Take a look at the orbits posted above.
Apogee- farthest point of an orbit around earth which is exactly what I said and exactly what your link said (which apparently you didn’t read or didn’t understand). You used the term incorrectly since we are discussing objects orbit the sun.
Again, you hypothesized an object with a 100,000 year orbit that could affect the earth. I used math to demonstrate why that type of object (and objects with similarly long periods) are pretty preposterous. Now, do you have an actual rebuttal as to what is wrong with what I’ve said or are you going to admit that you don’t know what you’re talking about, which we’ve already demonstrated.
From the cited source.
1 : the point in the orbit of an object (such as a satellite) orbiting the earth that is at the greatest distance from the center of the earth; also : the point farthest from a planet or a satellite (such as the moon) reached by an object orbiting it — compare perigee
2 : the farthest or highest point : culmination
Keppler’s laws are also limited to objects within our solar system. They cannot be applied to extra solar objects because we have no clue what objects beyond our solar system are also influencing their orbits.
You cannot know what the escape velocity is for any object without knowing it’s mass and gravity as well as that of the object who’s gravity you wish for it to escape.
You’ve got nothing to base any of your suppositions on other than your own prejudice.
Damn you guys crazy
What a bunch of nonsense.
No, Kepler’s laws can’t be applied to extra-solar objects which is not what we are currently discussing (I’ll remind you for the third time that you brought up an object with an orbital period of 100,000 years).
The escape velocity for our sun is known since, shocker, we know the mass of our sun. Escape velocity is independent of the mass of the object “escaping”.
Read your definition again:
the point in the orbit of an object (such as a satellite) **orbiting the earth **that is at the greatest distance from the center of the earth
The fact a body passes through our system doesn’t mean it’s orbit is locked solely to our sun. To have an orbital period that long it would have to be outside of our system through most of it’s orbit.
Escape velocity is dependent not only on the gravity of the object you want to escape, it’s dependent on the gravity, mass, size and distance of both objects.
As for definitions. You read it, maybe this time with your eyes open.
1 : the point in the orbit of an object (such as a satellite) orbiting the earth that is at the greatest distance from the center of the earth; also : the point farthest from a planet or a satellite (such as the moon) reached by an object orbiting it — compare perigee
2 : the farthest or highest point : culmination
- Aegean civilization reached its apogee in Crete.
Having an orbit that long is nearly impossible. It’d be like balancing an elephant on a needle. The slightest increase in orbital velocity at aphelion would give it escape velocity to leave the solar system. The slightest increase in velocity at perihelion would rise the aphelion dramatically.
I don’t know what you think you’re doing by making up some other outside force affecting the orbit but it’s not going to help your case.
Escape velocity is dependent on radius from object (1 AU in our example) and the mass of the sun. The mass of the planet would only be necessary if were anywhere near the mass of the sun which is ridiculous since even Jupiter is one tenth of one percent the mass of the sun.
The second definition is not the definition used in astronomy. This is a discussion about astronomy. Don’t be silly. Use the right words.
You should have quit long ago. The distance between the two objects, the mass of each and gravity of each all figure into escape velocity.
We know within our own galaxy there are bodies orbiting binary systems with very eccentric orbits.
We can’t possibly know all of the factors affecting the orbit of such an object that hasn’t even been identified.
When faced with rebuttal of your nonsense, you always double down with more nonsense.
If you want to make a claim about these “highly elliptical orbits” around binary stars, show the evidence supporting it. Of course, the biggest problem is that we aren’t in a binary star system so the relevance is extremely questionable.
We do know the factors they affect orbits. It’s called gravity. You’re just making up more and more nonsense to buttress your ridiculous notions.
You clearly don’t have any idea what you’re talking about. Time and time again I’ve had to correct your misconceptions. This time is no different.
This is some fancy dancing to avoid saying you were wrong.
You haven’t corrected anything.
As for binary systems.
You can’t possibly know all of the bodies affecting the orbit of a body that hasn’t even been identified and for which no orbital path has been established.
So now your theory relies on an undiscovered planetoid whose orbit passes near earth every 100,000 years and orbits the sun AND some undiscovered nearby star?
Dude, you were wrong.
You really need to work on your comprehension skills.
Kepler 47b has an eccentricity if <0.035. Kepler 47c has an eccentricity of 0.41. Getting warmer. The hypothetical planet we are discussing with an orbital period of 100,000 has an eccentricity if 0.999+. So not even close.
Just stop. You don’t know what you’re talking about and you don’t know enough to know incredible silly what you’re saying sounds. I have no idea what you think some other “large object” no one has ever seen in the far stretches of space is going to do to influence this other hypothesized “large object” that no one has ever detected but could totally come in and affect our orbit but this is getting completely ridiculous.
I had to correct you on what Kepler’s third law does, several times, on what affects the Earth’s orbit, on how escape velocity is calculated, on what apogee means and that’s just in the last 24 hours.
You haven’t corrected anything and once again it can only be applied to objects that remain in our solar system.
The fact remains it’s quite possible that some body we know nothing about passes through our system every hundred thousand years or so which could affect our orbit leaving little or no evidence of it’s passing that could be identified by us thousands of years later.
As I said originally the possibility exists and you can’t possibly show otherwise.
Still curious about this.
What are the remaining byproducts when methane breaks down?
Long period comets.
As far as the longest period comets go, the current leaders are Comet Hyakutake with an orbital period of 70,000 years, Comet C/2006 P1 with an orbital period of about 92,000 years and Comet West with an orbital period of about 250,000 years. Of course, we see new comets regularly so a new leader may well emerge in the near future.
Comets can have short periods of up to 200 years (such a Halley’s Comet with a period of 76 years) or long periods of between 200 to potentially millions of years.
Ideally, to know the period of a comet you would need to observe it twice and measure the time between observations to ascertain its period. However while comets have been observed for thousands of years it is very difficult to state with certainty whether a long period comet observed today could be one we have seen before.
I gave the reasons at length why this is such a ridiculous concept. I provided the math. I explained it to you in terms easy enough for anyone with a rudimentary understanding of physics and astronomy.
The only reason you’re sticking with this nonsense is because you can never admit you’re wrong even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
You haven’t even begun to show that I’m wrong because you can’t. Save your tantrums for those more easily entertained.
