Eight more moons for Saturn |
Eight more moons for Saturn |
Jun 27 2006, 05:31 AM
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 540 Joined: 17-November 05 From: Oklahoma Member No.: 557 |
The Minor Planet Center today issued an MPEC that listed eight more outer moons for Saturn. They are all very small, in retrograd orbits, and typically have orbital periods of two to three years. They were discovered with the eight meter Subaru telescope in Hawaii, by Jewitt and company.
Edit: As Jyril points out below, there is a ninth satellite that the MPC, for some reason, listed in a seperate posting. |
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 11:50 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 249 Joined: 11-June 05 From: Finland (62°14′N 25°44′E) Member No.: 408 |
Nine new moons, actually. S/2004 S 19 in the previous MPEC is also a new satellite.
That makes 56 Saturnian moons versus 63 Jovian moons. At this rate, Saturn will soon regain the planet with most satellites title. In addition, new moons of Saturn tend to be a couple of times bigger than Jupiter's (4-6 km vs. 1-2 km). Based on that, Saturn may have many more irregular satellites than Jupiter not yet detected. It is obvious that Uranus and Neptune are understudied in this respect, so there's probably many more satellites yet to be discovered. -------------------- The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
|
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 05:15 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
Can anyone help me? I've forgotten how to read these orbital elements from the MPECs to find out basic information (in particular, the semimajor axis). Here's one example set of elements:
CODE S/2004 S 19 Epoch 2006 Mar. 6.0 TT = JDT 2453800.5 MPC M 89.58888 (2000.0) P Q n 0.39374725 Peri. 268.52521 -0.67401577 +0.66054458 a 0.1214475 Node 47.33793 +0.71661425 +0.69335597 e 0.3604062 Incl. 153.27216 -0.17935092 +0.28799020 P 2.50 H 14.3 P/d 914.29 --Emily -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 05:34 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3648 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 |
You can find an explanation of the orbital elements here.
The 3 elements you're probably most interested are: a -- semimajor axis in AU, e -- orbital eccentricity and P -- orbital period in years. -------------------- |
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 06:02 PM
Post
#5
|
|
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
Thanks ugordan! I thought that's what "a" meant but it seemed very surprising on the face of it for the semimajor axes to be 10% of an AU or bigger. These outer planets have really huge systems! No wonder Cassini can't spot these moons.
--Emily -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 06:12 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 3233 Joined: 11-February 04 From: Tucson, AZ Member No.: 23 |
Well Neptune has a couple of moons that have semi-major axes at around 0.3 AU
-------------------- &@^^!% Jim! I'm a geologist, not a physicist!
The Gish Bar Times - A Blog all about Jupiter's Moon Io |
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 08:21 PM
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 249 Joined: 11-June 05 From: Finland (62°14′N 25°44′E) Member No.: 408 |
Neptune's outer irregular satellites have very large eccentricities (around 0.5) which allow them to reach distances of almost 0.5 AU from Neptune! Furthest of them spends over 25 years making one orbit around Neptune.
Given how poorly Neptune's irregular satellites are known, it wouldn't be surprising if even more distant satellites are found. Because of the great distance from the Sun, Neptune's Hill sphere extends over 0.75 AU so there's plenty of room left. -------------------- The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
|
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 09:43 PM
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 509 Joined: 2-July 05 From: Calgary, Alberta Member No.: 426 |
|
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 10:13 PM
Post
#9
|
|
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
So what are the Hill spheres of Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus?
--Emily -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 10:38 PM
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 249 Joined: 11-June 05 From: Finland (62°14′N 25°44′E) Member No.: 408 |
Jupiter: 53.2 million km = 0.35 AU
Saturn: 65.5 million km = 0.44 AU Uranus: 70.1 million km = 0.47 AU Neptune: 116 million km = 0.77 AU In comparison, Earth: 1.50 million km Mercury: 221,000 km Pluto: 7.58 million km So it is really the distance from the Sun that matters most. The actual equation is r ~ a * ( m/3M ) ^ 1/3 where r is the approximate radius of the Hill sphere, a orbital distance, m the mass of the orbiting body and M the mass of the parent body (in SI units). The mass of the satellite within the Hill sphere must be negligible compared to the other masses. -------------------- The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
|
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 10:54 PM
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 249 Joined: 11-June 05 From: Finland (62°14′N 25°44′E) Member No.: 408 |
Titan probably has larger Hill sphere than any other satellite. Still, the radius of its Hill sphere is mere 52,400 km. Callisto, whose orbital radius is larger, has slightly smaller Hill sphere (50,100 km). Jupiter's greater mass and smaller orbital distance makes Ganymede's Hill sphere much smaller, only 31,700 km in radius. Add various disturbances and it becomes clear that no large satellite can have own moons in our Solar System.
-------------------- The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
|
|
|
Jun 27 2006, 11:47 PM
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 30-January 05 Member No.: 162 |
Add various disturbances and it becomes clear that no large satellite can have own moons in our Solar System. I am not smart enough to set up a simulation to see if this is possible, but there may be a congenital (if that is the right word) reason why we don't see satellites of moons. Upon formation, let's say a moon like Dione, could be expected to be rotating non-synchronously with the host planet. Seems I have seen figures around 8 to 10 hours. Over time, the moon will tide lock to the planet, but during the period when it is not, any satellites of the moon will be subject to tidal effects from the moon, and will be accelerated in their orbit around the satellite, just as our moon is being accelerated today by tidal effects. The orbital evolution of such satellites should be interesting. As they 'loft' away from their host moon, the effect weakens and the satellite may be expelled ever so gently from the 'Hill sphere' of the moon. What then? Well the little satellite is still in orbit around the host panet, and not moving away very quickly from the original 'host' moon. I feel such objects are quite likely to wind up in a Trojan relationship with the moon. Objects such as Pandora and Calypso may be old satellites of moons, conveniently left for us to explore, time capsules of the materials swept up by the original host moon, and never processed thermally or tectonically. In the case of a larger moon such as Titan, we might expect the 'spin off' process to be rather more energetic and the cast off satellite might wind up in a higher orbit around the host planet, rather than in a Trojan relationship. Hyperion might be such a body. It's crater devestated surface recording the influx of debris coalescing into Titan, back in the time when Saturn's moon's (and their satellites) were forming. |
|
|
Jun 29 2006, 06:17 AM
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 599 Joined: 26-August 05 Member No.: 476 |
r ~ a * ( m/3M ) ^ 1/3 where r is the approximate radius of the Hill sphere, a orbital distance, m the mass of the orbiting body and M the mass of the parent body (in SI units). Uh, SI units are good, but are they required in this equation (as long as consistent units are used)? |
|
|
Jun 29 2006, 02:00 PM
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 249 Joined: 11-June 05 From: Finland (62°14′N 25°44′E) Member No.: 408 |
Umm... no, if you don't want an SI result.
-------------------- The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
|
|
|
Jun 29 2006, 04:09 PM
Post
#15
|
|
Dublin Correspondent Group: Admin Posts: 1799 Joined: 28-March 05 From: Celbridge, Ireland Member No.: 220 |
Umm... no, if you don't want an SI result. Provided you measure the masses using the same units and are consistent for those two the result will be in whatever standard you choose for the orbital distance. So we could measure the masses in MegaElephants and use the recently discovered GigaCellphone for orbital distance and it would still work fine yielding results that are quite neat since a GigaCellphone is around 10 million km. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 4th May 2024 - 09:14 AM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |