Celestia Forums

I anticipated some fuss about these things, but I see you guys have got about ten threads on the go already ...
Anyway, brief visit to let you know that the CVS tree version of outersys.ssc now contains preliminary entries for the following big new TNOs: 2003 UB313, 2005 FY9 and 2003 EL61 with its moon (which I've temporarily designated "2003 EL61 I", for lack of a better idea).
Download it here:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/celestia/celestia/data/outersys.ssc
The 2003 EL61 pair show mutual occultations in 1999 amd 2138.

Bye ...

Grant

Tx for the post Grant. Nice to see you are not completly out of Celestia.

Bye

I noticed this while browsing the CVS tree about half an hour before I saw this thread. There seems to be an orbit display bug when an object with "asteroid" class which does not orbit a star directly (e.g. "2003 EL61 I") and asteroid orbits are not set to display, even if the object is selected the orbit is not drawn (Windows, 1.4.0pre6)

Just a (slightly) unrelated question, has the name "Sedna" been approved yet? Seems slightly cumbersome to use the full "2003 VB12 (Sedna)" name...

chaos syndrome wrote:Just a (slightly) unrelated question, has the name "Sedna" been approved yet? Seems slightly cumbersome to use the full "2003 VB12 (Sedna)" name...

Yes- 90377 Sedna, to be exact.

d.m.f.

Grant!

great to hear from you, but.... argh! I just put an SSC for 2003 EL61 here: 'New' Trans-Neptunian Object 2003 EL61. ( http://www.celestiaproject.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7718 ). Sigh...

Spiff.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:Grant!

great to hear from you, but.... argh! I just put an SSC for 2003 EL61 here: 'New' Trans-Neptunian Object 2003 EL61. ( http://www.celestiaproject.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7718 ). Sigh...

Well, then updaqte it! I could use the Sedna update.

Here's Sedna's wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedna_(astronomical_object)

d.m.f.

granthutchison wrote:I anticipated some fuss about these things, but I see you guys have got about ten threads on the go already ...
Anyway, brief visit to let you know that the CVS tree version of outersys.ssc now contains preliminary entries for the following big new TNOs: 2003 UB313, 2005 FY9 and 2003 EL61 with its moon (which I've temporarily designated "2003 EL61 I", for lack of a better idea).
Download it here:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/celestia/celestia/data/outersys.ssc
The 2003 EL61 pair show mutual occultations in 1999 amd 2138.

Bye ...

Grant

2003 EL61 => MOON

http://www.aas.org/publications/baas/v3 ... 05/786.htm

30 June 2005 allow us to derive the following orbital solution for the delta K=3.8 magnitude satellite with respect to the primary:
a=49100?±400 km,
P=49.05?±0.03 days,
e=0.048?±0.002.
This implies a total mass of the system of 3.9?±0.1 x 1021 kg, or 30.2?±0.8% the mass of Pluto.

yes ou non ?!?

Spaceman Spiff wrote:Grant!

great to hear from you, but.... argh! I just put an SSC for 2003 EL61 here: 'New' Trans-Neptunian Object 2003 EL61. ( http://www.celestiaproject.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7718 ). Sigh...

Ummmm. Sorry.
But I'm not sure what caused the argh. Is the problem that you feel you've wasted work, or that I've wasted work, or that I didn't use your work?
Although I'm not developing Celestia or participating in the forum, I promised Chris and Selden that I'd intermittently maintain various ssc files I'd been heavily involved in developing. In this case I made the outersys.ssc update pretty promptly on 29th July because of my own interest, then realised after a night's sleep that perhaps others would also be working on updates and add-ons. So I felt it was important to make sure people knew that the core Celestia was already updated. I was a bit too slow off the mark in your case, it seems . If that's the cause of the argh, then I can only say sorry again.

(Personally, I'm waiting for the dust to settle on the lumpy light curve of 2003 EL61 before making it prolate. It does seem a little improbable.)

Grant

PS: Sedna does need an update, particularly because the long rotation period seems to have gone away. I'll get around to it soon.

granthutchison wrote:PS: Sedna does need an update, particularly because the long rotation period seems to have gone away. I'll get around to it soon.

Thank you- That's precisely why I suggested that.

d.m.f.

granthutchison wrote:Ummmm. Sorry.
But I'm not sure what caused the argh. Is the problem that you feel you've wasted work, or that I've wasted work, or that I didn't use your work?

No, no, it was the unfortunate co-incidence. I'd started a post saying I'd put an SSC in (for people to copy), and did all that work, then posted. Then saw that you'd done it!

Would you care to inspect my work and try it out for yourself?

Spiff.