Theory of multiple intrusions by rogues on the solar system

[Remcook]

From the top of my head: Vesc=sqrt(2GM/R), or srt(2)*Vcirc

Or wasn't that what you were after?

[Orstio]

Escape velocity is really a non-issue.  Depending on its angle of incident, an object could accelerate during its pass, ejecting it from the solar system, if it didn't have the velocity just from regular gravitational acceleration towards the sun.  This is how the gravity-assist maneuver used on spacecraft works.

Parabolic comets also move through interstellar space at quite slow speeds, until they begin accelerating toward an object like the sun.  They still manage to achieve escape velocity on their way out.

[dingo15068]

It depends on the speed of the object at it's closest approach to the sun, and it's speed at it's closest approach to a planet.  You accually can have objects who's speed is greater than the escape velocity of the sun, but who's speed is less than the escape velocity of the planet it is moving by.  

Now one of the more interesting things I have ran accross is that depending on the distance, you can have a planet affected by the passing of a large mass, but it leaves the moon's alone, due to in part, the gravitational pull of the planet on the moon's exceeds the pull of the large rogue, yet the planet itself is affected by the gravitational tug.  Not enough to dramaticly change the orbit of the planet, but strong enough to tilt the planet in the direction of movement.  Yet at the same situation, a planet can have it's orbit changed by the tug.  Depending on the mass and distance on the close encounter

[Remcook]

A parabolic comet always has a speed equal to the escape velocity of the sun at every point in its orbit. That's why it is called parabolic.

Absolute velocity is irrelevant without information about the distance to the central object.

[rajasun]

Remcock me boy SPOT on!!!
Escape Velocity (Vesc) is as follows:
Vesc = Sqrt[(2 * G * M)/r
where G = Gravitational Constant = 6.672 * 10^-11
M = Mass of Object in question
and r = Radius of Object

For general info:
eccentricity   energy   geometry
>1             >0       hyperbolic orbit
1               0       parabolic orbit
<1             <0       elliptical orbit
0              -GMm/2a  circular orbit

Dingo, you REALLY NEED to go through the basics again e.g. Keplerian, Newtonian orbital physics, Hill radius, etc. And with regards to your question on Pluto's origins, there's NOTHING as yet to rule out Pluto or Charon as independent KBOs i.e. objects NEVER EVER in orbit around ANY other planet. BUT there are folks who think that Uranus was HIT by an earth Sized body way back in time e.g. Tom Van Flandern.

And revisiting the issue of MASS of rogue again:
Posted on 12/26/01 8:41:54 am
"will take place approximately 3,337,951 years from now
The rogue will enter our solar system at an angle of 4.693 degrees from solar plane, at a speed of 74 m/sec.
"it's calculated size of 2.54 Julian masses"


Posted on 6/24/02 10:30:01 pm
"When: 447,512,833 years ago.
Size of rogue: 2.54 Julian masses"

Rogue 447,512,833 years ago =  2.54 Mj
Rogue 3,337,951 years from now=  2.54 Mj
Chances of the Sun encountering the "free-floating" object twice over 4 billion years apart in the SAME region of space is like expecting to get away unscathe twice over leaping off from the 30 th floor of a building. Different objects travel at different velocities in space. The Sun's average velocity is about 19 km/s, the stars in the Local Solar Neighborhood travel at around 20 to 21 km/sec. To relief you from the suspense, there is a candidate object under consideration that matches your MASS description i.e. 1 < Mpl < 3 Mj some 560 AU out. NOTE the distance.

The ONE assumption which MAY NOT hold is that Uranus has ALWAYS been in its current orbit since birth. Thing is where is the proof? There are evidence that INSTEAD point to the planet being either further out or having formed near where Jupiter is today. Its original location is still very much open to debate BUT if one is to stick to convental accretional model of planetary formation, Uranus and Neptune should have taken much much longer to form UNLESS it formed elsewhere or via some other processes i.e. processes other than accretion i.e. DIRECT Collapse or even Disk Fragmentation.

I've computed a list of VITAL parameters for potential perturbers that MAY still reside at remote distances beyond the Kuiper Belt and their predicted lamda, flux density, spectral intensity, etc BUT I'll need clearance from a few others on the team before I can post them.

PS: Hehe nice to meet you, Meteoroid, I'm versatile on a few OS platforms. Currently sourcing for an affordable SPARC machine for PERSONAL use i.e. NON-OFFICIAL pursuits. hmmm...

[dingo15068]

Rajasun,
I  have never assume that the current locations of the planets have not moved, but I am of the opinion that they are wrong with the current model of solar system creation.  In my opinion, the gas giants within our solar system are now closer to the sun than they were when they formed, and were pulled in towards the sun during the early formation.  I am also of the opinion that there is a lot we do not understand about solar system formations, nor do we know the conditions of the nebulas cloud that formed the local cluster of stars, nor do we know the density of that, but once we do figure it out, that we will have a clearer understanding of solar and planetary formation.  We also do not have any idea of what it was that seeded the nebulas cloud, and triggered the process.
As for the prediction I made about a possible next encounter.  It is based on running the model I have forward, and looking for the next time the conditions would exist, based on where the model has shown previous encounter's.
I am not as it is apparent with you, a professional astronomer.  I am a amature astonomer, with a general understanding of the laws of physics, and ballistics.  I do not have the academic background that you have.  It is the biggest reason I have for not publishing my work, because I know for a fact without the academic background, that it will be looked at with ridicule, which in my personnel opinion is the worst thing that has ever happened to science, where the layman who has a great idea, is ignored, because they do not have the accrediation of the "experts", and the internet is the greatest tool ever to come about in that it does allow us laymen to post our idea's and theories for all to see and for other laymen to evaluate them, even against the estabished conventional community.
I am thankful that you and other's have been pointing out errors in my thinking, so I can make corrections in the model.  One thing to keep in mind, the basic primis of my theory is that our solar system has had encounters with interstellar "rogue" bodies in the past, and the possibility exists that we will have them again in the future,  My model shows possible past encounter's based of circumstancial evidence at best.  This is only a theory, not a proof, and my model indicates the possibility.
Rajasun, you have the computing capibility with your group.  Run this by them.  
1. Calculate the force force nessisary to tilt Uranus on it's side, but leave it in it's general orbit. And without a direct collision.
2. Calculate the force nessisary to pull Pluto into it's current orbit from the passing of a large gravitaional body.  You can either assume that Pluto is an independant planet, or an escaped moon.
3.  Calculate the orbital path of an object that could cause both occurances.  You can use both regular and retrograde direction.
4.  Assume either steller or intersteller in origan

[rajasun]

Dingo do NOT get me wrong on this, developing a hypothesis from scratch can be pretty HARD especially if you NEDD it to be accepted, tested and verified by ALL in the community. There is NOTHING wrong with rogues just that working out the timing of impact, angle of impact, orbital energy, etc of impactor or rogue NEEDS some sprucing up on.

Yes there seems to be AGREEMENT that indeed it does appear strange that Uranus is tilted the way that it is, BUT astronomers, astrophysicists, planetary dynamicists CANNOT be found in common agreement as to when exactly the collision occured i.e. was it something that happened when Uranus was BUT proto-Uranus? Or did the impact took place somewhere after the planet came into being (i.e. something akin to your hypothesis)?

Pluto's peculiar instance coupled with the observed irregularities in Super Comet CR105 hints at perhaps a MORE REGULAR pattern in perturbation than can be explained by passing rogues. The MORE we look at the Pioneer 10 Anamoly, the MORE things seem to fall in place. i.e. The region just beyond Pluto's aphelion distance at 49.3 AU MAY contain BOTH the Center of MASS and Perihelion location of a 16.9495 - 17 Mj Scattered Disk/INNER Oort Cloud BD. Its current location MAY well lie in the direction of the region in and around Taurus.

Increasingly with BETTER surveys, we have been able to observed at first hand what a circumbinary disk looks like and its characteristics e.g. disk gravity, density, MASS, width, etc. The more we study GG Tau and other Young Stellar Objects (YSOs) and T Tauri stars, the more apparent the circumstantial evidence becomes of the existance of a widely separated DIM substellar companion >2000 AU removed.

Continue your modelling work Dingo, who knows you MAY locate yet MORE objects within and without the confines of the Solar System beyond the the 2 Kuiper Belts.

[dingo15068]

Rajasun,
Thanks, Yes I know I need to spruce up the model, or accually post better detail's, which at some time in the future when I feel that it is ready to publish, I will do so, and give people access to the underlining formula's of my model.  They are very extensive to say the least, and the work of 23 years.  I am putting the idea of my theory out here so that other's can take it, and further advance it.  As for wanting credit, and a place in history, I do not need it, nor particulary want it.  Unlike a lot of people I do not have the vanity, nor do I feel the need.  I know in my heart that I have done something to advance the field of astronomy in my small way, and I take satisfaction from it.  I also know that my theory will not be proven within my lifetime, and that someone somewhere, will be able to advance it further, I hope.  I am planning on continue to refine my model for the rest of my life, and to continue studing astronomy.  I know I have only 15 or so years left to live at the most ( I have genetic arterial scorosis) even with advances in modern medicine, I will be lucky to make it to 55. (I am 39 already)

[rajasun]

Sorry to hear about that Dingo. Well this may not be much of a comfort to you BUT the theories and predictions of MANY a well known scientist e.g. Einstein, were ONLY verified after they were long gone from the scene.

Some objects may take time to hunt down and time to study. Some candidate objects (including candidate planets in other Solar Systems) have been studied for some 2 decades and more now BUT they remain candidate objects NOT confirmed discoveries.

Then there's the Law of Resource Scarcity. There's a lot that's out there waiting to be discovered and unravelled BUT WE are very much still LIMITED by available technologies and constrained by material and financial resources. It's FRUSTRATING I know, BUT guess we just have to make do with whatever we can find and whatever equipment available for the time being.

Feel FREE to air your evolving thoughts and theories. Through Open and Frank exchanges, it can and will be improved.

Name or Fame  matters NOT to most of a commited scientist/researcher, the satisfaction of that comes from confimation of research DOES.

[payloadcontroller]

Well, after a long absence, I finally have myself more or less caught up on developments on the theory. I must say I was thrilled to see an active, intelligent discussion of Dingy's theory. I may pipe up with comments once in awhile now, but I think it's going great. Have enjoyed the catching-up!

[Orstio]

While looking up info for the "origin of the asteroid belt" thread, I often came upon the question "But what about the angular momentum?"

Now, granted, not all the sites I visited were reputable sources, but the question recurred enough in science journals to get me thinking. (Me thinking: Terrible thing)

This is pure speculation, but Dingo, have you considered a possibility where one of our current planets does not originate from our solar system?   A captured rogue, among our own nine planets?  This might account for at least some of the alleged "extra" momentum being observed.

[dingo15068]

Orstio,
Accually I have concidered it.  But if one of the planets in our solar system is a captured rogue, it would have had to happen nearly at the first 1/2 billion years of our solar system.  Gravitational effects during the last billion years would not have enough time to stabalize a near circular orbit that the planets currently are in.  The one possible exception from this is Pluto, yet the interaction of Neptune on Pluto's orbit is minute, it does exists when the 2 planets approaches at their closest point, adds a bit of angular momentum to Pluto, or decreases is, depending on which planet arrives first.  Give me a few days to come up with the exact figures.
Moons or planetoids depending on your definition, the orbits stabilized a lot more quickly due to the relative nearness of the primary planet (time wise speaking), as well as the aerodynamic effects of the solar wind on the smaller bodies, being strongest on the solar plain.  (The primary reason the planets are on a plain, and to some extent the reason the moons are also on the same plain vs the orbital plain of most planets (planets generally do not generate a "solar wind", but do generate an atmosperic drag among the rotational axis))

[dingo15068]

Time for an update:

As I have had time to reprocess my model, including all recent discoveries, I have an interesting result from my model.

I have been able to rule several of the previous possible intrusions as no longer valid per my model, due to the recent orbital entries. And refinement of the model.

We do have a few possible canidates so far, at 26,441,822.74 years ago.  Minor event.

Object size 1,713 km in size.
Speed 81 km/sec at impact with Uranus, after passing through the solar system.  Gravity assisted by flyby of Sol.
Path indicates passing through 2 of the 3 primary asteroid belts, with minor collisions, and deflections.  Shotgun effect on inner system.  All inner planets recieved small to medium bombardment from meteriods ranging from micro (sand size) up to 10 km in range.

At 447,401,612.13 years ago.  Major event.
Object size: 9,817 km diameter upon entry into solar system.
Speed at entry 37 km/sec
Close flyby inbound of Jupiter fractured object into at least 3 large, and several million small parts.  Deflection  of course towards Sol.
Speed after flyby 41 km/sec.  Minor bombardment of Mars.
Minor bombardment of Earth (< 5km).
Large bombardment of Venus from incoming debree.  At least one medium fragment struck glancing strike (<1000 km), disrupting rotation.
Minor bombardment of Mercury by debree field.  (Sol shielded Mercury from major damage)
Solar strike by large fragment (2000 km > 5000 km).  Super large solar flare, extending out at least 41 million miles.  (Size of flare as determined by independant modelling)  Radiation cloud partically deflected by Earth's magnetic field, but enough secondary radiation would have caused massive loss of life, and surviving species underwent drastic mutations.
Surviving debree cloud consisted of at least two major fragements, and several medium and hundreds of thousands small fragements.
Large bombardment of Uranus, resulting in change of tilt of planet.
Minor/medium bombardment of Neptune
Large bombardment of Pluto, resulting in fracturing it into two primary fragements, as well as change in orbit.
Debree cloud captured in eccentric solar orbit.  Minor bombardment lasted for at least 10 million years until majority of debree was captured by Sol.  Possibility of fragments still in eccentric orbits around SOL.

[payloadcontroller]

WOW! Scuze the language. But dang, it fits. I've been keeping up with the impact extinction theories for many years now, and my recollection is that there is a clustering of impact features at about the 26MY age. I will have to go check that out to verify my memory, but DANG!

Also the other events surely would explain some of the solar system features seen, such as the Pluto/Charon system. As for rad affecting life, again, I'll have to go off and double-check my memory, but that's a LOOOONG time back for there to be much in the way of life on Earth, at least. I...THINK...that's PreCambrian timeframe. Single cells and algae at most, if my memory isn't totally hosed. (Which admittedly it could be. Getting a 43 year old husband thru open heart surgery is kinda stressful. :omg :omg )

I do have a question: you mention, e.g. a glancing strike of Venus. Please tell me what you define as a 'glancing strike' -- are we talking actual planetary surface contact, or atmospheric interaction, or what?

[dingo15068]

PLC, by defining glancing strike, I am defining it as angle of strike less than 35 degree's from surface plain, vs normal strike of object angling down towards the surface from 35 - 90 degree's.  From calculations, it would have tunnelled through the upper crust and struck the mantel hard while exploding)  The resulting explosion would have blown back through the puncture, as well as forward, with the crust holding for a few fractions of a second before rupturing above the crater site it. Directing most of the force in 2 angles.
If the angle is < 10 degree's we would have a possible unusual effect of the object skipping off the atmosphere, and/or surface
(Scientific studies have placed the Venian crust at only 5 - 15 km think, vs Earth's 12 - 40 km think)
Composition of the rogue is unknown, but my model showing the effects has it as a rocky/frozen surface with a semi-liquid outer/solid inner core, similar to standard terrestirial planets.

Also when the object passed by Jupiter, in a close encounter, the tidal forces brief as they were, would have fractured the surface and ripped it into pieces, where the inner core would have had an almost instant pressure release, causing the whole object to expand rapidly (think explosion).  This expanding object if not disturbed would have condensed itself back into a planetoid over time, minus mass lost from the blast.  The object was super heated from the flyby.  Accual figures show the possibility of it accually skipping off of Jupiter's atmosphere.

This is similar to the effects theorized during the early formation of the solar system.

I have cross-referenced it to geological time-lines.  This is near the boundry of one of the largest mass-extintions, and the beginning of insect life on the surface.  This might be one of the possible "Geological kicks in the pants" that have happened in the past.  There is also a band of Iridium in geological layering that corrisponds with the date.