Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Asteroid 1998 QE2


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#16    bison

bison

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,436 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2011

Posted 05 July 2013 - 02:31 PM

I am pursuing the story of the continuing, and still unresolved scientific investigation of the object 1998 QE2. I have again contacted one of the scientists involved in this work, in order to resolve a seeming discrepancy in reports of the taxonomy of the object. I propose to report her response, if and when one is received. I also propose to post other information about 1998 QE2 as I become aware of it, and to comment on it.


#17    bison

bison

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,436 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2011

Posted 07 July 2013 - 03:12 PM

Erratum to my post, # 12, July 3rd. Figures for density of class D and class X asteroids inadvertently  reversed. It should read: Class D average  density ~ 2.9 g/cm3, Class X density ~ 9.6.


#18    Timonthy

Timonthy

    Placid

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,840 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne, Aust.

Posted 07 July 2013 - 08:09 PM

Can you please reveal the point of this thread?

Of course there are discrepancies when studying distant objects. It does not mean that the explanations are malicious. Are you suspicious also when something curious has a perfect and convenient explanation?

Edited by Timonthy, 07 July 2013 - 08:12 PM.

Posted Image


#19    bison

bison

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,436 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2011

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:56 PM

Reveal the point of this thread? I already did just that. (see post  #16). I have accepted everything I have learned about this object at face value.
I asked astrophysicist Alessondra Springmann about the seeming contradiction in the taxonomic type of this asteroid. She gave a very helpful reply. She suggested that one side of the object may be of one mineral type, like carbonaceous chondrite meteorites, and the other side a mixture of silicates and metal.
This suggests a very interesting history for this object. It may have been impacted by two asteroids, one of D and one of X class. Alternately, One side of the object may have collected the debris of a nearby collision of two such asteroids.
There is no current asteroidal classification, as far as I am aware, describing a transitional type between classes D and X, or any report, to my knowledge, telling of an asteroid with two hemispheres with very different types of mineral composition. It appears that this is a very unusual object, one worthy of our continued attention. Despite the fact that this object passed by Earth some five weeks ago, these are still very 'early days' in a scientific sense, as far as this object is concerned.

Edited by bison, 08 July 2013 - 09:57 PM.


#20    bison

bison

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,436 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2011

Posted 11 July 2013 - 08:47 PM

There have been fifteen years of observations of this object. It has consistently been assigned to the group of C class asteroids. Why, one wonders, has no one ever managed to note that one side of the object has, instead, a mixture of D and X class spectra, as is now seems to be the case? If the D and X class features are inconspicuous, and only became detectable upon the object's close approach, why was the spectrum still not dominated by the overall C class spectrum of the object?


#21    bison

bison

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,436 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2011

Posted 15 July 2013 - 02:20 PM

Dr. Marina Brozovic, head of the JPL radar investigations into 1998 QE2, stated that it had not been expected that this object would prove to have a moon.  Most near Earth asteroids with moons have rotation periods of about  2 to 3 hours.  With the currently estimated spin of 1998 QE2 in the area of around 4 hours, it appears to be exceptional.


#22    NatureBoff

NatureBoff

    SandersonHapgood

  • Banned
  • 3,491 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 15 July 2013 - 04:13 PM

View Postbison, on 15 July 2013 - 02:20 PM, said:

Dr. Marina Brozovic, head of the JPL radar investigations into 1998 QE2, stated that it had not been expected that this object would prove to have a moon.  Most near Earth asteroids with moons have rotation periods of about  2 to 3 hours.  With the currently estimated spin of 1998 QE2 in the area of around 4 hours, it appears to be exceptional.
I think you're on to something here Bison. I wonder what u-turns they will make with Pluto and Charon coming into simulation modelling view?

The object, known by the locals as "Bicho Voador" (Flying Animal), or "Bicho Sugador" (Sucking Animal), has the shape of a rounded ship and attacks people in isolation.

#23    bison

bison

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,436 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2011

Posted 17 July 2013 - 04:03 PM

The situation of Pluto and its moon Charon is quite different from that of 1998 QE2. The former are mutually tidally locked, in the latter, only the moon is.  The moon of QE2 presumably lacks the mass to tidally lock its primary, even thought they are separated by only around 6 kilometers.  The moon is also quite large in relation to its primary, as moons go-- about 22 % as large. We have no firm figures for the mass or density of QE2 or its moon, only the 'very preliminary' figure of ~1 g/cm^3 for the primary. Six and a half weeks, now, since the closest approach of the object. Still waiting for the refined figures. My latest inquiry about this to JPL has gone unanswered.


#24    NatureBoff

NatureBoff

    SandersonHapgood

  • Banned
  • 3,491 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 17 July 2013 - 04:23 PM

View Postbison, on 17 July 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:

The situation of Pluto and its moon Charon is quite different from that of 1998 QE2. The former are mutually tidally locked, in the latter, only the moon is.  The moon of QE2 presumably lacks the mass to tidally lock its primary, even thought they are separated by only around 6 kilometers.  The moon is also quite large in relation to its primary, as moons go-- about 22 % as large. We have no firm figures for the mass or density of QE2 or its moon, only the 'very preliminary' figure of ~1 g/cm^3 for the primary. Six and a half weeks, now, since the closest approach of the object. Still waiting for the refined figures. My latest inquiry about this to JPL has gone unanswered.
It will remain unanswered whether your right or wrong on this I imagine.

The object, known by the locals as "Bicho Voador" (Flying Animal), or "Bicho Sugador" (Sucking Animal), has the shape of a rounded ship and attacks people in isolation.

#25    bison

bison

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,436 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2011

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:37 PM

Perhaps my inquiry will not be answered. I put the question to: questions@neo.jpl.nasa.gov, so it seems the appropriate place. I trust I hadn't 'worn out my welcome', having never asked a question at that address before. I merely asked for the updated density figure, something they had already proposed to provide, once it was discovered the object had a moon. I asked my question in a polite manner. Even the admission that a better figure than the very preliminary  ~ 1 g/cm^3  still wasn't available, and perhaps  a sense of when that information might be available would have been appreciated.

Edited by bison, 18 July 2013 - 10:47 PM.


#26    NatureBoff

NatureBoff

    SandersonHapgood

  • Banned
  • 3,491 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 19 July 2013 - 05:49 AM

View Postbison, on 18 July 2013 - 10:37 PM, said:

Perhaps my inquiry will not be answered. I put the question to: questions@neo.jpl.nasa.gov, so it seems the appropriate place. I trust I hadn't 'worn out my welcome', having never asked a question at that address before. I merely asked for the updated density figure, something they had already proposed to provide, once it was discovered the object had a moon. I asked my question in a polite manner. Even the admission that a better figure than the very preliminary  ~ 1 g/cm^3  still wasn't available, and perhaps  a sense of when that information might be available would have been appreciated.
I commend your zeal bison..it's the only way to get any sensible answers nowadays.

Edited by NatureBoff, 19 July 2013 - 05:49 AM.

The object, known by the locals as "Bicho Voador" (Flying Animal), or "Bicho Sugador" (Sucking Animal), has the shape of a rounded ship and attacks people in isolation.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users