About this "model" from the link:
Quote:
|
Initially, Planet V had a stable orbit, but 600 Myr of perturbations from the other planets drove it onto an unstable orbit that crossed the asteroid belt.
|
This "model" would need to provide the mass of planet V and the radius of its orbit. To be more useful.
It still doesnt explain what created the asteroid belt and if it assumes the asteroids therein are remnants of the oort cloud, why they did not coalesce to form a planet?
I'd say the model (still) leaves a lot of questions unanswered.
And I presume beausoleil would want to look at the calculations? And a proper model?
Well, perhaps these guys are just skirting around EPH - or is EPH way too loony?
lpetrich,
Quote:
...This caused a lot of asteroids to be deflected into orbits which took them into the inner Solar System, where they proceeded to strike the Earth, the Moon, and Mars, with a few of them striking Mercury.
Thus producing the Moon's Late Heavy Bombardment.
And what happened to this planet afterwards? A likely fate is colliding with some other Solar-System object, most likely Venus or Jupiter.
|
If it never came back through the asteroid belt, I would expect the asteroids it collided with would all have flown or drifted away from the center of the SS as it(Planet V) exited through its eccentric orbit hence I wouldnt expect the asteroids to "strike the Earth, the Moon, and Mars, with a few of them striking Mercury".
There was something I read a while ago about only one side ot mass being heavily cratered.
To which beausoleil had responded in May last year (Aah, the good old days):
Quote:
|
What do you mean by saturated with craters? There is usually a diameter limit specified. The level of saturation over the southern highlands varies, but not from centre to rim.
|
To which I responded with Donald W. Patten's quote:
Quote:
On the heavily cratered planet Mercury the craters are somewhat equally distributed in both hemispheres, which is also true for the Moon. interestingly, the craters on Mars are not widely or evenly distributed in both hemispheres. Figure 6 illustrates the fact that 93 percent of all the craters 20 miles in diameter or larger are in one hemisphere. The "Hemisphere of Craters" is centered at Latitude 45 degrees South and at Longitude 319 degrees West. This hemisphere is termed "The Hemisphere of Craters" and its opposite hemisphere is called "The Opposite Hemisphere."
...
1 . Mars received about 86 percent of its craters in one catastrophic day.
2. Mars received the other 14 percent of its craters during all other time.
3. The 14 percent in all other time impacted Mars equally in both hemispheres.
4. Approximately 2831 of the 3068 craters in the Hemisphere of Craters impacted Mars during one single day, and, for that matter, during one single 60-minute spasm of tidal upheaval and crater formation.
5. Apart from this catastrophic day, Mars has had an astronomical history far more serene, for whatever reason, than either Mercury or the Moon.
6, As expected, the highest crater count is in the 270 to 360 degree region.
7. The Hemisphere ot Craters is centered on the aforementioned subpoint of 45 degrees South Latitude and 319 degrees West Longitude.
8 The subpoint is just east of the massive Hellas Crater, which is logical if Hellas was the core of the fragmenting Astra.
It is to be noted that all 15 of the largest craters of Mars are in the Hemisphere of Craters. It is also noteworthy that the massive lava outflows of Argyre, Hellas, and Isidis undoubtedly have spread and occluded a certain significant number of craters Thus our figure of 3068 craters 20 miles and larger in diameter has been masked by these lava outflows; the original figure was even larger before lava flow and before larger craters occluded some smaller ones.
|
Beausoleil then said (while acknowledging the ad hominem nevertheless) that Patten was not a scientist and asked for more data.
But I believe the fact that one side of mars is heavily cratered has been pretty well established.
And I don't beleive this model accounts for it. If Planet V excited the inner part of the SS in the manner Lpetrich describes above, I wouldnt expect it to affect Mars because it would eject asteroids away from the center of the SS.
Or is there something I am missing?
beausoleil,
Quote:
|
And it's being sputtered by the solar wind. The rate depends on the gravitational field of the planet. I was just illustrating the process and that low gravity isn't enough in itself to explain the current low atmospheric pressure on Mars.
|
I think the temperature of a planet is also important because it affects how fast the gas molecules in the atmosphere are moving.
This (in addition to gravity [which is based on its mass and radius], which influences the escape velocity) would influence the escape velocity required for the gas molecules to leave the atmosphere of a planet.
<moving back...>
beausoleil,
Quote:
This model isn't that the asteroid belt is the remains of a broken up planet (there isn't that much mass in the asteroid belt
anyway).
|
There being little mass in the asteroid belt is accounted for by the idea that (according to EPH) that the planet vapourises.
Quote:
|
...the eph, most fragments vaporize from the sudden release of pressure in the planet’s interior. For a wide range of surviving fragments, temperatures are just below the liquidus (vaporization) temperature. Thus the formation process self-selects fragments that can survive the explosion, even if not by much
|
beausoleil,
Quote:
|
The fifth planet is supposed to have perturbed the asteroid belt directing some asteroids towards the inner planets. The fifth planet then disappeared as its evolving orbit led it to collide with the sun, perhaps
|
Without leaving any "traces" (like knocking other planets off their orbits etc) in form of some sort of "aberrations"?
There is this concept of resonance capture that they mention in the link. Could you have any links that can have info on it?
01-27-2003, 06:12 AM
