Go Back   IceInSpace > General Astronomy > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 08-10-2019, 10:03 AM
gary
Registered User

gary is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mt. Kuring-Gai
Posts: 5,274
Saturn overtakes Jupiter as planet with most moons - 20 new ones discovered

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Rincon, Science Editor, BBC, 8 Oct 2019
Saturn has overtaken Jupiter as the planet with the most moons, according to US researchers.

A team discovered a haul of 20 new moons orbiting the ringed planet, bringing its total to 82; Jupiter, by contrast, has 79 natural satellites.

The moons were discovered using the Subaru telescope on Maunakea, Hawaii.

Each of the newly discovered objects in orbit around Saturn is about 5km (three miles) in diameter; 17 of them orbit the planet "backwards".

This is known as a retrograde direction. The other three moons orbit in a prograde direction - the same direction as Saturn rotates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Rincon, Science Editor, BBC, 8 Oct 2019
The finds were made by applying new computing algorithms to data gathered between 2004 and 2007 with the Subaru telescope. These algorithms were able to fit orbits to potential moons identified in the old data.
Story here -
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49962134
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-10-2019, 08:01 PM
Dennis
Dazzled by the Cosmos.

Dennis is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 10,895
Oh No - I thought I was doing well to record 9 of them with my old C9.25...

Cheers

Dennis
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (Saturn and Moons Composite Crop 800 Flat.jpg)
35.8 KB8 views
Click for full-size image (Saturn and Moons Composite Crop 800 Flat text.jpg)
47.5 KB9 views
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-10-2019, 09:44 PM
ngcles's Avatar
ngcles
The Observologist

ngcles is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Billimari, NSW Central West
Posts: 1,566
Moon or Moonlet?

Hi Gary & All,

Marvellous technical feat to detect these very tiny bodies -- kudos to all those involved but leads to another question.

How big/massive does a body have to be to be designated a "Moon".

I believe we need to think about writing a definition in the same way we did with the planet/dwarf planet ... thing.

When I was a young lad just starting as an amateur astronomer, my How and Why Wonder Book "Stars" (published 1968) had the (known) moon count:

Mercury & Venus: 0
Earth: 1
Mars: 2
Jupiter: 12
Saturn: 9
Uranus: 5
Neptune: 2

During my lifetime, the count of natural satellites for major planets in our solar-system has blown out from 31 to 205 -- over 660%. In my mid-fifties and assuming I am about 2/3rds of the way through my life-span it would be reasonable to assume that on my demise, the number of "moons" in our solar-system would be somewhere between five hundred and one thousand -- an absurd number and really, meaningless.

I think we should introduce a division between moons and moonlets.

I know it's a somewhat arbitrary line I'm drawing here, but I'd suggest that for it to be classed as a "moon" it must be a body (a) in a closed orbit around a major planet (any one of the eight) and either (b) have a major axis radius greater than 50km and/or (b) have an estimated mass greater than 10^18kg. Any body that does not meet a+b or a+c would be classed as a "moonlet". Unlike the planet/dwarf planet test, hydrostatic equilibrium is not required nor is clearing its orbit.

In the above scheme (a) the IAU retains jurisdiction over naming moons, (b) no existing moons with names would be "un-named" (merely re-classified) while newly discovered moonlets are instead numbered.

Under that definition, Jupiter would therefore have 7 moons, Saturn 10, Uranus 8, Neptune 6, Earth 1 making a grand total of 32 and a combined count of 173 known moonlets in the rest of the solar-system.

Yes I know this would mean re-classifying Phobos and Deimos, but they wouldn't become "un-named", merely re-classified. I know that might upset one or few people but you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

It's an arbitrary line, but I think we have to draw a line somewhere before this gets out of control.

Thoughts?

Best,

L.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-10-2019, 10:53 PM
billdan's Avatar
billdan (Bill)
Registered User

billdan is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Narangba, SE QLD
Posts: 1,338
You would be upset to learn that Professional Astronomers believe there could be another 100 smaller moons orbiting Saturn.

I don't know if we need to reclassify them, by definition if they orbit a planet they are called a moon, size is irrelevant.

( I also think Pluto should retain its planet status)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 11:58 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement