Three big new TNOs added to outersys.ssc

The place to discuss creating, porting and modifying Celestia's source code.
Post Reply
Topic author
granthutchison
Developer
Posts: 1863
Joined: 21.11.2002
With us: 22 years

Three big new TNOs added to outersys.ssc

Post #1by granthutchison » 30.07.2005, 16:24

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
Top
ElChristou
Developer
Posts: 3776
Joined: 04.02.2005
With us: 19 years 9 months

Post #2by ElChristou » 30.07.2005, 16:40

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

Bye
Image
Top
ajtribick
Developer
Posts: 1855
Joined: 11.08.2003
With us: 21 years 3 months

Post #3by ajtribick » 30.07.2005, 18:11

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...
Top
d.m.falk
Posts: 105
Joined: 03.07.2005
With us: 19 years 4 months
Location: Eureka, California

Post #4by d.m.falk » 30.07.2005, 19:29

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.
There IS such a thing as a stupid question, but it's not the question first asked. It's the question repeated when the answer has already been given. -d.m.f.
Top
Spaceman Spiff
Posts: 420
Joined: 21.02.2002
With us: 22 years 9 months
Location: Darmstadt, Germany.

Post #5by Spaceman Spiff » 30.07.2005, 20:20

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.
Top
d.m.falk
Posts: 105
Joined: 03.07.2005
With us: 19 years 4 months
Location: Eureka, California

Post #6by d.m.falk » 30.07.2005, 20:51

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.
There IS such a thing as a stupid question, but it's not the question first asked. It's the question repeated when the answer has already been given. -d.m.f.
Top
symaski62
Posts: 610
Joined: 01.05.2004
Age: 41
With us: 20 years 6 months
Location: france, divion

Re: Three big new TNOs added to outersys.ssc

Post #7by symaski62 » 30.07.2005, 22:02

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 ?!?
windows 10 directX 12 version
celestia 1.7.0 64 bits
with a general handicap of 80% and it makes much d' efforts for the community and s' expimer, thank you d' to be understanding.
Top
Topic author
granthutchison
Developer
Posts: 1863
Joined: 21.11.2002
With us: 22 years

Post #8by granthutchison » 30.07.2005, 23:58

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 :cry:. 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.
Top
d.m.falk
Posts: 105
Joined: 03.07.2005
With us: 19 years 4 months
Location: Eureka, California

Post #9by d.m.falk » 31.07.2005, 03:19

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.
There IS such a thing as a stupid question, but it's not the question first asked. It's the question repeated when the answer has already been given. -d.m.f.
Top
Spaceman Spiff
Posts: 420
Joined: 21.02.2002
With us: 22 years 9 months
Location: Darmstadt, Germany.

Post #10by Spaceman Spiff » 31.07.2005, 09:04

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.
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Development”