Quoting: --Voltaic-- Quoting: Dr. Astro Quoting: pstrusi ... Quoting: Dr. Astro
What a dipshit. He's full of shit. ISON does not have any "companions." I'll tell what happened, he saw this image floating around on conspiracy forums like this one claiming it shows "companions" near comet ISON and he latched onto it: Thread: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is being followed
These sorts of images often show asteroids as well as hot pixels, but those asteroids are nowhere near the comet, and the hot pixels are not even real objects at all. I'm betting he didn't even notice the asteroid at the top of the above image:
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com
Hot pixels don't even form point-spread functions, which is why that dipshit McCanney exclaimed that it "hadn't formed a coma." The lack of a point-spread function means it's not a real object, it's just noise in the imager. Asteroids and other real objects in space such as 2002 TY164 do, however, making them easy to distinguish. Obviously McCanney did not realize that.
Well, the only way to know this for sure will be when it is closer to Mars, to us...etc Maybe from September we'll have a better data to contrast.
No, we already know this for sure, the astrophotographer himself confirmed it. It's hot pixels, end of story.
No, we know of the hot pixels, we can't be 100% sure ISON is alone until it gets closer is what they are saying.
Oh really? You speak for the other poster? He said the only way to know "this" in direct response to what I was talking about. I was talking about the hot pixels in the image.
And I agree, there could be things hitching a ride behind ISON. Quoting: Voltaic
Let's assume for a moment ISON is a fairly big comet at about 20km diameter for its physical nucleus. Its volume would then be about 4,188,790,200,000 m^3. If we assume a density of about 1500 kg/m^3 (and that's extremely generous, realistically it'd be closer to 400 kg/m^3) then the total mass is about 6.2831853 x 10^15 kg. If an object were orbiting a comet with that mass at any kind of distance, it wouldn't remain in orbit of it. If an object tried to orbit it at the distance that the moon is from earth, for instance, then it would take over 2000 years to complete a single orbit.
It wouldn't even still be orbiting it though, it would have been stripped off by the sun by now. The comet is currently about 5 AUs from the sun. The current difference in gravitational acceleration due to the sun over the distance of the object orbiting the comet would be about 2.25 x 10-10 m/s^2. That may not sound like much, but it's two orders magnitude higher than the acceleration such an object would experience from the comet, which would only be about 2.84 x 10^-12 m/s^2. In other words, even if an object were "trailing" it as close as the moon is from earth, it would have been peeled off by the sun a while ago. At further orbital distances it would have been ripped away sooner still. In order to stably orbit the comet, an object would have to assume a much lower orbit and be virtually indistinguishable from the comet's nucleus.
McCanney has claimed that the comet is being orbited by objects at two lunar distances. That is in direct contradiction to the evidence. The comet would have to be much, much more massive for that to be the case, and that is his claim indeed. He claims it's the size of the earth or larger. He's STILL claiming Pete's image of the comet showed "companions" but now he's now gone to claim that Pete's images were a NASA hoax to bait him into claiming the presence of companions so that they could then debunk it. He's a full-on nutjob.
ISON may also break up into several smaller pieces as it gets closer to the Sun. Noting ISON hasn't been "melted" yet by the Sun as far as we know. Quoting: Voltaic
Things in space don't melt, they sublimate, and the comet is sublimating which is why it has a coma, it's just not all that much yet. Yes it could break up into pieces, and then those pieces would continue along the original orbit of the comet. What does that have to do with anything McCanney claimed?