At 05:38 PM 9/19/2013, you wrote:
>One is a presentation by Paul Chodas in which he lists (slide 10)
>fourteen of these "low energy" objects. He also states (slide 18) that
>"...natural objects outnumber artificial objects by 1 or 2 orders of
>magnitude."
Bill,
Thanks for all the complimentary and helpful comments on various object,
and I might want to follow up on those, maybe even as a published paper
sometime soon (you as co-author, of course). I'd like to do an inventory
of natural vs. space junk objects, along with some simulations I've done on
the survey "detectablilty" of low-v objects (100-1000 times more detectable
is the short answer). I would caution that Paul's estimate quoted above is
based on a pretty firm guess of the number of artificial objects out there,
but only a WAG of the number of natural ones, so I think his claim of a
ratio of "1-2 orders of magnitude" is highly uncertain. My guess is "0-1
orders of magnitude", and then only if you include lunar ejecta, which I am
becoming more and more convinced is the majority of what passes for
"natural" objects. Your preliminary inventory I think is in line with the
"0-1 order of magnitude" guess. I think the score of "confirmed junk"
versus "confirmed rock" so far is pretty close to equal, maybe favoring
just a bit, but not by an order of magnitude, rocks.
Cheers,
Alan
Alan Harris Phone: 818-790-8291
4603 Orange Knoll Ave.
La CaƱada, CA 91011-3364
email:
harrisaw@...
*****************************************************************************