Re: [meteorite-list] A sweet PLANETOID by any other name ...
Hi Doug/List, I know Doug has a special place in his heart for Vesta, as do many of us who delight in HED meteorites. My only complaint is in the unnecessary elevation of Vesta to some special naming status beyond asteroid or minor planet. Why do we feel the need to invent pigeon holes for the one or two objects that reside at the end of some arbitrary size continuum? (If we lived on Jupiter or Saturn, would we say there were four planets, four subplanets, and a bunch of mini-planetoids?) If you plot solar system objects on an orbital inclination vs. LOG(mass) graph, it's hard to make the argument that Vesta deserves more than an honorable mention: http://www.spaceobs.com/perso/textes/solarsystem2.gif (This plot also shows why Pluto -- other than for historical reasons -- has no business being lumped in with the eight solar system planets.) Vesta, Ceres, Pallas and Hygiea are far more like all the other asteroids than they are like any planet. (And don't forget there are quite a few planetary satellites that are far more massive than Vesta.) Protoplanet suggests something that is ~nearly~ a planet or was oh-so-close to becoming one: a woulda, coulda, shoulda planet. I just think it's a stretch to say Vesta, Ceres or Pallas deserve that label. Best wishes, Rob -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com]On Behalf Of MexicoDoug Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 10:23 PM To: mojave_meteori...@cox.net; j...@hc.fdn.com; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] A sweet PLANETOID by any other name ... just an asteroid Awww, come guys, VIVA PLANETOID VESTA! ... Remnant protoplanet is perfectly fine description and so what if just an adjective is being dropped! They are not required in the English language unless the context is obviously misunderstood. Agreed that it is a little nutty to think Vesta would dynamically grow into a planet at this point - but that is only one point of view on what a protoplanet is and while a lot of people might insist they know better what a protoplanet is because it sounds like a somewhat scientific term, the definition is just, well, just not there unless someone wants to massage the literature to create an upwelling of passion among scientists that have nothing better to do than carve out new definitions out of what we all have settled already, and then to educate us on our improper usage which they work up in foolish, ramrodded, not properly peer reviewed meetings by all interested parties. To NASA's credit, DAWN's stated mission is to make a trip back to the point in history by hoping Vesta in fact is a remnant protoplanet in the truest form. So in the context of Dawn, while it may serve NASA's publicity, unless someone has an axe to grind against Vesta because of the well-deserved passion and euphoria of all of the growing Vestal crowd that just wants to have a good time, IMO, NASA is well within its bounds. That is not to say that that for every opinion there is not an equal and opposite opinion, but this is not scientific; it is much less scientific at least than the Great Planet Pluto debate garbage many of us got caught up into and that wasn't scientific. Speaking of self serving, if geologists ran the show, there would be no problem calling Vesta a planet even. Astronomers somehow feel that when something is far out in space that somehow makes it their exclusive domain. However, though astronomy is my first true love, IMO it is time to defer to those specializing in planetary geology, especially bodies other than earth. Yeah, I know planetary geologists and astronomers are now just like the delocalized mesomeristic electrons in Kekule benzene diagrams ;-) Right. Pure opinions ... Vesta, however, from a classical view is definitely not just an asteroid. Asteroids are those star-like things that don't move much against the background and are most frequently just points of light on photographic plates and these days in the domain of patient and gifted people like Rob to pick out of noisy backgrounds. Vesta is thought to be actively bombarding earth with fragments and is brighter than planet Uranus at her best. So, just to be a little self serving myself, I'll get ready to announce a new sale of Tatahouine's at great prices, and I think I'll call Vesta a planet. It'd probably be good for marketing, as if no scientist ever marketed his passionate work in the history of the age of reason by selecting the words that suited them! Nah. I love Vesta as a planetoid, but that is just my 2c. Peace, Vesta has just graduated and is on its way to becoming the most studied roundish, formerly volcanic, big object at 2.3 or so AU in the Solar system ... my fingers are crossed that the mission goes well. Kindest wishes Doug -Original Message- From: Rob Matson mojave_meteori...@cox.net To: John Lutzon j
Re: [meteorite-list] A sweet PLANETOID by any other name ...
just an asteroid Awww, come guys, VIVA PLANETOID VESTA! ... Remnant protoplanet is perfectly fine description and so what if just an adjective is being dropped! They are not required in the English language unless the context is obviously misunderstood. Agreed that it is a little nutty to think Vesta would dynamically grow into a planet at this point - but that is only one point of view on what a protoplanet is and while a lot of people might insist they know better what a protoplanet is because it sounds like a somewhat scientific term, the definition is just, well, just not there unless someone wants to massage the literature to create an upwelling of passion among scientists that have nothing better to do than carve out new definitions out of what we all have settled already, and then to educate us on our improper usage which they work up in foolish, ramrodded, not properly peer reviewed meetings by all interested parties. To NASA's credit, DAWN's stated mission is to make a trip back to the point in history by hoping Vesta in fact is a remnant protoplanet in the truest form. So in the context of Dawn, while it may serve NASA's publicity, unless someone has an axe to grind against Vesta because of the well-deserved passion and euphoria of all of the growing Vestal crowd that just wants to have a good time, IMO, NASA is well within its bounds. That is not to say that that for every opinion there is not an equal and opposite opinion, but this is not scientific; it is much less scientific at least than the Great Planet Pluto debate garbage many of us got caught up into and that wasn't scientific. Speaking of self serving, if geologists ran the show, there would be no problem calling Vesta a planet even. Astronomers somehow feel that when something is far out in space that somehow makes it their exclusive domain. However, though astronomy is my first true love, IMO it is time to defer to those specializing in planetary geology, especially bodies other than earth. Yeah, I know planetary geologists and astronomers are now just like the delocalized mesomeristic electrons in Kekule benzene diagrams ;-) Right. Pure opinions ... Vesta, however, from a classical view is definitely not just an asteroid. Asteroids are those star-like things that don't move much against the background and are most frequently just points of light on photographic plates and these days in the domain of patient and gifted people like Rob to pick out of noisy backgrounds. Vesta is thought to be actively bombarding earth with fragments and is brighter than planet Uranus at her best. So, just to be a little self serving myself, I'll get ready to announce a new sale of Tatahouine's at great prices, and I think I'll call Vesta a planet. It'd probably be good for marketing, as if no scientist ever marketed his passionate work in the history of the age of reason by selecting the words that suited them! Nah. I love Vesta as a planetoid, but that is just my 2c. Peace, Vesta has just graduated and is on its way to becoming the most studied roundish, formerly volcanic, big object at 2.3 or so AU in the Solar system ... my fingers are crossed that the mission goes well. Kindest wishes Doug -Original Message- From: Rob Matson mojave_meteori...@cox.net To: John Lutzon j...@hc.fdn.com; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Sat, Jul 23, 2011 12:19 am Subject: [meteorite-list] Vesta is NOT a protoplanet Hi John, Just a gentle request to resist the urge to parrot NASA's erroneous (and mildly self-serving) labeling of Vesta as a protoplanet. Vesta will never evolve into a planet via accretion, so while one might have optimistically called it a protoplanet 4+ billion years ago, that window of opportunity has long since closed. To label it as such is simply an anacronism; it is an asteroid, and nothing more. Cheers, Rob -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com]On Behalf Of John Lutzon Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 8:50 PM To: brian burrer Cc: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Is Vesta Mong Nong? Hello List, I don't know what i don't know---so: The latest photo of Vesta shows about 1/2 of this protoplanet which is about 350 miles in diameter and the largest crater looks approximately 1/10 0f this radius which means the crater dia. is about 17.5 miles--quite a hit for such a little guy. I remember seeing a photo of a much smaller asteroid with an impact crater of about 1/3 to 1/2 the size of the whole thing and wonder why it wasn't cracked in half or completely obliterated. So, are impact forces mitigated when an object is not in a tightly bound orbit confiscation and just gets pushed rather than crushed? John __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
