| |
|
Article: <5e7u7a$rh7@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Re: Hale-Bopp THEN and NOW (1-6)
Date: 16 Feb 1997 21:29:14 GMT
In article <5e5hrg$j8c@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti
writes:
>> What does it take to move a probe in space off course?
>> A little puff of gas from the jets!
>
> once off the surface of the comet, there's not enough
material
> in a cometary jet to move anything significant. If you were
> more than a kilometer from the exhaust of a small rocket
> on a space probe, you wouldn't even feel the exhaust, yet
> you're claiming that the same affect is blowing the
fragments
> off of Hale-Bopp.
> jscotti@LPL.Arizona.EDU (Jim Scotti)
If the "chunk" that broke off were bright enough to be seen, for days and days, then IT TOO WOULD HAVE BEEN OUTGASSING. Are we to assume that it was outgassing in exactly the same places that the parent nucleus was outgassing from? Would not the broken side, of both the parent and child, have LESS outgassing, at least for a time, to preclude that scenario?
It was a nova. It walked and quacked like a duck, because it WAS one.