[meteorite-list] Catch A Comet?

From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_webb_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:56:23 -0500
Message-ID: <552E78D87D1B42898A0362CE8470A261_at_ATARIENGINE2>

    It got a Minor Planet number 2006 RH120,
but so did J002E3, which seems to be a Saturn
booster...

    That fount of all knowledge, the Wikipedia, says:
"However, later analysis shows the body is not affected
by the pressures of solar radiation and must be a
dense rocky body or at least regularly shaped. One
hypothesis is that the object is a piece of lunar rock
ejected by an impact. '6R10DB9' was the Catalina
Sky Survey's own discovery designation for this object,
which usually would only be used on the MPC's NEO
Confirmation Page (NEOCP) until an IAU designation
was applied, if the object was classified as a minor object.
It was added on September 14 to the NEOCP and
subsequently removed with the explanation that it
'was not a minor planet.' However, the object was
later confirmed to be a minor planet."

http://www.birtwhistle.org/Gallery6R10DB9.htm
"The Spacewatch II 1.8-m and the Mt. Lemmon 1.5-m
reflectors in Arizona observed it during the period
11 - 17 December 2006 when it was between 2 and
3 LD, shining at magnitudes between 19 and 20.
These observations allowed the orbit to be improved
enough to be reasonably certain that there had been
close approaches to Earth as far back as October 1958.
By perigee in early January 2007 it was fading fast as
it approached conjunction with the Sun and was not
observed."

Obviously, there were no Big Boosters in October
1958, only a year after Sputnik!

Then there were observations that said the rotation
period was only 2.75 minutes and the brightness
variation was 1.25 magnitude which makes it sound
like a booster stage again.

Then, this guy:
http://home.gwi.net/~pluto/mpecs/6r1.htm
says "the area/mass ratio is way too low to be a rocket
booster. If the object is two or three meters across, it
would have a mass of a few tons, about what a low-density
rock might have. I hate to say this, because it seems so
implausible... but this looks a heck of a lot like a natural
object."

Not much of a Moon, hard to plant a flag on, awkward
to walk around, no place to put the barbeque... If we're
going to have a second Moon, I want something better
than this.


Sterling K. Webb
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alexander Seidel" <gsac at gmx.net>
To: "Richard Kowalski" <damoclid at yahoo.com>;
<sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net>; <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Catch A Comet?


>> You may remember a few years ago when my colleague, Eric Christensen
>> discovered 6R10DB9, which was Earth's first know "Second Moon".
>> albeit a
>> temporary one.
>
> Dear Richard,
>
> how did this turn out in the end? Did you/they find out it might have
> a cross-sectional profile that, via the observed orbit evolution, gave
> an indication to a man-made object, even identifiable somehow as a
> rocket booster of some specific launch from the past, or was it
> nothing but a natural coincidence with a natural object finally...
>
> Just curious,
> Alex
> Berlin/Germany
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Mon 14 Sep 2009 03:56:23 PM PDT