This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think this article needs better images. Since this is the English Wikipedia, labels in images should be in English unless the labels are historic in nature. Will ( Talk - contribs) 06:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
This is to advise that the graphic "Horseshoe thin" is showing the L4 and L5 points on the wrong side of the planet (assuming counterclockwise orbital movement). L4 should be leading the planet. Nfr-Maat ( talk) 23:42, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I've asked the authors of http://www.scielo.br/pdf/cam/v24n1/06v24n1.pdf for permission to publish their image on p105. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfast321 ( talk • contribs) 17:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I just noticed that the second section of this article has the following text:
To my knowledge, Wikipedia isn't supposed to be written in first person. However, I'm not sure of any good way to replace this text. Perhaps someone with a little more experience should look into it and figure something out? - green_meklar 00:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
What does this mean? A gravitational exchange would change an object's actual direction, not just the apparent. OrangeDog ( talk • edits) 02:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
What has that to do with a "gravitational exchange of energy"? Surely it is just down to relative position and viewing angles. OrangeDog ( talk • edits) 18:03, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
No OrangeDog, it is a real change of energy. Conceptually the same as skaters (ice or rollerblade) do. One slows down, the other speeds up. The asteroid gains energy from earth, and thus orbits slightly faster. It then loses energy back to the earth, and then orbits slightly slower. So it is more than just position and angles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.242.37 ( talk) 00:57, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
There are a few statements that seem (to this layperson) unclear:
First, this and the other use of "counter-intuitively" probably just need to be excised as POV. But to clarify the meaning - by "slowing it down", does the writer mean: 1- an actual decrease in velocity (contrary to the acceleration mentioned just before), or 2- change to a higher orbit, which lengthens the orbit period? Both? Neither? - Special-T ( talk) 19:16, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I just looked at an old version of this article and, while the information wasn't presented that clearly, there was an explanation of this phenomenon that seems simpler to me:
If someone with knowledge of this area (that wouldn't be me) thinks this is useful and can present it more coherently, please pick up the ball and run with it. Oh yeah, assuming it's reasonably correct! - Special-T ( talk) 13:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
The 2010 TK7 article contains such statements as "the asteroid orbited the Sun with a period of 365.389 days" and "its average period over long time intervals will exactly equal that of Earth", but neither that nor this article do not define what "period" and "average period" (relatively to Sun) mean for an aperiodic orbit. Possibly it can be defined in terms of longitude, but it should be defined before usage in articles. If someone is willing to rectify this, then look on 3753 Cruithne also – it is a good example how such complex things can be explained. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 14:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Surely relative to the Sun, the asteroid rotates around the sun, in about a year; slight wobble every hundred (?) years. If we want to use weird frames of reference, lets choose the asteroid as centre. Now the earth is on a horseshoe orbit, but what about the tadpole asteroid? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bparslow ( talk • contribs) 10:04, 22 February 2014
This section, Horseshoe orbit#Tadpole orbit, has a link to the page Tadpole orbit, which redirects back to this section. Either a separate page should be created, or the link should be removed. JMtB03 ( talk) 00:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
The statement: "The horseshoe becomes apparent only when mapping the movement of the asteroid relative to both the Sun and the Earth. " is completely true, as is the rest of the paragraph, but it is not enough. And that appears to be the source of confusion for several of the comments here. It needs to be elaborated that the horseshoe (and for that matter the tadpole) shape only occur if viewed in a frame of reference rotating with respect to the second body. If someone better than I at creating (for example) animated gifs can do one, showing both views - that is, a rotating and a non-rotating one - then this can be further discussed around that animation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.242.37 ( talk) 00:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think this article needs better images. Since this is the English Wikipedia, labels in images should be in English unless the labels are historic in nature. Will ( Talk - contribs) 06:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
This is to advise that the graphic "Horseshoe thin" is showing the L4 and L5 points on the wrong side of the planet (assuming counterclockwise orbital movement). L4 should be leading the planet. Nfr-Maat ( talk) 23:42, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I've asked the authors of http://www.scielo.br/pdf/cam/v24n1/06v24n1.pdf for permission to publish their image on p105. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfast321 ( talk • contribs) 17:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I just noticed that the second section of this article has the following text:
To my knowledge, Wikipedia isn't supposed to be written in first person. However, I'm not sure of any good way to replace this text. Perhaps someone with a little more experience should look into it and figure something out? - green_meklar 00:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
What does this mean? A gravitational exchange would change an object's actual direction, not just the apparent. OrangeDog ( talk • edits) 02:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
What has that to do with a "gravitational exchange of energy"? Surely it is just down to relative position and viewing angles. OrangeDog ( talk • edits) 18:03, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
No OrangeDog, it is a real change of energy. Conceptually the same as skaters (ice or rollerblade) do. One slows down, the other speeds up. The asteroid gains energy from earth, and thus orbits slightly faster. It then loses energy back to the earth, and then orbits slightly slower. So it is more than just position and angles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.242.37 ( talk) 00:57, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
There are a few statements that seem (to this layperson) unclear:
First, this and the other use of "counter-intuitively" probably just need to be excised as POV. But to clarify the meaning - by "slowing it down", does the writer mean: 1- an actual decrease in velocity (contrary to the acceleration mentioned just before), or 2- change to a higher orbit, which lengthens the orbit period? Both? Neither? - Special-T ( talk) 19:16, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I just looked at an old version of this article and, while the information wasn't presented that clearly, there was an explanation of this phenomenon that seems simpler to me:
If someone with knowledge of this area (that wouldn't be me) thinks this is useful and can present it more coherently, please pick up the ball and run with it. Oh yeah, assuming it's reasonably correct! - Special-T ( talk) 13:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
The 2010 TK7 article contains such statements as "the asteroid orbited the Sun with a period of 365.389 days" and "its average period over long time intervals will exactly equal that of Earth", but neither that nor this article do not define what "period" and "average period" (relatively to Sun) mean for an aperiodic orbit. Possibly it can be defined in terms of longitude, but it should be defined before usage in articles. If someone is willing to rectify this, then look on 3753 Cruithne also – it is a good example how such complex things can be explained. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 14:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Surely relative to the Sun, the asteroid rotates around the sun, in about a year; slight wobble every hundred (?) years. If we want to use weird frames of reference, lets choose the asteroid as centre. Now the earth is on a horseshoe orbit, but what about the tadpole asteroid? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bparslow ( talk • contribs) 10:04, 22 February 2014
This section, Horseshoe orbit#Tadpole orbit, has a link to the page Tadpole orbit, which redirects back to this section. Either a separate page should be created, or the link should be removed. JMtB03 ( talk) 00:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
The statement: "The horseshoe becomes apparent only when mapping the movement of the asteroid relative to both the Sun and the Earth. " is completely true, as is the rest of the paragraph, but it is not enough. And that appears to be the source of confusion for several of the comments here. It needs to be elaborated that the horseshoe (and for that matter the tadpole) shape only occur if viewed in a frame of reference rotating with respect to the second body. If someone better than I at creating (for example) animated gifs can do one, showing both views - that is, a rotating and a non-rotating one - then this can be further discussed around that animation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.242.37 ( talk) 00:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC)