home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.astro
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!news.hawaii.edu!galileo!tholen
- From: tholen@galileo.ifa.hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
- Subject: Re: Calculating Planetary Positions
- Message-ID: <1992Aug22.044853.9810@news.Hawaii.Edu>
- Sender: root@news.Hawaii.Edu (News Service)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: galileo.ifa.hawaii.edu
- Organization: Institute for Astronomy, Hawaii
- Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 04:48:53 GMT
- Lines: 23
-
- Travis R. Stone writes:
-
- > Meeus gives you rough formulae only for Pluto, since the
- > wobbly little bastard's orbit is so hard to pin down (i.e.,
- > there has been no good "theory" derived for Pluto's motion
- > yet).
-
- Could you elaborate on what you mean by no good "theory"? JPL has
- integrated the orbits of all the planets (and five asteroids as well)
- for their DE200/LE200, which serves as the basis for the Astronomical
- Almanac. The laws of gravitation can be applied to Pluto just as
- easily as for the other planets. The osculating elements given in the
- Almanac allow my ephemeris program to consistently provide an ephemeris
- of Pluto good to better than an arcsecond. The orbit may slowly run
- off in the future, because of the possible perturbing effects of the
- hypothesized tenth planet (see Harrington's publications on the matter),
- or because a full orbit hasn't been covered yet, so the accuracy of the
- known orbit may not be as high as we'd like it. But there's nothing
- wrong with the theory.
-
- Wobbly I can go along with, given the mass ratio between Pluto and
- Charon, but little bastard is a bit too much for me, having poured my
- heart and soul into the study of this planet for the last decade.
-