alessandro_odasso Sep 28, 2013
Thanks Tony,
the strange thing is that the orbital elements taken from MPC are very different:from those calculated by your Find_Orb and the difference between them is not so big:
2002 PA153 versus 2002 PJ153
=======================
a=45.54 vs 46.41
e=0.06 vs 0.00
i=2.33 vs 2.13
w=170.50 vs 169.86
om=139.36 vs 139.11
Cheers,
Alessandro Odasso
---In find_orb@yahoogroups.com, <find_orb@yahoogroups.com> wrote:My Find_Orb gives me totally different orbital elements for the two objects:
PA has a=52, e=0.2, i=2.1, peri 169, node 140
PJ has a=29, e=0.6, i=4.3, peri 355, node 133
Both have consistently small residuals so I think these are reasonable approximations of their orbits..
My Find_Orb totally refuses to find any solution to the combined observations. So I think they are separate objects.
Not surprising they have very close elongations as Cerro Tololo was probably imaging in that direction on those 2 nights.
Tony.
From: find_orb@yahoogroups.com [mailto:find_orb@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of alessandro odasso
Sent: 28 September 2013 09:35
To: find_orb find_orb
Subject: [find_orb] TNO and Find_Orb
What is the best trick to use Find_Orb when submitting TNO observations?
I have tried to play with Settings trying to force the Period without success.
Two cases:
2002 PA153
2002 PJ153
Both have just 5 observations taken on August 13th and August 15th, 2002
If they are really distinct objects, isn't it strange that they have so similar orbital parameters and very similar
solar elongation (at the time of the observations it was 309.8751 vs 308.9768 )?
Cheers,
Alessandro Odasso