithne is an asteroid in a 1:1 resonance orbit with the Earth. Not really a satellite. [ September 11, 2002: Message edited by: Abacus ]</p>

09-11-2002, 05:26 PM	#4
echidna Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,832	I don�t see why it isn�t a satellite. From the Merriam Webster � 2 a : a celestial body orbiting another of larger size Strange, somehow I�d always assumed that there were dozens of these natural asteroids orbiting Earth. I�m surprised this is the first.

09-11-2002, 06:40 PM	#5
Brian Thompson Junior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: One day offworld Posts: 92	"That's no moon.....that's a space station. Let's get out of here!" <a href="http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/" target="_blank">Here are some details</a> from NASA's Near-Earth Object or NEO page. Most likely a Saturn V third stage: Analysis of J002E3's pre-capture orbit about the Sun shows that the object was always inside the Earth's orbit, and that it may have come within the Earth's vicinity in the early 1970s or late 1960s. The future motion of J002E3 is also very interesting. A similar orbital analysis which takes into account the current orbit uncertainties shows that the object has a surprisingly large 20 percent chance of impacting the Moon in 2003. Such a lunar impact would not be unprecedented: NASA intentionally impacted five Apollo S-IVB stages on the Moon from 1970 through 1972 (Apollos 13 through 17), as an experiment to study the interior structure of the Moon. It would be very cool if it was a captured asteroid and settled in a stable orbit. Its orbit is currently 50 days, not much more than the moon's. Forget Apollo: nowadays you could possibly send a manned crew there using a few beefed-up el cheapo Souyzes for a few hundred million dollars. Oh no, maybe it's <a href="http://cebul.spittingangels.com/nibiru.htm" target="_blank">Niribu</a>! Edited to complete quote from unknown source , add second last paragraph, add Niribu link. [ September 11, 2002: Message edited by: Brian Thompson ]</p>

09-12-2002, 09:39 AM	#6
gabalski Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Baltimore, Ohio Posts: 38	Will the real Cruithne please stand up. Now I'm confused. I've read about Cruithne before here: <a href="http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/second_moon_991029.html" target="_blank">http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/second_moon_991029.html</a> which says it's in a horseshoe shaped 770 year orbit around the Earth. When I saw Abacus' second message above, I decided to refresh my memory and found this site: <a href="http://burtleburtle.net/bob/physics/cruithne.html" target="_blank">http://burtleburtle.net/bob/physics/cruithne.html</a> which says Cruithne is an asteroid orbiting the sun in 1:1 resonance with Earth. Are they 2 different "heavenly" bodies with the same name? Someone please clarify. Mike [Edited to Add] Please ignore the above question. I found the following site which describes in great detail the very complicated orbit of Cruithne. It is apparently a combination of the two orbit I listed above. <a href="http://www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/3753.html" target="_blank">http://www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/3753.html</a> [ September 12, 2002: Message edited by: gabalski ]</p>

09-12-2002, 05:34 PM	#7
B. H. Manners Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 1,213	If Cruithne's orbit extends all the way out to Mars (in the demos) why has Mars not captured it (or Mercury for that matter)? Is it possible that Cruithnes may have been Neith and or Vulcan, the supposed moons of Venus and mercury that astronomers back in the nineteenth century spent a lot of time trying to find?

09-13-2002, 12:08 PM	#8
Brian Thompson Junior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: One day offworld Posts: 92	Cruithne shares Earth's orbit around the sun hence the term "co-orbital" to describe its motion, but it can't really be called another moon of Earth's. Sometimes Cruithne is on the opposite side of the sun and cannot even be seen from Earth. Moons orbit planets. It's that simple.

09-13-2002, 02:39 PM	#9
ajm51987 Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Seattle, USA Posts: 245	Three moons?? Dang I dident even know we had two!

09-14-2002, 12:48 PM	#10
American Agnostic Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: CA, USA Posts: 56	Acutually, NASA now thinks that the newly disvocered "moon" is just a spent thrid stage form the Apollo Program (probibly from Apollo 12) <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/09/13/mistaken.moon/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/09/13/mistaken.moon/index.html</a>

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.