![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sorry about the picture quality...if someone can find a better one please replace it.
This is still confusing, because the orbits of true moons orbiting a planet also encompass the star simply by following the planet. Also "is an object similar to a planet or satellite" is not informative, because the definition of a quasi-satellite is all about its orbits (so I have removed at least this). Does anyone know a rigorous definition that lets you determine whether an object is a true or quasi satellite? Deuar 12:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Could someone please explain what the difference is between quasi-satellite, co-orbital moon, and objects on horseshoe orbits? The text is not too clear. Aren't objects in horseshoe orbits about the Earth in a 1:1 mean motion resonanance, at least temporarily? I would like to categorize all these objects accordingly, but its not clear if the planetary community even has a clear definition of what these things are. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lunokhod ( talk • contribs) 11:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
Couldn't Pluto be a Quasi-satellite of Uranus? Their orbits do cross. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggydude ( talk • contribs) 13:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Footnote 4 appears to be dead. A Russian-speaker could confirm that and possibly get more information; the link goes to what looks like a short error message in Russian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.182.240.194 ( talk) 14:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I was doing some modeling in Celestia with quasi-satellites and found that the view of the quasi-satellite from the planet is actually not "an oblong retrograde loop around the planet" (quoted from page). It does so relative to the central star, but relative to the background stars, a quasi-satellite appears to simply occilate back and forth within a fixed region of sky. Not sure if there's a reference somewhere, but it might be worth a look. 71.104.187.210 ( talk) 09:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
From the definition given in the article I don't see why Arawn in particular rather than plutinos in general should be considered (accidental) quasi-satellites of Pluto. Am I missing something? Lavateraguy ( talk) 16:34, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sorry about the picture quality...if someone can find a better one please replace it.
This is still confusing, because the orbits of true moons orbiting a planet also encompass the star simply by following the planet. Also "is an object similar to a planet or satellite" is not informative, because the definition of a quasi-satellite is all about its orbits (so I have removed at least this). Does anyone know a rigorous definition that lets you determine whether an object is a true or quasi satellite? Deuar 12:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Could someone please explain what the difference is between quasi-satellite, co-orbital moon, and objects on horseshoe orbits? The text is not too clear. Aren't objects in horseshoe orbits about the Earth in a 1:1 mean motion resonanance, at least temporarily? I would like to categorize all these objects accordingly, but its not clear if the planetary community even has a clear definition of what these things are. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lunokhod ( talk • contribs) 11:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
Couldn't Pluto be a Quasi-satellite of Uranus? Their orbits do cross. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggydude ( talk • contribs) 13:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Footnote 4 appears to be dead. A Russian-speaker could confirm that and possibly get more information; the link goes to what looks like a short error message in Russian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.182.240.194 ( talk) 14:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I was doing some modeling in Celestia with quasi-satellites and found that the view of the quasi-satellite from the planet is actually not "an oblong retrograde loop around the planet" (quoted from page). It does so relative to the central star, but relative to the background stars, a quasi-satellite appears to simply occilate back and forth within a fixed region of sky. Not sure if there's a reference somewhere, but it might be worth a look. 71.104.187.210 ( talk) 09:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
From the definition given in the article I don't see why Arawn in particular rather than plutinos in general should be considered (accidental) quasi-satellites of Pluto. Am I missing something? Lavateraguy ( talk) 16:34, 22 October 2017 (UTC)