Talk:Main-belt comet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Solar System (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Solar System, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Solar System on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
For more information, see the Solar System importance assessment guideline.
WikiProject Astronomy / Astronomical objects  (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Main-belt comet is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
 

2011 CR42 Notes[edit]

-- Kheider (talk) 16:40, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

70P/178P[edit]

Can someone clarify this article's content? Where do the standards for a main-belt comet come from? Is this an incomplete list? Just by these criteria, I know of two others that should be on the list: 70P/Kojima, which crosses Jupiter's orbit and Hug-Bell, which is entirely in the asteroid belt region. 71.12.171.24 04:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

It does need work. A really good explanation of various issues can be found at Henry Hsieh's webpage. Regarding 70P/Kojima and Hug-Bell, have a look at the right-hand diagram of orbital elements at the bottom of Hsieh's webpage. It's not enough to have a semi-major axis well within Jupiter's because lots of Jupiter family comets have this − small eccentricity (and presumably also inclination) is also needed to be in a typical main belt orbit. Deuar 16:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for clearing that up, I'll check out those links. Tiakalla 05:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Look at this diagram. Main belt zones are shown in orange, red and maroon. — Fjörgynn (talk) 06:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

P/2010 A2[edit]

The new nature article might me good enough to get P/2010 A2 off the list. Both groups identify it as an asteroid after a collision.--Stone (talk) 19:52, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I think it is better to use it as an example of a probably false detection. JPL is still listing it as an Encke-type Comet. -- Kheider (talk) 20:40, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
HST is from Johns Hopkins so APL so they will not likely change it until they have their article on the topic. --Stone (talk) 21:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
P/2010 A2 is not in the main belt. The classification as 'Main Belt Comet' is a pure technicality, see also Dave Jewitt's site where he describes it as merely 'empirical': http://www2.ess.ucla.edu/~jewitt/mbc.html. -- Comet1979 (talk) 21:37, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
MBAs are defined as "Asteroids with orbital elements constrained by (2.0 AU < a < 3.2 AU; q > 1.666 AU)". -- Kheider (talk) 16:40, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Rotational shedding[edit]

I just wanted to note this: Jewitt: Newly discovered Main Belt Comet observed w/ HST. Coma is remarkably thin sheet--caused by rotational shedding? -- Kheider (talk) 16:43, 17 October 2012 (UTC)