Is This Moon Three?

tetrad writes "The BBC reports that a new object has been discovered orbiting Earth. It's possible that it's just a piece of space junk, but more likely it is a rock that has been recently (in the last year) captured by our planet's gravitational field. If the object is confirmed to be natural, this would be Earth's third moon. (Did you know there were two already?)" Here's our earlier mention of Earth's alleged second moon. Update: 09/12 04:52 GMT by T : Reader cscx adds a link to an article running on space.com which says this newfound object may be some trash from the Apollo missions.

Comments

trolling for Jay-Z

[Trolling Stones]

h to the goatse
v to the penis bird
fo shizzle my tubgirl widen the page

Ah so

[Anonymous Coward]

Velly good. In time foh Mooncakes.

trolling against Jay-Z

[Anonymous Coward]

what a toy. what a fag.

I might be what a lot of people would consider a spoiled rich brat. I am the only child and my mother passed away while I was still very young. I will admit I am vain in nature and consider myself fairly good looking. I have traveled extensively with my father, having lived in many foreign countries and experienced much of the world before I was 18 than most people have in a lifetime. My father is presently filling a three-year tour as an Ambassador for the U.S. I have just finished up my second year at Notre Dame and decided to spend a year off in Germany where I have spent most of my years growing up. I try to visit Germany as much as possible. I have long time friendships that I keep in touch with and I love the country and its culture.

Two of my good German friends are Regina and her younger sister Sue. I had known them all my life. We attended school together and after High School we went our separate ways. They entered into the working class while I continued on with my education. This year the three of us agreed to spend the summer at my father's vacation house on the lake just outside of Garmisch.

I met Regina and Sue at the Stuttgart Bahnhoff (train station). They looked amazing and it was obvious they kept themselves in wonderful shape. Regina was my age 20 and her sister was 17. I was really impressed with Sue and how she had grown. She like her sister had fantastically long legs and a tight ass. They both wore clinging dresses that outlined the curves in their body quite sensually. They recognized me and quickly approached me. Regina met me first and gave me a big kiss and a hug. I had forgotten how tall she was. Regina stood about six foot and in heels even taller. While she hugged me she brought up her right knee pressing it against my swelling member. While she did this she whispered in my ear, "There is a lot more of this to come." As I peered over her shoulder I could see her sister watching us and smiling.

Regina was unaware that before I headed off to my first year of school Sue and I spent the night together. That was an amazing night as I blew my load so many times that my cock ached the following day. Since then Sue and I have had similar nights without Regina's knowledge.

We arrived at the house early that evening and I uncorked a bottle of champagne to celebrate our reunion. We talked about a lot things, catching up on lost time. We joked and laughed about the past. Eventually, as it usually does, our conversation turned to sex. Regina and I have been having sex together since we were teenagers and we knew what turned the other on. She was very familiar with my body as I was with hers. She knew I loved foot jobs and was turned on by her long sexy legs. Regina got up to use the bathroom and get another bottle of champagne from the basement. As Sue and I talked I felt her foot slip up the leg of my boxer shorts from underneath the table. As her toes softly caressed the head of my hard dick I watched her smile at me from across the small table.

I reached down and cupped her smooth flexing calf in my hands rubbing it while she continued to grip the throbbing head of my cock with her clenching toes. I closed my eyes and leaned my head back enjoying the sensation Sue's toes were giving me. Seeing this reaction in me Sue giggled, "Regina told me you were into feet. I can see your enjoying this." Having said this I felt her toes spread over the head. The tight sensation I felt as the head of my cock slipped between her big toe and second toe caused me to jerk and groan. Sue said, "mmmm, that's a tight fit isn't it, sorry but that's as far as my tiny toes will spread." She flexed her foot and began to jerk the head between her tightly locked toes in short yanks causing me to thrust my hips up and down. Her quick jerks elicited grunts from me. I looked down into my lap and could see a wet spot growing against my white boxers. Sue laughed lightly saying, " I like hearing you groan and watching you lose it like this." Her powerful leg continued to pump back and forth in my hands as she flexed her foot.

Regina entered into the room and Sue kept on with what she was doing to me. As she sat down Regina said, "Well, I see you have gotten matters well under foot." Sue laughed and pulled her foot away asking me to remove my boxer shorts. I did as she instructed. Sue then got up and sat on the table in front of me. I watched as her long legs swung around and she placed her feet on the insides of my thighs. She slowly spread my legs wider apart using her feet to open me up to her saying with a smile, "Open wide for me." She then reached down with her left hand and grabbed my rigid cock wedging it firmly between the same toes as she had earlier. Again it was a very tight fit as I could now see how small her toes were. I felt I was going to lose it right there as I watched and felt Sue continue to fondle my cock having some difficulty getting it locked between her spread toes.

She then asked, "Hey sis' I need some help here." Regina scooted in and reached over spreading her sister's toes wider saying, "There, that should do it."

I groaned as I felt Sue wedge the head of my cock in tighter between her toes. Regina released her sister's toes saying, "Nice tight fit now. He likes that."

Satisfied with the fit Sue sat back up and brushed her hair back from her face, smiling down at me, "That feels good, my toes squeezing just below his swollen head."

The head of my cock barely fit the space between her toes. Again the tight sensation caused me to jerk and groan as I stared down to see my swollen head poking above the tops of her toes. Sue turned to her older sister saying, "He really likes this, I like it to." Immediately the precum began to leak from the head of my cock. Sue squeezed and jerked, concentrating all her efforts on my sensitive head. Meanwhile, Regina poured them both a glass of champagne, which they sipped on while Sue continued her toe assault on my cock. After several minutes the head of my cock began to turn purple. I was squirming uncontrollably in the chair and Regina recognizing I was on the verge to cum knelt down beside me and gripped the base of my cock wrapping her fingers around the shaft and gently squeezed my balls with the fingers of her other hand.

Sues severe toe lock was keeping me on the edge and Regina looked at me asking, "Are your ready to cum now all over my sisters foot." I nodded quickly saying, "Oh yes, oh yes." Regina jerked my shaft between her fingers up and down while Sue's toes jerked the head of my cock. It only took a few strokes as I felt myself begin to release. My body shook uncontrollably and Sue held me down with her free foot pressing it against my abdomen. I leaned forward and grabbed her legs with my hands as she continued to jerk me. Regina's fingers locked around my shaft felt hot as she stroked me in full measure. Feeling the muscles flex in Sue's calves as I held on excited me even further. I watched, as the hole at the end of my purple head was pulled open by Sue's tightly clenching toes. Regina reached over the index finger of her other hand and wiped up a drop of oozing precum rubbing it between the toes of her sister's foot. As Regina's fingers pulled up on the shaft a load of my cum was forced out and blown across the top of Sue's milky white foot. Sue said excitedly, "My gosh it feels so hot on my foot." Regina laughed, "Here comes some more." I felt her jerk my shaft up again, my body shook uncontrollably as I tried to throw my hips up against Sue's pressing foot. Another load of cum shot out from between her toes landing on top of her toes filling up the space between them. Several more times I shook and released my seed before the orgasm slowly subsided and my cock withered between her toes. Completely spent I looked down to see what was done. The top of Sue's foot and toes were splattered with my cum.

Afterwards we finished the second bottle of champagne and talked about sex. Regina knew all about the secret rendezvous between Sue and I. She said she was glad it was with her sister and not someone else. We confided with each other about our desires and I explained to them my unusual curiosity of late with Cock & Ball Torture (CBT). They found it interesting but could not see the excitement in it. I felt a headache coming on and decided to call it a night. I fell to sleep in the next room to the sound of their voices in conversation.

For two weeks we continued to satisfy each other sexually. It was turning out to be a wonderful summer. The sisters were fantastic. We frequented the nearby towns enjoying the local customs. Throughout this period I was expressing my desire towards CBT until finally my desire was granted.

I had just finished watching a soccer game and was getting ready for bed and a wonderful night of sex with Regina and Sue. I hollered up stairs to them telling them to hurry up and come to bed, that I was feeling horny.

I heard them laughing upstairs and then heard Regina say, "We will be right down. You go lay down on the bed and take all your clothes off."

After several minutes passed I heard them coming down the steps. I watched from the bed as they entered the room completely naked and carrying a bag filled with items.

Sue sat on the bed next to me and said, "We are going to satisfy your curiosity and make your dream come true."

Regina began to empty the contents of the bag out onto the bed saying they were first going to tie me up.

Regina spread my legs apart and locked the leather bands around my ankles. She secured the end of each strap to either bedpost at the foot of the bed. While she did this Sue performed the same act to my wrist securing them to the bedposts at the head of the bed. I was spread eagle on my back and feeling a bit vulnerable. I laughed and said, "This is pretty kinky."

Sue smiled and produced a bottle of baby lotion squirting some in her hand I watched as she rubbed her hands together and began to stroke my cock. Her oily hands felt fantastic along my member as she slowly and deliberately jerked me to hardness. Regina moved in between my spread legs and sat cross-legged between them. There was just enough slack in the ties securing my legs to the bed, enabling Regina to slip her knees under each of my thighs slightly propping up my hips from the bed. As she made herself comfortable she watched what her younger sister was doing to me and said, "That's it get him nice and hard."

I requested that my head be propped up so I could watch more clearly what they were doing to me. Sue reached over and placed a pillow behind my head resting it against the headboard. She then said, "Of course, we do not want you to miss any of this," as she resumed her stroking of my swelling member.

Like her sister, Regina had slender fingers and beautifully long fingernails. I watched as she spread the fingers of both hands in a claw like fashion and began to softly rake the tips of her nails across my scrotum. Slowly back and forth she raked them starting underneath my scrotum at the base encircling my entire nut sack. Immediately I felt goose bumps begin to rise on the inside of my thighs and run down both legs. After several slow rakes of her nails she commented on how my nuts were swelling and becoming full. She then asked her sister to tell her when she thought I was fully erect so that they could get started on their plan of action.

Sue looked at me and smiled, "Are you ready yet?"

I said, "Oh yes, yes. I am ready."

Regina laughed, "Okay. Hmmmm, now which one should I start with. I think this one is good."

I watched as she gripped my right nut between her thumb and two fingers and slowly squeezed it and then release the pressure.

The pain was sharp and forced me to tense up. I gasped, "Ouch!"

Regina again squeezed it, this time more firmly and released. Again I gasped, "Owwwww! Shit! That hurt."

Regina looked at me and smiled. She squeezed my right nut once again and this time held it between her fingers, squeezing and rolling it back and forth. As she did this she commented on how it felt like a squishy marble.

My entire body tightened as I felt the constant sharp pain roll from my groin into my stomach. I pulled on the straps holding my legs apart struggling to bring my knees up to my chest but was unable to do so. Regina recognized my feeble attempts and giggled looking at me, "Nope, struggle all you want but you are all ours tonight. We are going to squeeze you all night until you cum. Until then we are not going to stop."

I gasped, "Okay, okay, you guys made your point. This hurts too much. Let me go now."

Regina smiled at me shaking her head not saying a word. She continued to roll and squeeze my nut while her sister Sue stroked my throbbing cock up and down. I screamed in pain, "Ouch, Oh stop, stop it hurts."

But Regina did not stop. Instead, I saw her smile and lick the fingertips of the fingers in her left hand. Then she reached in with them grabbing my left nut, doing the same to it as she was to its counterpart. She was now squeezing and rolling both my nuts between her fingers, causing me great pain. I arched my back and raised my hips into the air desperately struggling to find some kind of release. Instead Regina took advantage of this and scooted in even closer to me sliding her crossed legs further under my thighs. When I lowered myself back down I rested firmly on her legs. I felt so vulnerable now with my groined raised up in her lap.

Sue laughed, "He is really moving now." Regina answered, " Yes, but I am keeping a good grip on his balls. I have them both. They feel so gushy and smooth between my fingers. How are you doing?"

Sue replied, "He is still hard. I am going to start rubbing the head more now."

Regina said, "Okay, since you are going to do that we do not want him to cum too soon. I am going to squeeze his nuts harder."

Hearing this I screamed at the top of my lungs, "NOOOOOO! Please do not do that. The pain. It hurts. Not harder Regina please."

Regina and Sue laughed, "Oh come on, this is what you have been wanting, just bare with us."

Sue moved her stroking fingers up to the head and began to rub the sensitive area and I began to feel the first stirring of wanting to cum. My breathing became rapid. Suddenly Regina's grip on my nuts became harder and the urge to cum subsided quickly as I screamed at the top of my lungs, "Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh!!!!" I shut my eyes tightly tossing my head from side to side, bright colors flashed across the darkness. Regina's fingertips felt like hot pokers in my nut sack. Regina shouted in excitement over my screams of pain, "Whoooweee! This is fun! Scream as loud as you want. No one will hear except Sue and I." With each squeeze of her fingers I felt my nuts slip out only to be painfully found again by her probing fingers and squeezed again. Each time my body jerked in spasms. The tense muscles in my back and legs began to tire under the constant onslaught. Sue continued to work the head of my cock. I could not believe it when she said that I was starting to precum. I opened my eyes to see. Sure enough as she squeezed the head a drop of precum leaked out.

I said, "Thank God. I have to cum Sue. Pump me faster Please!"

Sue laughed and shook her head, " Oh no, not yet sweetie," as she then took the tip of her long index nail and poked it into the hole at the end of my swollen head. Slowly she wiggled it back and forth. Again, I screamed at the top of my lungs, "Noooooo! Oh God!!! Stop both of you stop! It hurts!"

Sue laughed, "Stop screaming and enjoy this." Sue continued to wiggle her nail until my swollen head diminished and the precum stopped leaking. She stopped wiggling it but kept it inside the hole and continued to rub the head between her thumb and index finger of her other hand. My thrusts and struggles became more intense as I begged for release and begged for them to stop. Regina asked Sue to hold me down that she was having difficulty holding my nuts. Sue who was sitting on her knees beside me said, "Okay I will try," and slid her left leg from underneath her throwing it over my stomach. The presence of her beautiful long leg resting across my stomach added a twisted sense of excitement but was briefly enjoyed as I felt my nuts being squeezed and jostled even harder.

Regina lowered her head in concentration. The look on her face was intense as she tortured my nuts. I began to feel that sickly feeling in my lower abdomen as the constant pain of having my nuts racked began to overtake me. Regina asked her sister how I was doing. Sue explained to her that my cock was semi hard. Sue removed her nail from inside the head and began to stroke me in long strokes. As she did this she gently ran the tips of her other fingernails around the skin at the base of my cock.

Regina said, "Okay, get him hard again." Sue raised her left leg from my stomach and began to rub her sexy calf across the head of my cock while she jerked my shaft. Sue guided the head against the smooth skin of her calf. Amazingly I felt and watched my cock slowly grow into hardness once again despite the pain Regina was causing me between my legs. Sue felt me growing in her hand knowing that I would be turned on by her long leg. She smiled at me saying, "I knew you would get hard against my leg." I felt completely helpless. These two knew me well and they knew what turned me on the most as they exploited my weaknesses.

I screamed, "Please stop!! I can't take anymore!!" Sue laughed, "You have to cum first. That's all, just cum." Then she teased me as she lowered her face to my cock and pursing her full lips saying, "Cum, you can do it. Cum for me." They both laughed and I screamed, "SHIIIIIIT!! This is crazy! Please stop!" I knew no one would hear me but I screamed my pain loudly hoping they would listen.

Regina looked at me pitifully and said, "I am tired of hearing him complain, put the gag on him."

Sue stopped what she was doing and reached into the bag and produced an elastic strap with a rubber ball in the center. She leaned over and attempted to shove the ball into my mouth. I clenched my teeth preventing her from doing so. She turned to her sister saying, "He won't open his mouth." Regina said, "No problem and squeezed my left nut hard between her fingers. I screamed from the excruciating pain and in doing so Sue quickly shoved the ball into my mouth muffling my scream. She then brought the ends around my head synching it tightly in back. I muffled and groaned: my screams of anguish were futile. Sue immediately picked up where she left off bringing me back to full hardness.

Regina said, "Much better, now lets get back to work." Regina squeezed my balls harder than ever saying, "This is like checking the fruit at the market for juiciness." Sue laughed. I screamed in muffled silence as I watched Sue jerk my cock occasionally rubbing the purple head and then stroking again. She was expertly working my cock and knew just the right amount of sensitivity to keep my hard. The look on her gentle impish face was nonchalant as she tilted her head from side to side every so often as if studying what she was doing to me. Tirelessly, she jerked my cock then turning to look at me smiling.

I had lost complete control of my body as I felt it giving out. My muscles were exhausted. Sue noticed that I was reduced to quivering as my body shook uncontrollably. She smiled at me saying, "You are completely exhausted now, you have no choice but relax we have control."

I began to feel sick in my stomach as if I was about to puke when Regina exclaimed, "Shit!! I lost it. I lost his right nut."

Sue giggled, "What are you talking about."

Regina laughed, "The damn thing must have moved up inside."

Sue laughed, "Your joking right? Can it do that?"

Regina said, "No, I'm not joking."

Sue said, "Well you better find it."

Regina said, "I will get it back."

Sue leaned over to watch what her sister was doing. I watched as I felt her probe a long fingernail into my nut sack and up into my lower abdomen. I felt her finger moving slowly around inside my groin searching for my nut. Occasionally I would feel the tip of her nail move against it causing me to spasm in pain. All the while she delved her finger around inside me Regina continued to punish my left nut with her other fingers and Sue stroked my cock methodically.

Regina cursed, "Damn! Every now and then I can feel it there. I am going to have to go deeper and try to wrap the tip of my nail behind it plucking it back out."

Sue said, "Awesome! I would love to do that."

Hearing all this I was muffling No! No! But they could not understand. Sue looked at me and recognized the fear in my eyes she smiled, "Look at him Regina I think he is scared shitless."

Regina smiled and leaned in closer to me her face hovering over my groin, "I want to watch his expression while I do this."

Slowly I felt Regina's finger extend into me, "As she did this I saw her eyes look away in concentration as the tip of her tongue poked out between her lips. Then she looked back at me smiling. Her finger was buried all the way into my sack as I felt her knuckles pressing against me. I could feel her finger turning in circles touching areas inside me never before touched. Occasionally she hit a nerve causing me to jump. This whole time I groaned in pain, breathing franticly through my nostrils. The pain was intense as I stared into Regina's lovely smiling face. Her mouth slightly open as she exclaimed almost to herself, "Got you!"

I felt the nail of her index finger slide along the side of my nut and move in behind it. I shut my eyes tightly, the pain almost unbearable.

Regina laughed, "I think I am just gonna stay here and play with it inside you for a while." I screamed muffled No after No tossing my head from side to side. Teasingly I felt her flick it again and again with her nail. I squeezed my eyes tightly shut forcing the tears to roll down my face.

Regina said, "Look! He's crying."

Sue exclaimed, "Oh my God! We reduced him to tears."

I cried. My body shook by the muffled sobs. Regina was relentless as she prodded and flicked the nut inside me.

Regina said, "It is amazing how much pleasure and pain just the fingers and hands can provide."

Sue laughed, "I am loving this."

After a minute or so Regina said, " Okay I guess I better pull this nut out back where it belongs."

I opened my eyes to find Regina still smiling at me as I felt her fingernail move behind my nut and ever so slowly begin to pull on it forcing it back down. Immediately it was obvious that by doing this she was forcing my body to do something it did not want to do. The pain was the most excruciating I had felt that night.

Slowly she pulled on it saying, "C'mon little nutsy."

Sue laughed, "Wow, what you're doing to him is making his cock twitch like crazy in my hand."

Sue was stroking my cock with one hand, while her fingers danced across the head.

Suddenly I felt Regina pop my left nut between her fingers combined with the slow pulling of my other nut I shut my eyes again in extreme pain saw a bright flash of color and blacked out. I welcomed the oblivion brought on by passing out.

I do not know for how long I was out of it. I do remember waking back up to a cool sensation on my forehead. The girls had applied a moist rag to my forehead. Quickly I felt the familiar pain in my groin again. I moaned, my mind shouting, "NO! NO!" Sue giggled, "Welcome back. We lost you there for a second." Then as if reading my mind she said, "You're not going to get off that easy."

The girls had not moved me I was still tied up spread eagle on the bed. I stared down at what they were doing to me. Amazingly, I was immediately becoming hard again. They were both working me over using their feet. Sue sat along side me where she had my cock in a double toe lock. My shaft was locked between her big toe and second toe of her left foot and the same toes of her right foot were locked just below the head. Regina sat up between my legs her knees brought up to her chest she was squeezing my balls with her long toes. With her chin resting on her knees she smiled at me saying, "Morning, You gonna cry for us again? I hope you don't mind my toes playing with your little nutsys."

Sue laughed as she began to pump my shaft and head between her tight toes.

The pain inflicted on my nuts by Regina's toes was more of a dull pain as compared to the sharp precise pain her fingers caused. I was able to deal with this a little better. I began to pump my hips up in rhythm to the toe job Sue was giving me. I wanted to reach out and caress her beautifully shaped calves as they swayed to and fro in front of me. My breathing increased as I felt the cum begin to rise. Sue recognizing this reaction in me smiled down at me and winked. She began to caress her swaying calves rubbing them sensually. She said, "You enjoy what you see?"

Precum began to ooze freely from the tip of my dick and Sue squeezed her toes tightly beneath the head eeking out more of the clear fluid and catching it on her big toe. Regina continued to poke and prod my nuts with her toes. Sue picked up the pace, stroking me in full measure between her toes. I desperately wanted and needed to cum. My entire groin area was on fire and I was praying to God that this was it and they would finish me off. I threw my hips up to meet Sue's ever increasing strokes releasing high pitched muffled sounds of desperation. I concentrated on making myself cum quickly to get this crazy nightmare over with.

Sue laughed, sensing the desperation in my voice and body action. "I never seen anyone try so hard to cum. I want to feel the heat of it all over my toes and feet. Give it to me, give it to me."

I concentrated on her beautiful legs, the sound of her voice and the feel of her toes around my throbbing aching member.

I began to feel the cum rise as her toes milked it up the shaft. Sue felt it between her toes as well as she said, "Its Cumming Regina, I can feel his cock throbbing now."

Regina stopped what she was doing as I felt her position her toes underneath my balls, resting them on top of her toes. Then she flexed her toes up pushing the tips of them into my nut sack and then pulling them out away from my body.

I jerked up upon feeling this as Regina said, "That's it, cum now. Cum hard I want to feel your nuts tighten around my toes when you cum."

That was it: the sensations, sights and sounds were too much. My body shook tremendously upon the onset of orgasm. I strained against the straps that held me in place and groaned loudly as I watched my seed spew out into the air, landing onto the shins of Sue's beautiful legs.

Seeing this Sue exclaimed, "Oh my God! That is incredible!" I felt Regina's toes wiggle as she laughed, "His nuts just sucked in around my toes."

Sue did not stop her toe strokes as I felt my body shudder into another powerful orgasm. This time my load spewed out onto the tops of Sue's feet filling in the spaces between her toes. I looked at Sue's face and the expression was priceless. Her mouth was open in awe as she watched my seed cover parts of her feet.

Sue cooed, "Ooooh that feels so hot!" She wiped up some of my cum from between her toes and rubbed it into her smooth calf, smiling at me as she did this.

Regina slowly wiggled her toes into my nut sack and Sue Stroked my cock between her toes until it was completely spent and flaccid.

They untied me and took the gag off. Immediately upon my release I rolled onto my side and assumed a fetal position. I began to cry my balls ached tremendously as did the head of my cock. The girls sat on either side of me stroking my aching body and consoling me.

Regina asked, "So how did we do for our first time at CBT?" Between sobs I managed to say, "Never! Never again."

Sue giggled, "I guess we should take that as a compliment." They both laughed as I heard them exit the room. The sound of the door shutting behind them brought about a sense of security. I was glad to be alone in the dark.

SECOND MOON IS A DEAD COSMONAUT WITH PANTS DOWN

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats no moon...

[Anonymous Coward]

Its an xbox running linux courtesy of the OPEN SOURCE LINUX MOVEMENT.

Don't look now...

[AshPattern]

The invasion has begun!

MUHAHAHAHahhahahahahahahaherk *cough* *cough*

Re:Don't look now...

[Anonymous Coward]

W3 0wN J002E2!

Re:Don't look now...

[Chundra]

Hmmm. Pretty funny how the "moon" is known as J002E2 and you were modded down as offtopic. Typical.

Re:Don't look now...

[Anonymous Coward]

Many comments are being unfairly modded offtopic in this story.

Re:Don't look now...

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to Slashdot. Get over it.

size matters?

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesnt an orbiting object need to be of some specific minimum size? or does Saturn have billions of moons that just end up looking like rings?

Re:size matters?

[Anonymous Coward]

Rick Austenson is ghey, look at his asshole

x-files fodder

[circletimessquare]

just arrived? nah, nah, nah... it's a camouflaged spy device from an alien civilization.

Re:x-files fodder

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong. It's a spy device from OUR civilization.

Re:x-files fodder

[nanoakron]

As long as it's more of a Rama (Arthur C. Clark) than Greg Bear's 'Hammer of God', then I'll sleep soundly.

-Nano.

Re:x-files fodder

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't that Unicron's head in orbit?

What's in a moon?

[(H)olyGeekboy]

Just out of curiosity, what is the scientific criterion for a moon?

The "trojan asteroid" described in the previous story is only 3 miles wide and take 770 years to orbit the earth. That is not what elementary schoolteachers say is a moon, a la Jupiter's many moons... giants like Europa and IO.

I also heard a while back that Charon might not be a real moon either, because of size or rotation or something? Huh?

I'm not versed in astronomy enough to know, so does anyone have an answer for laypeople, so I can talk with people at work about this? :)

Re:What's in a moon?

[Xunker]

Scientifically speaking, a "moon" is any planetary body that orbits a larger body and causes American students to turn to werewolves whilst visiting France.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

Charon's more than half the size of Pluto (measured by equatorial radius).

Are you perhaps thinking of the arguments that Pluto shouldn't be considered a planet because it's a tiny (very tiny) ice ball with some rock mixed in?

Re:What's in a moon?

[brokenbeaker]

As far as i can remember, and IANAA (I am not an astronomer)...

The argument against Charon being a moon (and Pluto being a planet) is that the two are roughly similar in mass. It think it turns out that the point that the two bodies revolve around is outside of Pluto - i.e. they both revolve around a point in space. Or, the centre of gravity of the Pluto-Charon system is somewhere in between the two, and closer to Pluto since it is more massive.

Re:What's in a moon?

[disco_stu00]

Here, let me bend over and show you.

Re:What's in a moon?

[NetFu]

New Page 1

Well, here's what Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary says:

Moon:
-- 1a : a natural satellite of a planet

Satellite:
-- 2a : a celestial body orbiting another of larger size

I think based on these common definitions that these objects, assuming they are found be natural and that they can be proved to orbit Earth, should be called moons. Maybe they don't fit our cultural, unwritten definition of a Moon, but that doesn't change the facts. So, maybe we need to change what most people think of as the Moon...

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

and IANAA (I am not an astronomer)...

Do you realize that it would have been LESS typing to just write "I am not an astromer" than to include the idiotic acronym?

Re:What's in a moon?

[orac2]

I think the BBC have it wrong - the earlier discovered Cruithne asteroid is *not* a moon of Earth. It doesn't orbit the Earth, rather it orbits the Sun in a rather unusual fashion that keeps it relatively close to the Earth's orbital position.

The new object is a moon though, because it orbits a planet. Moons orbit planets, planets orbit stars (hence asteroids are sometimes known as 'minor planets' or 'planetesimals').

Re:What's in a moon?

[jhines0042]

From the Dictionary:

Moon -- a natural satellite of a planet

Additionally there is a moon of Jupiter that has these properties:

S/1999 J 1 (a provisional name)
The seventeenth and outermost moon; S/1999 J 1 is the smallest-known moon orbiting a major planet. This moon is 3 miles (5 km) in diameter and has an irregular orbit roughly 15 million miles (24 million km) from Jupiter. It orbits Jupiter in 774 (Earth) days and is in a retrograde orbit (orbiting opposite to the direction of Jupiter). It was discovered by Robert S. McMillan et al (at the Spacewatch program at the University of Arizona ) in 2000.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Breakfast Pants]

yes but our moon also orbits the sun in a rather unusual fashion(if you were to look at our moon going around the sun without observing earth that is)

Re:What's in a moon?

[Bonker]

IANAA, but a professor once told me that a body that orbits another non-stellar body is a moon while a body that orbits a star is a planet or an astroid (astro- from star) depending on its size and regularity of its orbit.

Thus, the Pluto-Charon system is probably much more accurately labeled as either a pair of asteroids due to size considerations, or a dual-planetary system because their orbits are highly regular, albeit at a significant pitch compared to the other 8 planetary systems.

I've also heard that the Earth/Luna system should be considered a dual-planetary system because Luna has a much higher percentage of it's parent planet's mass than other moons... This jives with the 'Planetary Collision' theory of moon formataion, in which the moon is actualy a significant chunk of Earth, torn off early during our planet's formation.

The 'second moon', Cruithne, fits in with a large category of non-moon, non-planetary, non-asteroid bodies in the solar system. If you ever study the 'Trojans', you know that there are huge bodies of apparent moonlets that sit on a sixty-degree angle from Jupiter's, directly along Jupiter's orbit from the sun. (They are apparently held in such a strange place by the gravity of Jupiter vs. the gravity of Sol.) Rather than calling Cruithne a moon, we're probably better off adding a new 'common' cetegory to our solar classification to include it and the Trojans. AFAIC, there's no reason not to call these all Trojans and be done with it.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're going to reference a movie, at least reference the original.

Re:What's in a moon?

[(H)olyGeekboy]

Here, let me bend over and show you.

Please pay attention, sir; I was talking about moons, not Uranus.

*Groan* I can't believe I just said that. Sorry. (Ducks)

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

A large body of blue cheese created in a warehouse so NASA can create phony space mission films and then be broken up and sealed in lucite for gifts to foreign politicians.

Re:What's in a moon?

[kzinti]

Just out of curiosity, what is the scientific criterion for a moon?

Isaac Asimov, in one of his popular-science articles, once presented a well-reasoned argument that the Earth and Moon should not be considered a planet and satellite, but a double planet. He formed his argument by comparing the masses of all the other moons in the Solar system to the masses of their primaries, and showed that the Moon:Earth mass ratio was far greater than that of any other planet/satellite pair. He suggested that we could account for this "outlier" by considering the Earth and Moon to be a double planet.

Whether this argument would stand up to real scientific scrutiny, I don't know. It sounded pretty good to me, but I was just 10 at the time. Maybe it was just gee-whiz stuff made up to impress 10-year-olds, but that doesn't really seem like Isaac's style.

Does anybody else remember this essay?

--Jim

Re:What's in a moon?

[cyclist1200]

If it hast to be the size of Europa, IO, or our own Luna to qualify as a moon, then Mars has no moon. Both are the size of Cruithne.

The only qualifications for a moon that I'm aware of is that an object has to be a satellite (that is to say, that it orbits another body), and that it is natural.

Re:What's in a moon?

[GabboFlabbo]

Every object documented as a "moon" requires a black slab with dimensions factored by 1x3x9 burried beneath the surface and upon touching this slab, releases a high pitched screetch.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Ctrl-Z]

Well, according to your definition of a moon, 3753 Cruithne is not a satellite of the Earth, because it does not orbit the Earth.

Re:What's in a moon?

[WinPimp2K]

Yeah, well the center of gravity of the Earth -Luna system is about 100 miles below terrestrial sea level. Both bodies revolve around that point.

Some folks have argued that Earth-Luna is technically a binary planet rather than a single planet with a moon.

Re:What's in a moon?

[slurry47]

Is there a more correct name for what I think of as "The Moon?"

Not a "moon" like Jupiter has but "The Moon."

You know the one.

The one that has drastically affected this planet since before people -- the one the wolves call "Whoooooooooo!"

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's easy. If I can't use an ultra-powerful laser to engrave my name on it at a size that will be visible to the unaided eye from Earth, it's not a moon.

Chairface Chippendale

Re:What's in a moon?

[hanmer]

Luna?

Re:What's in a moon?

[Autonomous Crowhard]

The best explanation I've ever heard of if a two body system is a planet-moon or two-planet combination is this:

If the center of gravity of two bodies lies inside one of the bodies then that is the planet and the other is the moon. If the center of gravity is between the two objects then it is a two planet system.

Re:What's in a moon?

[PTBarnum]

If you look here you'll see that the center of gravity is 1000 miles below the surface, not 100 miles.

Re:What's in a moon?

[dalassa]

Luna is the term I've heard tossed around but they may be due to reading too much sci-fi.

Re:What's in a moon?

[mzajac]

Also, because Pluto's orbit is retrograde, highly tilted and very eccentric (it sometimes comes closer to the sun than Neptune), it's thought to be an object that was captured in this orbit after the formation of the solar system. All of the other planets probably coalesced along with the original formation of the solar system.

Pluto's orbit is in a 3:2 resonance with Neptune's (reminiscent of Cruithne's relationship with Earth). In the last ten years, a number of other pluto-like objects have been discovered further out in the Kuiper belt.

NASA has a good article on the subject entitled Much Ado About Pluto.

Re:What's in a moon?

[akincisor]

3: expose one's buttocks to; "moon the audience"

Re:What's in a moon?

[SEWilco]

IANAAE (I am not an acronym expert)

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

when he realized that, he had already typed IANAA. deleting that would have been even more typing.

Re:What's in a moon?

[reallocate]

If it revolves around something, regardless of size, it's a satellite of whatever it revolves around. The planets are satellites of the sun; the moon is a satellite of the Earth. Use of the word "moon" to refer to a "satellite" of a body other than Earth is common usage.

Charon is a satellite of Pluto. Perhaps you're thinking of recent evidence that both Pluto and Charon were not formed by the proceses that formed the other planets, but are, instead, Kuiper Belt objects. The Kuiper Belt is a region of the Solar System beyond the orbit of Pluto that is believed to be the source many comets and other objects.

Re:What's in a moon?

[p3d0]

Another one I heard was that it's not a moon if its orbit is convex; that is, its center of curvature is always toward the sun. In that case, the moon fails, and therefore the moon is not a moon.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:

Luna \Lu"na\, n. [L.; akin to lucere to shine. See {Light}, n.,
and cf. {Lune}.]
1. The moon.
....

Seems valid enough to me.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Lars T.]

IANIIYAG (I am not interested in your acronym games)

Re:What's in a moon?

[Mt._Honkey]

I think that this whole argument is laughably trivial.

Why does it matter? Should we call the Moon a moon, a co-planet... It's just a word!

I've seen a few times on here "When should planet/moon be considered double-planet?". This question illustrates the futility of talking so much about the first question. If you set some exact criteria, there will be a point in which we have a planet/moon system, and by adding a single atom's worth of mass to the moon, it would be a double planet system.

Obviously there are times that it is clearly Planet/Moon (Neptune/Triton for example), and if two bodies have mass within 10%, it is clearly a double planet. I just don't think that the argument of whether Pluto/Charon and Earth/Moon are double planets or planet/moon systems, just because it is a gradual change.

When are two galaxies said to be colliding, and when does it stop? At what instant is a person dead? Within .1 picoliters how much alcohol do you have to drink before you are considered drunk?

You see?

Re:What's in a moon?

[Ryan C.]

I've often heard from astronomers and astronomy texts that a moon is an object that primarily orbits a non-stellar object. Thus our moon is not a moon since its orbit never gets concave with respect to the sun.

There is an obvious scientific problem with this definition though. The term "moon" predates scientific astronomy and thus any definition or theory with regard to something's "moonness" must account for observed data. When we discovered that our moon primarily orbits the sun, we didn't discover it wasn't a moon, we discovered our definition was wrong.

How about this one? "A body which from a non-stellar mass reference always contains that mass within its arc of rotation providing that reference mass does not also fit the reciprocal condition (double-planet)"

-Ryan C.

Re:What's in a moon?

[anthony_dipierro]

IANAA, but a professor once told me that a body that orbits another non-stellar body is a moon

So that would make the sun a moon. As well as all the stars in the sky.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

sounds like a good definition

Re:What's in a moon?

[topham]

Oh come on now, don't go ruining all their fun.

by the way, regardless of the crap all others dig up... I agree with this definition.

Re:What's in a moon?

[sr3u]

Luna means the moon in Latin, and also in modern languages like Italian (anyone remember `Tintarella di Luna'?).

Re:What's in a moon?

[hitzroth]

Since the Sun goes round and round in the galaxy, does this mean the Sun is a moon? Does this also mean that when bad poets talk about the "sun and the moon" they're really talking about the same thing?

Re:What's in a moon?

[mattdm]

The dictionary's job is to reflect our "cultural, unwritten definition". If it says something else, it's wrong. Just because a definition gets written in a dictionary doesn't make it a fact. In this case, I think it's in error.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

This message is redundant. Somebody posted the same thing at 5:05pm.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

This message is redundant. Somebody posted the same thing at 5:05pm.

That is because Tablizer wrote the other one. Nobody likes Tablizer because he is obsessed with discrediting OOP. Even if he was right, he is too annoying to listen to. Look at all that shit he writes at his web. The links go on forever. I have not seen somebody obsessed like that since goatse's reign.

Re:What's in a moon?

[Orthanc_duo]

I believe the argument was that pluto and Charon are twin planets (don't know if this is the right terminology). Like a binary star two planets orbiting each other rather than a moon orbiting a planet.
Then again I may be wrong.

Orthanc

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

i thought it was what we do when we drop our pants and "moon" the french?

Re:What's in a moon?

[geoswan]

Yeah, well the center of gravity of the Earth -Luna system is about 100 miles below terrestrial sea level. Both bodies revolve around that point.

And the moon recedes from the Earth five inches a year. So, if the moon has receded far enough that the center of gravity no longer lies beneath the Earth's surface does the moon graduate from being a satellite to being a planet? That is a crappy definition of moon IMO.

Re:What's in a moon?

[g4dget]

The "moon" was called "moon" (or something equivalent) long before we even knew that other planets had other things orbiting them. So, if earth and the moon form a double planet, it seems to me "moon" should then be generalized to refer only to the smaller of a pair of double planets. We should find some other term for those in-between things orbiting other planets.

Re:What's in a moon?

[kzinti]

Interesting idea. I like people who think about etymologies.

--Jim

Re:What's in a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you can't get a country to change to the metric system, how much chance do you have getting the world to call the moon a planet?

Re:What's in a moon?

[SEWilco]

IABADH (I am beating a dead horse)

Re:What's in a moon?

[dave_f1m]

1x3x9? Multiples of three? I thought it was 1x4x9.

- dave f.

Re:What's in a moon?

[GabboFlabbo]

quickly searching through the book yields 1x4x9, thanks for the correction =)

Maybe an old Apollo booster?

[ishmalius]

Here is a link I saw just before your posting:

Space.com

Re:Maybe an old Apollo booster?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's no moon!

Re:Maybe an old Apollo booster?

[GT_Alias]

Only problem with that is it doesn't address a point brought up in the article:

Observations made in Europe have failed to see any variations in brightness that might be expected from a slowly spinning metallic object.

Just goes to show . . .

[SanLouBlues]

God really is trying to moon us. Maybe we should practice asteroid demolition on these things so we are less likely to screw up if there's one coming straight at us.

This just adds more....

[p_trekkie]

to the debate about what constitutes a moon....

Even if this does turn out to be a natural object, it is probable too small to be of any significance. One of these days we'll have to distinguish between a large boulder in space and a moon. Otherwise we might have to start counting particles of space dust.

Re:This just adds more....

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe to be classified as a moon and not a chunk of rock, the body has to be at least 1 km across.

Re:This just adds more....

[utoddl]

One of these days we'll have to distinguish between a large boulder in space and a moon.

Why? So we'll know at what rate to tax its residents?

Asteroids

[evilviper]

Maybe this is just fate's way of teasing us. Quite a bit of talk lately that we are overdue for a deadly asteroid collision. Maybe we are going to be gaining more and more objects locked in our gravitational field, just to make us nervous. Similar to vultures circling overhead.

Excuse me. How many objects are obiting the earth now? Twenty!? I'll be moving to Mars tommorow.

Re:Asteroids

[Coffee Warlord]

No no no. This is actually Mr. Burns' long term plan to destroy the sun, again. The plan is to bring in so many rocks to orbit the earth, that the entire space surrounding us will be filled with such objects, preventing the dreaded sun from reaching us.

It may take another few hundred thousand years, but eventually, we will all fall under the sway of Burns Nuclear Power yet again.

Interesting.

[batobin]

When the second moon was discovered I wondered if there was the face of a woman on it (remember "the man on the moon" from when you were a kid?). That's good. I'm all for eqaulity.

But now that there are three, I wonder what should be on this one. The face of a she-man/transvestite? The face of an ape?

I'm sure Rumsfeld would be happy to blast George Dubya's face on there in no time (this is unrelated to the transvestite suggestion mentioned earlier, merely a reflection on the trigger happy habits of some individuals running the country).

criteria

[sixdotoh]

yes what is the criteria for a moon. and if its not a piece of alien stuff, maybe its that truck from star trek voyager. or, if you remember that bbspot article about the Fly Feature of win XP!

4th moon hopes dashed.

[lateralus_1024]

Nasa and I had our hopes of a 4th moon dashed when that NSync kid couldn't cough up the money on time. He hadn't even read the fine print regarding a conditional return.

No mention of NORAD

[HotNeedleOfInquiry]

I thought it was the responsibility of NORAD to track space junk. Their job is to insure that there isn't an incoming ICBM amongst the junk. What do they have to say?

Re:No mention of NORAD

[undeg chwech]

Since it isn't an incoming ICBM perhaps it was in a piece of sky in which incoming ICBMs cannot be found and therefore isn't watched by Norad.

Re:No mention of NORAD

[Anonymous Coward]

NORAD have responsibility for a lot more than incoming ICBMs these days.

They track any object in earth orbit, above a certain size IIRC.

In particular they are responsible for notifying NASA should any object stray into a 3 mile box around the Space Shuttle, and a similar (But larger iirc) box around ISS-Alpha.

Unfortunatley, I can't recall what the smallest size object they track is, and I didn't see any mention of the size of this object.

Re:No mention of NORAD

[PhuCknuT]

Yes but there has to be a limit to how far out they are tracking... With a 50 day orbit this thing has got to be farther out than the moon.

The Martian Space Defence...

[amorsen]

...has decided to deploy an advanced warning system, due to the number of missiles coming from Earth that have been hitting or narrowly missing Mars in recent years. While planetary defenses have had a decent intercept rate, some of the missiles are still getting through. Hopefully the new early warning system will enable the Martian Space Defense to improve intercept rates considerably.

Re:The Martian Space Defence...

[AndroidCat]

According to the inner teachings of Scientology* this is the 4th Invader Fleet. (The 5th Invader Fleet had to make do with Venus, but don't call them Venusians!)

* Sort of inner. Scientology is like a Mystic Onion. You peel it off layer by expensive layer until you reach the center of the onion. (Where you have nothing -- except tears.)

Stop laughing, this is science damn it!

Re:The Martian Space Defence...

[lightcycler]

Jou of tech cartoon

"Do you still want to make contact?"

(watches commercial TV broadcasts coming from the planet) "Naah, leave it!"

Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[zulux]

We all have grown up with the notion that there are three earth-orbiting natural satlites, but did you know that there is no mention of the third satelite in any media before 2002!

It's true!

See, it's all a plot of the Libertarians - they have been secretly construcing this "third moon" in order to live there and to not pay any of their taxes - taxes that you and I need in order to buy delicious governemnt cheese!

Being cheap bastards, this new moon is nesesairly small - but if you look at it with a high-power "telescope", then you'll realise that this "moon" has been meticulously constructed to look like Montanna!

Complete with Moon-Sheep!

I urge you, the right minded American, to rise up and take a stand! No third moon, unless taxes are to be paid on it.

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[linzeal]

An ayn rand death star, oh my god this is serious.

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[Moonshadow]

That's no moon...it's a space station!

It's all a plot! They're going to incinerate the planet! :P

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[kzinti]

Of course, we all know that the Moon landing was a fake! Just ask Buzz Aldrin, he'll set you straight (though he might also break your nose).

--Jim

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, a link to a broken (javascript errors) page. How insightful of you.

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[AndroidCat]

You mean like this: Buzz Aldrin accused of punching moon sceptic? I'd punch someone who kept poking me with a Bible too. Pretty good for a 72 year old Buzz!

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[Kintanon]

Damn straight! It was the THIRD time that asshole had ambushed Buzz to harass him about it. I think the idiot deserved to get his asskicked by a 72 year old astronaut.

Kintanon

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[AcdFlashBk]

Careful, that third moon, she is a harsh mistress.

sorry, really I am.

http://www.lp.org

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[AndroidCat]

Third? Time to get a restraining order!

"Mr Sibrel, an independent filmmaker" Is that like all those "actors" who wait on tables?

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[drik00]

no point in getting a restraining order against someone whose ass you could kick anyhow. capice?

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[FIGJAM]

You believe it was a hoax only because you WANT to believe.

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.htm l

Don't be so gullible.

Re:Third-Moon a Disturbing Libertarian Myth!

[kzinti]

You believe it was a hoax only because you WANT to believe.

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.htm l

Don't be so gullible.

Hey, Poindexter, did you actually read the page I linked to? Didn't think so. Hook, line, and sinker! I land at least one of you every time I post that link.

--Jim

Obligatory Star Wars reference

[InfoVore]

"That's no moon, its a rocket casing!"

I.V.

Re:Obligatory Star Wars reference

[leviramsey]

"That's no moon, its a rocket casing!"

No, it's a trap!

Re:Obligatory Star Wars reference

[AndroidCat]

"Oh wait, it is a moon after all. My bad."

Are you sure....

[TheKubrix]

its not just CowboyNeal?

ObDouglas Adams Reference

[idiotnot]

Maybe it's Earth's own fish?

On the other hand, it could be....

• Jimmy Hoffa
• A gigantic glob of pens, pencils, and loose change that seem to magically disappear from earth.
• This guy's vacation home.
• ....

What makes it a moon?

[howardjp]

Just how big does a piece of spave junk have to be before it becomes a moon? I mean, surely my collection of neat quartz crystals wouldn't count because they are all about the size of a quarter.

obelisk?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it black, rectangular in shape?

* 2001 music plays... *

Maybe, I'm wierd but....

[jsonmez]

This kinda reminds me of the move "Signs"... This thing appeared in our skys, we don't know what it is... Wait till three lights appear in Mexico City...

Re:Maybe, I'm wierd but....

[Anonymous Coward]

Completely offtopic here, but this has been bothering me since I was a kid... I just want to know if people spell "weird" as "wierd" on purpose? You know, to be weird?

Re:Maybe, I'm wierd but....

[winse]

no you're not wierd. actually I was thinking that perhaps this is an alien space probe that was supposed to observe our planet

Re:Maybe, I'm wierd but....

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahh, the English language...

i before e except after c... kinda weird, isn't it?

oops

[PirateKing]

This will probably make me lose that bet I made a year ago...they claimed I couldn't make that mountain invisible!

Well, it's not there anymore, now, is it???

In other news...

[james_underscore]

In other news, a red double decker bus has gone missing from a depot in Islington, London.

There are reports of a large red object seen rising into the sky by eye-witnesses driving over Waterloo bridge last night.

Damn.

[undeg chwech]

My horoscope said I was going to meet a gorgeous woman today. I guess that will change now this new mystic influence has been discovered.

At last. . .

[AlaskanUnderachiever]

with this new moon I shall have a second orbital base for my friggin' lasers. . .

So...

[Anonymous Coward]

I rightfully claim this moon for the Queen of Spain.

Christopher Columbus, deceased.

Re:So...

[Anonymous Coward]

MOD PARENT UP

Thistledown

[DCMonkey]

Perhaps we should check inside it

the moon isn't

[debrain]

That's no moon ... it's a space station.

Re:the moon isn't

[Anonymous Coward]

Which verifies that this is not infact a moon, but actualy just a "piece of space junk".

If this is true..

[glh]

It would be cool to do some scientific experiements on this thing. Maybe even put a "moon 3 cam" or whatever on it.

By the way, I've always wondered- why don't we have a moon cam (maybe we do?)? Or some telescoping equipment on the moon to peer even further into our universe? How hard would it be to put a camera on the moon and have it beam pictures to a nearby satellite or whatever?

Re:If this is true..

[foistboinder]

By the way, I've always wondered- why don't we have a moon cam (maybe we do?)? Or some telescoping equipment on the moon to peer even further into our universe? How hard would it be to put a camera on the moon and have it beam pictures to a nearby satellite or whatever?

There really wouldn't be any advantage over an optical telescope in earth orbit (except maybe having stable ground).

Re:If this is true..

[sweet reason]

How hard would it be to put a camera on the moon?

harder than putting one in orbit (since you have to land it), and half the sky would be blocked by the moon.

Re:If this is true..

[Harbinjer]

Are you kidding? Do you know just how much the earth's atmosphere distorts light? The moon has virtually no atmosphere so it would be much better.

But, you may have temperature problems and big problems repairing it. So the overall advantage may not be worth it, but the atmosphere thing would be a big help I suspect, but IANAA.

Re:If this is true..

[95_gst_al]

Or some telescoping equipment on the moon to peer even further into our universe?

There are 2 satellites in outerspace that report back pictures to NASA already. In about a year or two they will reach end of our solar system. They were launched about 25 years ago! Back to the topic...I wasn't aware we had a third moon little alone a second one???

Re:If this is true..

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

Hubble space telescope does a lot of this, though its limited in size. Because it doens't have atmospeheric distortions, it's mlearer even with it's relatively small size lens.

Re:If this is true..

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably because we don't have any satellites orbiting the moon. Not only is it ungodly expensive, but by the time we've done it, we might as well have put the telescope on the silly little satellite instead of sticking it down on the far side of the moon (the landing of which, as mentioned, would be a colossal pain in the butt and add to the expense of the satellites -- which might be more attracted to earth anyway).

Re:If this is true..

[foistboinder]

Are you kidding? Do you know just how much the earth's atmosphere distorts light?

Yes I do, that's why I said in earth orbit.

Re:If this is true..

[Magila]

First off the parent post was refering to telescopes in earth orbit (read: hubble). Secondly while there would be little/no advantage for optical telescopes, a radio telescope on the far side of the moon would have a huge advantage over earth based dishes because the moon would block virtualy all radio waves coming from earth. Thus giving it a much clearer view over the entire spectrum instead of being limited to a few unused frequencies like it's earth-bound conterparts.

Re:If this is true..

[Fez]

There really wouldn't be any advantage over an optical telescope in earth orbit (except maybe having stable ground).

Except for allowing us to see the invading Alien forces hiding on the far side of the moon.

Re:If this is true..

[pediddle]

half the sky would be blocked by the moon

Yes, but the moon rotates (as it orbits around Earth). If you put the telescope on the equator, you'd see just as much of the sky in the course of a month as you would from the equator on Earth -- that is, just about all of it.

Re:If this is true..

[sweet reason]

half the sky would be blocked by the moon

Yes, but the moon rotates (as it orbits around Earth). If you put the telescope on the equator, you'd see just as much of the sky in the course of a month as you would from the equator on Earth -- that is, just about all of it.

still, if you put the scope in orbit you can point it where you like when you like. and it doesn't have to stand against gravity, so it can be as big as you like.

in the early days, the inability to point a telescope at will caused some short-period variable stars to be misread as long-period, becuase their actual period was close to 24 hours.

Just a thought...

[DigitalSorceress]

Hey! let's send a manned mission to it so that the conspiracy nuts can have yet another moon mission they can claim was hoaxed.

*grin*

Obvious SW joke ahead...

[danger42]

That's no moon.... it's a trojan asteroid.

The Force

[codepunk]

Oh no, the DEATH STAR

Nothing to see here ...

[JonKatzIsAnIdiot]

It's just the flag guy for the Vogon construction fleet.

Re:Nothing to see here ...

[1nsane0ne]

Damn it you beat me to it. Now I'll just grab my towel, some peanuts, drink a few beers and be on my way. Of course finding a hitchhiker may be a problem as I'm kind of far away from england.Thats OK i'll hop in my Ford Prefect and hope for the best.

Re:Nothing to see here ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Beware the cheetah.

Re:Nothing to see here ...

[JimPooley]

Damn it you beat me to it. Now I'll just grab my towel, some peanuts, drink a few beers and be on my way.

You might have trouble getting change from a fiver though!

Maybe it's only the second moon

[ColdChrist]

Isaac Asimov has a piece in one of his science collections -- unfortunately I don't recall which one, but maybe someone can post a link -- that discusses "what is a moon?". The really interesting conclusion he draws is that by at least one common-sense test, the traditional "moon" is not a moon!

As I recall (and I apologize if I get this wrong; we're working with twenty-years-ago memories here) the key point was the relative strength of the gravitational attraction between the sun and moon, and between the earth and moon. I think the sun attracts the moon just a fraction more strongly than the earth does. The result is that at no time does the moon move away from the sun and towards the earth, and it does the opposite at some points in its orbit.

I can't remember the details so I won't post more, but with luck someone else can dig this up.

something doesn't add up

[D0wnsp0ut]

You mean with all the $$$ being spent on satellite technology, ultra-powerful telescopes, space exploration and such no one can identify the f^%king thing?!?!

Personally, I don't think we're getting our money's worth and I want a refund! :-)

Re:something doesn't add up

[Callamon]

Yeah, why not just point the hubble at it and find out what the hell it is??? If it's space junk, the hubble could see the markings on it and we could figure out who put it there.

It's not a moon

[fudgefactor7]

Cruithne doesn't orbit the Earth, rather it shares our orbit around the sun.

Re:It's not a moon

[fudgefactor7]

RE my above... (accitently hit...)

so of Cruithne doesn't orbit us, and therefore isn't a moon (like the moon), then this new junk most likely is in the same boat as Cruithne, and isn't a moon either...

sorry for the problem in posting.

Re:It's not a moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Cruithne does not simply "share" earth's orbit, there is a complex interaction between Cruithne and the Earths orbits. This causes it to follow a bizzare horseshoe shaped orbit, More info at http://www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/faq.html

Third Moon??

[JazerWonkie]

I thought we were only supposed to get a moon every few thousand years when that hot french chick from 5th element destoys the evil forces with light shouting from her mouth.

junk or rocket casing....

[Blob Pet]

or black monolith?

Ask Buzz what he thinks about it.

[dargaud]

Read this and this and have a good laugh. Go Buzz, go !!!

Re:Ask Buzz what he thinks about it.

[stratjakt]

Imagine getting your ass kicked by a 72 year old man and then whining to the police about it?

If you think you're laughing, imagine the poor cop who had to keep a straight face while taking the report.

that's no moon...

[haa...jesus christ]

...it's a SPACE STATION.

They can put a man on the moon....

[Anonymous Coward]

But they can't put a man on the second moon...or the third moon....

It's Actually Moon #5

[NeuroManson]

If you take into account Sun Myung Moon and Keith Moon...

How is Cruithne a moon?

[fm6]

I'm missing something. I thought a moon was an object that orbited a planet. Cruithne's orbit is profoundly perturbed by the Earth's gravity, but it stil orbits the sun.

Re:How is Cruithne a moon?

[Mercuria]

so does "the" Moon. do the math. It experiences more gravitational attraction from the Sun than it does from Earth.

Re:How is Cruithne a moon?

[stratjakt]

It's always near the earth, is affected by the earth, so you can call it a moon, just not a true satellite.

It's just a matter of convention. The point is there's big rocks out there that are close to us, and we can strip-mine them and rob them of their natural beauty, just cause.

My question is how big does something have to be to become a moon/asteroid/near earth body? I was under the impression that theres tons of base-ball sized rocks whizzing about our planet. (we have a ring like saturn, just not as pronounced).
Some fall into the atmosphere as a meteorite, some get captured by gravity and end up in an orbit.

What's the yardstick? Being big enough to see it?

M-O-O-N, that spells slashdot.

Re:How is Cruithne a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you plot our Moon's orbit in the solar system, you'll see that it orbits the sun too. So, you'll have to find another reason why you don't consider Cruithne to be a moon.

Re:How is Cruithne a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

The primary centroid of Luna's orbit is Earth. That makes it a moon.

The primary centroid of Cruithne is the Sun. It is very often a long long way from Earth. This makes it an asteroid in a "companion" orbit.

Seriously, you can look this stuff up on any astronomy sight. Look stuff up before you post crap.

Re:How is Cruithne a moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

Cruithne isn't always near Earth. Look data up before posting with your mouth open. There are solid definitions for all of these things. Learn them.

Re:How is Cruithne a moon?

[anjrober]

And as an Anonymous Coward you are going to tell us what? register before you open your mouth, bitch.

Re:How is Cruithne a moon?

[kalidasa]

Cruithne isn't really a moon - it's a coorbital companion. And if you look at the Cruithne FAQ fm6 linked to, you'll see that it's not the only one. So if these coorbital companions counted as moons, this new object (if it isn't just a spent rocket booster) really would be the fifth moon.

Does the Earth have any other companions or moons?

Yes, the Moon. But apart from that, there are no natural objects known to be in close dynamical relationships with the Earth. NEW! Asteroid 1998 UP1 and 2000 PH5 have been found to be in similar relationships with our planet. We are currently (18 Sept 2001) working on publishing these results. Look for more info here soon.

Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[phorm]

Are any of these large enough to cause damage were they to go into orbital decay? I suppose there's probably a minimum size limit before something is called a "moon" as opposed to a normal orbiting "satellite."

Moon #1 is stable I'm sure, but it would be somewhat scary if one of these went off course and decided to make a landing.

If you've seen the movie "Time Machine", the moon crashes into Earth once its mass has been lower due to colonization (and blowing big chunks in it). I wonder if something like this might eventually happen if the moon were to be bumped by another satellite, etc.

We probably won't need to do a lot of blasting to colonize though. I remember hearing a long time ago that the moon was actually quite hollow in place. Apparently a semi crash-landing on it had it vibrating a bit gonglike at once point in time.

Another theory I remember reading is that Moon #1 was part of earth before something blew them apart and they eventually spun themselves back into a spheroid shape.

The lunarians are watching us from those crater-holes - phorm

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

If you've seen the movie "Time Machine", the moon crashes into Earth once its mass has been lower due to colonization (and blowing big chunks in it).

Which is complete bullshit, BTW. If the mass of any orbiting body is reduced, that body will break orbit and fly out into space, not fall.

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

It might be possible that the moon could crash to earth if a large enough nuke exploded in or on the far side of the moon, causing moon-mass to eject into space, slightly propelling the moon earthwards according to conservation of momemtum.

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[inburito]

Well you're talking complete bullshit too!

If you consider an object of mass m going around the earth at a certain radius r and velocity v the equations are:

Fg=GmM/r^2 and Fr=mv^2/r,
where M is earth's mass and G is the gravitational constant.

for a stable orbit Fg = Fr
-> GmM/r^2 = mv^2/r

simplifies to
-> GM/r^2 = v^2/r

and further
-> v^2 = GM/r

So looking at the final simplified equation for an orbiting body we see that it don't matter shit what the mass of that body is! You only need to have a certain speed to keep it on a steady orbit.

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[phorm]

But since mass is a determinate factor in gravity, would not this affect the gravity between the Earth and the moon. I may be mistaken, but I thought that current orbital path of the moon was partly determined by its own gravity as well?

Guess I'll hang up doomsday placard again for awhile - phorm

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the "Moon" is not stable. It is slowly leaving earth's orbit. Eventually, it will be gone. This is of course a very small distance per year, but it is there. For example, have you ever seen a solar eclipse? They used to be much more impressive because the moon was larger (relatively) than the sun, so it was almost completely dark, unlike today. I don't have any evidence at the moment, but I am sure google does.

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[N3WBI3]

Yes but gravity is not in that equation.. the *gravitational constant* is which does not change.

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[inburito]

It just so happens that moon's mass does affect the amount of gravitational pull between earth and moon but since the force required to keep a certain mass in an orbit is in the same proportion to mass as gravitational pull (which in this case is the force keeping the moon in orbit) moon's mass get's canceled out.

If you want to further complicate the situation it would be more accurate to say that moon does not orbit earth! In reality moon and earth have elliptical orbits and they both orbit around a point that is somewhere between moon's center and earth's center. So all of the previous talk is just approximation.. If you want to get even more detailed you should take into account relativistic effects too..

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[gsaraber]

His whole argument is bogus because iirc the moon fell apart because they were blasting new tunnels and got the charges all wrong.. nothing todo with its mass

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[p3d0]

That's the hard way. You'd have to make the remaining piece of moon fire toward the earth at such a high velocity that its existing tengential velocity (you know, that velocity that keeps it in orbit?) becomes negligible.

A much easier way to make the moon hit the earth is to slow it down, so that it takes up an elliptical transfer orbit with the perihelion underground.

Here, I drew some pictures. The one on the left has its orbit altered drastically, but it still misses the earth. The one on the right is slowed down enough so it falls into the earth; and it didn't need as much of a push.

Re:Degraded orbit, hollow moon?

[Royster]

Actually, it depends entirely on the amount of mass and means of imparting velocity to the removed mass. If you excavated a lot of mass and decided to eject it from the moon with a mass driver so that the velocity of the moon around the Earth decreased enough, it sure would crash.

Not just France

[fm6]

This also happens in Tibet and Southern California.

grumble

[Anonymous Coward]

*grumble* got this exact story rejected *grumble*

Ahhhh.....

[CaffeineAddict2001]

Hey, see that moon? No that one there. I think that moon is a bit of a spy. Yes I do. There was a moon like that on the summer of my sixteenth year. Some say I was sixteen but [sigh] I don't know. And there was a girl, too; her name was Marie. At night together we would walk down by the sea and oh my god if you could see the body on this woman. The way at night her long legs would stick into the moist night sand like gods own barge poles, you know. And I longed to tell her the feeling I had in my heart for her but the words would not come, they would not come through my spotty adolescent face, they would not come through my angry hair or my sweaty feet or any other part on this body that I know call a man. So the words je t'aime were never passed between us but the moon, yes, that moon spied on us.

Re:Ahhhh.....

[Exedore]

Ummm... uhh... I wonder who owns that moon?

Captured How?

[FuzzyDaddy]

Calculations suggest it may have been captured earlier this year.

Any small object near the earth-moon system sees a gravitational potential that is static (in some frame of reference.) The object either has enough energy to not be bound to the system, or it does not. So how is the capture supposed to take place? An object can't be captured by simply wandering into the vicinity of the earth, it needs some way to change it's energy - such as a collision with another object, which seems unlikely - space is big, and things rarely collide up there.

Unless there is some secret space-mining project which is deliberatly intercepting space rocks and slowing them down enough to keep them bound so they can extract space juice out of them...

Re:Captured How?

[jedwards]

Reverse-slingshot?

Some energy could have been transferred from the object to the Earth if it approached in the right way.

Re:Captured How?

[FuzzyDaddy]

No, this wouldn't work. The slingshot effect changes the energy of a small object near a large one in a frame of reference that is not comoving the large object - for example, a rubber ball bouncing off a brick wall does not change it's energy in the frame of reference relative to the wall, but if you bounce it off of a moving truck, the energy in ground frame of reference will change - but not in the truck frame of reference.

Because in SOME frame of reference, the energy of the object doesn't change, this type of elastic collision CANNOT move an object from a bound to an unbound orbit.

Re:Captured How?

[foolish]

It could have easily been captured by skimming (creating a lot of drag on the orbit) the upper atmosphere. Dozens if not hundreds of small sizes asteriods do this each year, though most appear to 'bounce'/'skip' off (or conversely 'hit'). NASA uses aero-capture as a way to optimize propulsion costs. If the rock is small enough, once slowed, the dynamics of the Sol-Earth-Moon system could have perturbed it into something fairly 'normalized'.

In fact, one of the reasons SpaceWatch type asteriod monitoring solutions are discussed is that a lot of these atmosphere skimmers appear to be Nuke hits to poorly designed tracking systems, and unless we KNOW that a particular item is a piece of rock, someone monitoring Kashmir might get a little jumpy. Just because NORAD knows about something doesn't mean it SHARES.

Anyways, sounds like a great chance to study the dynamics of asteriod capture into our system.

Perhaps Moon Number Four?

[mojotoad]

From one of the pages about Moon #2, Cruithne , this could be our fourth moon:

(Sept 18 2001) There are now two more near-Earth asteroids known to be currently in resonant states similar to those of Cruithne. These are 1998 UP1 and 2000 PH5. We are currently in the process of preparing these results for publishing. Look for more information on these fascinating new asteroids soon.

As mentioned above, Cruithe was reported on slashdot previously.

Matt

Moonlets, etc.

[ackthpt]

I dub thee Stanley
I dub thee Craftsman
I dub thee Snap-On
I dub thee Russian Airsickness Bag
I dub thee Paint Chip
I dub thee Scott Evil's Secret Hideout
I dub thee ...

That's no moon,

[uberstool]

we must use The Force to destroy it!

Did it ever occur...

[jesco]

to anybody that Earth's big moon (the one on which mankind made a great step) isn't a moon at all. Seeing it's sheer size compared to earth (about one quarter of earth's diameter), I would rather call earth-moon a dual-planet-system, same like dual-suns.

Bah, typical human arrogance. Just like with us being the top of evolution.

Let's have a real name.

[tiedyejeremy]

So, the 1st moon out there we started calling "Moon" The second got something I can't pronounce, Crithne. The third receives the sad designation J002E2. What's up with that?

1st kid named "Boy", 2nd named "Methusala" and 3rd named "3".

Here is an example of the obvious need of scientists to receive more liberal arts education and some ethics schooling!

Re:Let's have a real name.

[PhuCknuT]

Wouldn't you like them to decide WHAT it is before they declare it a moon and name it?

Oh Goody!!

[Anonymous Coward]

My ride is here - so long, earthlings! I can't wait to get back to Zatox. Earth is a yucky place. I'll have to shower for a month to feel clean again.

New Picture of 3rd Moon!

[teamhasnoi]

Its got a big crater in it. Pretty cool.

Re:New Picture of 3rd Moon!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yah, I bet you were there for the first "Moon Landing" eh?

No one thinks its a UFO?

[Anonymous Coward]

Great idea for a book.. Someone tell me if its been done... A ufo that is hanging out in our atmosphere and silly humans believe the Government / NASA telling them its just a piece of space junk.. a small group of linux hackers figure out the conspiracy and figure out a way to hack the aliens wifi network only to find:

Microsoft Windows 2000 [Version 5.00.2195]

(C) Copyright 1985-2000 Microsoft Corp.

Turns out Bill G is the head alien and out to take control of earth.. but.. stupid humans don't care because they figure Microsoft software is easy and don't mind an alien controlling the worlds software because they are to lazy to learn new software.

Peace..

Re:No one thinks its a UFO?

[uncoveror]

Since no one knows for sure just what it is, by definition, it is a UFO, an Unidentified Flying Object. That doesn't prove that it's alien, but it could be. If it is a moon, those nasty Zhti Ti Kofft will put a death ray on it.

Re:No one thinks its a UFO?

[theguru]

Not quite.. but check out "Footfall" by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle

Re:No one thinks its a UFO?

[kalidasa]

Actually, everyone is in fact saying that it's a UFO. One of Earth origin (unless it's natural).

Still a chance!

[rczyzewski]

So there is still a chance I could be the first person on the moon (not THE moon though).

Chick from 3rd Element

[Anonymous Coward]

Milla Jovovich is Ukranian

Suspicious

[aardwolf64]

Why do we only see news of this on the BBC page? I've not once seen mention of second or third moons on MSNBC, CNN, or any of the other online news places. I'm starting to consider the BBC as the National Enquirer of online news.

Re:Suspicious

[tiedyejeremy]

can you say "September 11 bullshit coverage....?"

Re:Suspicious

[Debillitatus]

I think you're looking at it the wrong way. More accurate is to consider MSNBC, CNN, et al. as the buck-toothed stepchildren of the BBC.

Re:Suspicious

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm starting to consider the BBC as the National Enquirer of online news.

As an astrophysicist, I only feel qualified to comment on their science reporting.

From what I have seen, their science reporting is not so good. In particular, David Whitehouse, who wrote this story, has written some very poor articles.

Most general-audience science reporting is not great, but the New York Times consistently does a better job than the BBC (online anyway).

If you want science headlines, the websites of Scientific American and New Scientist are much better places to look.

Re:Suspicious

[cmallinson]

I've not once seen mention of second or third moons on MSNBC, CNN, or any of the other online news places. I'm starting to consider the BBC as the National Enquirer of online news.

That's really backward. The main reason there is nothing about this story on the main page of CNN or MSNBC is that the american news media has barely reported anything non related to 9/11 this week. Comparing these news sources to the BBC is laughable, and an insult to those who provide proper and disinterested news reporting.

If you look at the BBC World Service news site, there are also many more very important news stories that will never make it to the mainstream US media outlets. It doesn't mean those stories are not important, they just don't help sell advertising.

Re:Suspicious

[geoswan]

There is something fishy about this story. How come Bill Yeung, the guy who the BBC credit as discovering this third moon doesn't mention the discovery on his web-page?

Ephemeris information for the object

[xlation]

The JPL has an ephemeris generator that now calculates the position of the object.
To see the data:

1. Click the "Target Body" Button
2. Choose "Spacecraft" from the "Select Major Body" dropdown.
3. Select "J002E3 Spacecraft (UNCONFIRMED)"

After further investigation....

[Anonymous Coward]

....it was determined that the three celestial bodies were in fact Wilson Phillips, accidentally jettisoned into space during a Soviet space flight originally intended for N'Sync's Lance Bass.

-MWH

Death Star

[NetFusion]

They have discovered the Death Star before its completion and i fear the plans to it maybe have been leaked to the rebels. Luckly we can prevent any rebels from circumventing its security flaws with the DMCA. Prep the fleet lawyer drones and prepare to launch.

Re:Death Star

[80N]

Darth Vader: The rebel base is hidden on the far side of the Moon. The Moon will be in range in 30 minutes...

Princess Leia: Time to scramble... (Where are you going Han Solo?)

80N

Re:4th moon hopes dashed.

[linzeal]

Maybe we can sell him to the chinese to use in their space program, I hear they have not worked out all the kinks yet.

Cruithne is NOT A MOON

[Overphiend]

Earth's second one is called Cruithne. It was discovered in 1986 and it takes a convoluted horseshoe path around our planet as it is tossed about by the Earth's and the Moon's gravity.

Umm, Cruithne's orbit is a horseshoe around the SUN in Earths orbit. Not around Earth.
The following is taken from Near-Earth Asteroid 3753 Cruithne Frequently Asked Questions

Does asteroid 3753 Cruithne orbit the Earth like a moon or satellite?
No. The asteroid's behaviour is more complicated than that: it doesn't orbit the Earth, but rather it shares the Earth's orbit. The relationship of a moon to its planet is called a two-body because there are only two important players (ie. the moon and the planet). However, in the case of Cruithne, the Earth and the asteroid both share the same orbit about the Sun, but are choreographed in such a away as to remain stable and avoid colliding with each other. This is called a three-body relationship as there are three main players: the Earth, the asteroid and the Sun.

It's a hollywood liner

[Anonymous Coward]

coming to abduct our precious celebrities! Uh, like Joseph Berardino, Victor Wang, or Martha Stewart. Those celebrities. Please don't abduct them!

So THATs why...

[Anonymous Coward]

i THOUGHT people were acting loonier than normal in the last few months!

Johnson feed my fish!

[mdechene]

It looks just like a..........Big Boy! Check for Osama!

Just tried to get to the earlier /. article

[StressGuy]

Wasn't able to log on..... ...does this mean that Slashdot has been Slashdotted?

Second moon: Cruithne

[cyclist1200]

I hear there's some really good calamari on Cruithne. Some weird blue loop that seems to lead to other universes too, but mainly, good calamari.

Re:Second moon: Cruithne

[Anonymous Coward]

I suspect you're going to get "OFftopic" for that one, too bad. Do you think he'll write another one with the "new" moon?

Re:Second moon: Cruithne

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think so, given that the other two books in that series didn't reuse settings.

It's a ufo

[Openadvocate]

It's a ufo, and they have just made this cropcircle with a binary message in it.

hmm,,, naaah, me thinks it's just a rock :)

And what classifies an object as a planet, shouldn't have a certain size or something? I remember something about a planet being "downgraded".

Re:It's a ufo

[Bender Unit 22]

Hmm, very good one I'd say, take a look at it!

Even if it's man-made, it's still one heck of a job.

Thats no moon...

[Metallic Matty]

... oh wait, yes it is...

Fifth, not third

[jdavidb]

If you google for "Cruithne," the name of the second "moon," you'll find that researchers think there are two other objects in strange orbits like Cruithne's. That would make this new discovery the fifth.

Beat that, Jupiter!

Errr..

[Frank of Earth]

The BBC reports that a new object has been discovered orbiting Earth. It's possible that it's just a piece of space junk

Or maybe it's possible that your fucking telescope has a smudge on it and it's nothing at all. Come on, can't they fucking check whether or not it's at least a rock before they post an article about Earth's third moon.

Who knows, it could just be Lance Bass.

Third "Moon"?

[goldspider]

I didn't even think we had one, let alone three!

mmm smoked gouda

[Cubeman]

Maybe this one will finally be made of cheese! ;)

Dark Side of the Moon

[EvilBudMan]

--Nasa's Paul Chodas says the object must have arrived quite recently or else it would have been easily detected by any of several automated sky surveys that astronomers are conducting.--

Not if it was alien and was hiding on the moons' dark side. It also might be a giant prism of some sort. Oh well back to OZ.

Why discovered by a amateur?

[Comen]

I find it amazing that a amateur found this.
You would think that with all the money that must be spent by governments etc... that this kind of thing would be discovered by someone else first!

From the article
An amateur astronomer may have found another moon of the Earth
And
It was discovered by Bill Yeung from his observatory in Arizona

Seems like it would be embarrassing to others

Re:Why discovered by a amateur?

[sixdotoh]

actually, astronomy is one of the few fields that amateurs play a big role in. experts often welcome astronomy amateur's discoveries or whatnot. i just took an astronomy class, which is how i know that. i'm no expert

Re:Why discovered by a amateur?

[AndroidCat]

Not at all. Look at the number of comets discovered by amateurs. The important thing is not having a big instrument and a load of cash, but lots of patience and knowing what's supposed to be where in the sky.

And you should see the setups that some of these amateurs have. (And I'm sure that CCD cameras and computers have done a lot to level the playing field when it comes to spotting like comets or sort-of-moon-things.)

And all the money that must be spent by governments? I'm sure a lot of people are rolling on the floor over that remark.

Re:Why discovered by a amateur?

[Anonymous Coward]

Amateur in this context means someone who doesn't do it as a Profession.

It certainly is no reflection on his/her ability in their chosen field.

The Sky is so large, and you can only look in one direction at once, that there is always the possibility that an "Amateur" will see something that the "Professional" miss.

Re:Why discovered by a amateur?

[DriceX]

Amateur astronomers spend a lot of time scanning the sky for new asteroids, comments, and space junk. The professional astronomers really don't have the time for it because they are too busy concentrating on one area of research, such as studying quark or pulsar stars.

This results in a lot amateur astronomers finding new comments, asteroids, space junk, and apparently third moons. While professional astronomers release papers on quark stars.

Drat

[SnarfQuest]

Now I'll have to have my astrology chart redone. You finally get good events coming your way, and then "bampf", they throw a new moon at you.

Re:Drat

[Anonymous Coward]

i know what you mean, those 80 some odd new planets really frell my readings up...

see, astrology is absolutely true; it's a fact, it can predict the future!! It's just all the new celestial objects they keep discovering that throws shait into the gears!!! *sarcasm*

Moons or no Moons

[Anonym1ty]

What exactly is a moon? A natural satellite revolving around a planet.

Of all the definitions of a moon that's generally about as clear as they get. Perhaps it's time we decide to define what makes something a moon. I don't think having a defined set size is going to do it. We need some way to define what is a moon and what is just some crap floating around.

A true moon should be a natural object (not man made). A moon should be smaller than then planet it orbits (or less massive). The moon must orbit the planet so that its orbit's centerpoint is within the planet, or very close - any more and then it would probaly have to be a double-planet. Well that covers too big and probably makes charon the 10th planet. A moon should also have an orbit that is reasonably stable. If the orbit is not stable, it's not worth bothering with calling it a moon as it won't be there long. The moon should be in size approximately some percentage of the planet's diameter say at least 1% of the planet's diameter (This atleast covers all the named moons of Jupiter but would also mean the minimum size of any Terrestrial moon would be only 7 meters) Or perhaps by relative mass - which would allow for smaller Jovian moons, but require larger Terrestrial ones.

And what about an object that orbits both a planet and another moon? Is it a moon too or just a satellite, or can we make up a new word? What about an object that orbits a point of equalibrium between two celestial bodies but orbits neither? Although I know of none, what about an object that orbits both a planet and a star? Nobody's thought of defining these better since the 17th Century? How can you call this stuff science when your terms are so vague? And if these are defined better, why isn't there some nifty show all about it all over PBS and the Science Channel?

I am not an expert in these matters, these are just my ideas. - Ok experts, lets hear what you can come up with.

Re:Moons or no Moons

[Quill_28]

Not trying to be nit-picky here but don't moons orbit thier planets in an elliptical pattern, with the planet being at one of the focuses?

But I might be wrong.

Re:Moons or no Moons

[Anonym1ty]

Well I woulda thought that too... but where is the centerpoint of Charon's orbit around Pluto? Is it a double-planet? I dunno, you dunno, we dunno, they dunno. But isn't it nice that the terms are so vague we're all right?

Re:Moons or no Moons

[kalidasa]

Well I woulda thought that too... but where is the centerpoint of Charon's orbit around Pluto? Is it a double-planet? I dunno, you dunno, we dunno, they dunno. But isn't it nice that the terms are so vague we're all right?

Orbits aren't circular, they're elliptical, so it isn't that there's a center, it's that there are two foci, and the planet is at one of them. My question, then, is this: in the case of Pluto and Charon, is Charon at one focus of Pluto's "orbit around" Charon, just as Pluto is at one focus of Charon's orbit around Pluto? And what about the orbits of the Earth and Moon?

Re:Moons or no Moons

[Yunzil]

Not trying to be nit-picky here but don't moons orbit thier planets in an elliptical pattern, with the planet being at one of the focuses?

Well, strictly speaking, planets and moons (and planets and suns) orbit around a common center of gravity. If the mass of one body is much large than the mass of the other, you get pretty close to an elliptical orbit, with the large mass at one focus.

It just depends on how accurate you want to be. For example, Jupiter is large enough that the center of mass of the Jupiter-Sun system is actually outside the photosphere of the Sun, but relative to the distance of Jupiter, that's not much.

One way astronomers look for extrasolar planets is to look for the star to 'wobble' as its planets orbit, so maybe there's a Little Green Astronmer out there somewhere who noticed that little yellow star in quadrant 57 wiggled approximately every 27.3 blurgons, meaning a large planet is orbiting. :)

Re:Moons or no Moons

[Anonym1ty]

yeah I know they aren't circles. but regardless elipses still have a center, just cuz you can't draw an elipse with a compass and one point, doesn't mean they don't have a center.

What I was trying to point out is that Pluto and Charon almost orbit one another. if you look at say Jupiter and Europa, it's quite obvious that one orbits the other. And both foci are definately within the planet. with Pluto and Charon, they move around so much that at any given time either focus may not be within either body. As of the latest stuff I've read of course, we still need a lot more info to explain Pluto and Charon's relationship.

But back to the origional story anyway... what about a body that orbits Earth in a zig-zag because of the influence of the Moon's Gravitational Field? I'm not talking about a little eccentricity here either. Or what about a figure 8 orbit around the Moon and the Earth? My point is we need to define a little better What is a Moon, Moonlet, Ring, Belt, Cloud, Debris or satellite. I mean right now someone (not me) might even try to argue that a stray hydrogen atom that actually orbits the Earth is a moon.

Re:Moons or no Moons

[Anonym1ty]

and yeah.. yer right I wasn't going into center vs foci in geometry or calculus or orbital mechanics.. i didn't need to... I wasn't even trying to be that close. As I said I am not an expert, but in general terms... not mathmatical everything has a center or a centerpoint you can decide how you want to define it I'm not going to bother, that can be for the expert, but if you want you can average out the locations of the foci and base it there just for argument's sake. I didn't feel the need to define it that well, because that definition wasn't required for me to make my point... but I suppose I could see how someone might get a little out there to say If I'm not defining myself, why should I argue that they should define themselves.... well because my not defined term is still less vague then theirs :)

Scooped!

[lepus97230]

I can't believe that RPG.net scooped slashdot on this subject (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1 5238) and almost scooped them on the Quake Adventure too!

And in other news...

[og_sh0x]

And in other news today, McDonald's Corporation has announced it will lower the fat content of it's french fries. The multinational corporation has stated that it hopes the lower fat content in American diets will prevent any more large objects from falling under Earth's ever-increasing gravitational pull.

*FAR* Side of the Moon

[Osty]

Try the "far side of the moon", since there is no dark side of the moon.

Re:*FAR* Side of the Moon

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no gravity. The earth sux.

Re:*FAR* Side of the Moon

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to correct your attribution. Pink Floyd said it way before the .com said it.

The 60-degree angle, moons, and whatnot

[devphil]

If you ever study the 'Trojans', you know that there are huge bodies of apparent moonlets that sit on a sixty-degree angle from Jupiter's, directly along Jupiter's orbit from the sun. (They are apparently held in such a strange place by the gravity of Jupiter vs. the gravity of Sol.)

Anytime you have something (Foo) orbiting something else (Bar), i.e., once the requirements of "orbit" are met, there are five points of gravitational equilibrium set up amongst the two bodies. They're called LaGrange points. The last two, L4 and L5, are on Foo's orbit around Bar, sixty degrees ahead of Foo (L4) and sixty degrees behind (L5).

L4 and L5 by themselves, ignoring L1-L3, are often called Trojan points, named for this particular group of satellites.

As for the defintion of moon versus just another satellite in general, I believe it has to do with respective mass ratios, and where the fulcrum point of rotation is between the two bodies. Right now our own moon isn't in a true rotation around us, we're in a sort of dumbbell tumble, and the center of the dumbbell is a bit below the ground.

(Actual astronomers please correct me, I'm on a number of narcotic-containing painkillers right now and could have gotten some words tumbled.)

Re:The 60-degree angle, moons, and whatnot

[Tablizer]

(* Right now our own moon isn't in a true rotation around us, we're in a sort of dumbbell tumble, and the center of the dumbbell is a bit below the ground. *)

That might make a good definition: if the center of gravity between the two bodies is below the surface of one of the bodies, then the other one is a "moon" as long as it is not artificially created (in which case call it a "man-made satellite"). Is this what you mean?

If the center of g is above the surface, then you have a "double planet". (Or double asteroid, assuming those definitions can be settled.)

As far as the ones with "funny" orbits (lagrange), I don't know about those. Call them something different, like "Lamoons" or something.

moon illusion

[Anonymous Coward]

the moon illusion

THat is interesting-- L4 and L5 planetoids?

[einhverfr]

If you ever study the 'Trojans', you know that there are huge bodies of apparent moonlets that sit on a sixty-degree angle from Jupiter's, directly along Jupiter's orbit from the sun. (They are apparently held in such a strange place by the gravity of Jupiter vs. the gravity of Sol.)

THis is actually really interesting because it indicates that these are on the L4 and L5 points relative to Jupiter and the Sun. For those that don't know the Lagrange points are the points where the gravity from the orbiting and orbited bodies are equal, and of the five points, only 2 are stable (L4 and L5). This is why, after the Moon, why the L4 and L5 points will be very important politically, economically, and militarily, assuming we want to have commercial relations with Mars...

But this new object is on a 50 day orbit around earth, so it is not on L4 or L5.

Re:THat is interesting-- L4 and L5 planetoids?

[Kintanon]

But this new object is on a 50 day orbit around earth, so it is not on L4 or L5.

This means that the object will either crash into the planet, or get flung off into space, eventually, right? Or will it eventually settle in to a stable orbit?

Kintanon

Re:THat is interesting-- L4 and L5 planetoids?

[kalidasa]

It sounds like it may have already settled into a stable orbit. There's no reason I can think of why the earth can't have a 50-day satellite.

Re:THat is interesting-- L4 and L5 planetoids?

[einhverfr]

This means that the object will either crash into the planet, or get flung off into space, eventually, right? Or will it eventually settle in to a stable orbit?

I think you misunderstand me. L4 and L5 are important points because they are stable orbits which remain fixed in positions related to the other two bodies. Other orbits are stable, but for example, the relative position of Mercury relative to the Sun and Venus varies, but if you had a planetoid on L4 relative to Venus, its position would be fixed relative to the positions of the Sun and Venus.

Re:THat is interesting-- L4 and L5 planetoids?

[Kintanon]

Ok, yeah. I misunderstood what you meant by stable. Cool. Interesting to know.
Now, is the big rock close enough for us to go mess with it conveniently?

Kintanon

Re:THat is interesting-- L4 and L5 planetoids?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't the SOHO probe at a stable point (L3?) permanently between the sun and Earth?

This explains...

[Anonvmous Coward]

...why my key policies never get implemented. I hope the newspaper prints a retraction.

Music industry is gonna have a fit

[Tablizer]

The music industry is going to ban any mention of multiple moons. For they have thousands of songs that would be obsolete if word got out.

"Moons River"

"Blue Moons"

"Sad Moons Nite"

Etc. Etc. Etc.

"We must protect the integrity and consistency of our content", said an anonymous industry spokesperson. "If you have to force legislation by any means available, we will."

Re:Music industry is gonna have a fit

[hanmer]

"There's a Bad One of Two or Perhaps Up to Five Moons on the Rise"

Catchy.

How fitting

[Anonymous Coward]

It is Osama Bin Laden's head.

THAT'S DUE TO EDITORS WITH UNLIMITED MOD POINTS

[Anonymous Coward]

Try Fifth Moon

[markt4]

The discoverers of Earth's second moon, 3753 Cruithne, announced the discovery of "moons" three and four - 1998 UP1 and 2000 PH5 - almost exactly a year ago, September 18, 2001. See http: //www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/3753.html for more details.

Re:Try Fifth Moon

[The Cydonian]

Feeling lucky, eh? :-)

Baah. Doesn't matter. You got to it before me.

For all those Google-challenged, you automatically go to the first hit if you press "I'm feeling lucky" (or it's linguistic equivalent thereof) instead of "Search". The parent's (and my!) link are the first hit on Google for "Cruithine".

There, pre-empted any predatory moderation.

It's going to that small moon.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's no moon. It's a space-station.

If only the discoverer were as enthusiastic

[Anonymous Coward]

See the discoverer's homepage

http://www.geocities.com/microplanet333/

No mention of third moon there. Underwelming if anything.

Maybe it's Moon #5

[n1vux]

There are one permanent moon and three temporary moons already.

Satellites: 4
#1 Moon, average distance: 384,000 km (211,265 miles)
#2 Asteroid 3753 Cruithne
#3 Asteroid 1998 UP1
#4 Asteroid 2000 PH5

The Page of #2 Cruithne's Discover has details on the weird "resonant" orbit of #2. #3 and #4 are from same team, and are equally weird. Note that "Horseshoe orbit" is relative to the supposed primary (Earth) as opposed to the actual primary (Sun) around which the pair are mutually resonant. The previously referenced space.com article said it had a booster-like orbit, implying chaotic, but didn't indicate if it was a ?stable? chaotic orbit, a single-lagrange-point orbit, or a quasi-stable multi-lagrangian horseshoe orbit of a temporary (10kyears) or what.

We dont need no stinking .sigs

The "Moon": A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)

Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.

Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!

Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=5698 04

The best things in life are three!

[dpbsmith]

OK, all together now:

B.G. DeSylva, 1927, from _Good News_, (modified)

The moon belongs to everyone,
The best things in life are three.
The stars belong to everyone,
They gleam there for you and me.
The flowers in spring, the robins that sing,
The moonbeams that shine, they're yours, they're mine.
And love can come to everyone,
The best things in life are three.

Of course, Trinitarians could say
"And God belongs to everyone
The best things in life are Three."

how big is the damned thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anybody got a link for its size?

What third moon?

[guttentag]

You mean that thing that keeps flying around our world without doing anything constructive? It's called a troll.

http://www.geocities.com/microplanet333/

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.geocities.com/microplanet333/

Or since geocities just pulled it, try Google's cache of the front page by typing in Bill Yeung and hitting cached.

The obscure link to his NEA pointed at this text (underwhelming no!):

The accidental discovery of Apollo 2002BJ2

The details as to the discovery of Apollo asteroid 2002BJ2 is
relatively short, but the lesson it taught me was not.

I have always been interested in recovering PHAs and 1998FW4 seems
to be a interesting target. At mag. 20.2, it is right at the limit of
my 18" set up. The uncertainty could be +/- several degrees in either
direction, that suite the wide FOV of my system too. The difficulty
was that at 15 Hr RA and -15 degree Dec., it would only be visible
for about 90 minutes every morning and it never rises above 40 degree
above horizon. After 4 nights of trial, there was still no sign of
1998FW4, may be it was fainter than predicted.

On Jan. 21, as usual there was no sign of 1998FW4 during visual
blinking. And I would like to test how well Pin Point could detect
other faint objects that might happen to be in the same field. So I
set the mag. tab of Pin Point to an unbelievable 22 (note 1), knowing
full well that at this level there will be so many possible
false "loners" in all three images and it will make the auto
detection take zillion of hrs to complete. To my surprise the whole
process took only a few minutes (with a 2 GHz computer though) and
there were a few detections. Among them was Y00C62. It's motion was
about 0.87" per minute at PA 140 degree or so. The motion in RA was
not too out of line, but the motion in dec was a bit high. I am no
orbit expert. But from my limited experience in seeing how asteroid
move in images, this mean that this asteroid may have high
inclination. While this seemed interesting, I have my fair share of
interesting MB discovery so I just emailed the whole batch of
astrometry to MPC.

As usual, Tim Spahr processed the batch really fast. He emailed me
back all IDs, along with the six lines of astrometry on Y00C52 and
asked me whether this object was real. With 6 positions obtained by 2
sets of triplets, I was pretty sure it was real. Upon rechecking the
astrometry it was confirm that this was a real object. Pin Point
indicated the mag. to be between mag. 21 to 22. I compared the flux
to a known asteroid in the same images and advised Tim to change the
mag. on the NEOCP page to 20.5. This is NOT data manipulation. I just
didn't want to discourage potential observer that this object is too
faint to observe.

The weather in Jan. so far had been frustrating at 333. On a rare
good night I could detect and report astrometry on 600 moving
objects, and the next day only 450 could be IDed to known objects.
Leaving 150 potential new discoveries. But the next night the weather
was less than perfect and only 30 objects could be picked up. The
whole experience was really disappointing. However, it did allow me
to reflect on the method I used and in the next dark run, a totally
new method to discover MB will be tested. But well all of this
belongs to another article.

With this kind of weather I was worry about spotting this object
again the second night. Well, luck was indeed on my side this time
and I did manage to pick up this object on Jan. 22 too. With only a
one day arc, all Tim could tell me was that nothing normal could fit
these observations, and more observations were need. On the third
night it could be observed again. With a minimum of three well spread
observation some meaning orbit could be tried. Tim came up with an
Apollo orbit but he said more observation was necessary. So far I had
not been too excited by this whole incident. I have NEA discovery in
my mind and I know eventually I will discover one. But I never give
this too much attention as I have other more immediate goals at this
point of time. But I also have to admit that by the third day, it
really got me curious as to what kind of asteroid Y00C62 could be?

I had to arrive at the airport by 6 am so no more observation could
be made. Luckily thanks to Tim again, Spacewatch jumped in to help.
With a 4th day observation, Tim was finally able to conclude that it
was indeed an Apollo. The rough orbit indicated that it has a=2.1 AU
with one sigma error of 0.7 AU! It also had very eccentric orbit
(e=0.66) and high inclination (I=25 degree) and H=17 or so (a
disappointment at first).

I got the news when I was in the New York airport. So after all I
did discover my first NEA and it was a relatively big Apollo!

While waiting for the next flight I draw the Earth's orbit and an
Apollo's orbit on a piece of paper, just to discover something that a
lot of you might already know. If an Apollo has inclination=0, it is
just a matter of time that it will hit Earth. But further rough
calculation showed that on average it will still take about 100,000
year for the two to collide, no wonder funding NEA search has been
such a hard sell to the public.

After all the dusts settled I have to confess that this discovery was
pure luck. I seldom visit this region of sky and I only shot a few
sets of images with hope to recover the faint PHA 1998FW4. While this
effort failed, a fair size Apollo was discovered. If credit has to be
given I think Tim Spahr and Bob Denny's Pin Point has to be mentioned
to share any honor. As to me, it just remind me once again that how
interesting this "sport" (to quote a term used by Roy Tucker) is. At
the end all I want to say that I will find another NEA soon, and this
time it won't be another accident, but a well plan effort :)

Bill Yeung

(Note 1) It is well known that with barely a few photons above the
background, photometry at such mag. is not very accurate. That is why
I set the mag. tab to 22, with the intention to get mag. 21 objects.
This is not a problem with Pin Point.

Re:http://www.geocities.com/microplanet333/

[geoswan]

That is funny. I used the google cache to find the page where Yeung talks about his NEA too. And I concluded the BBC had got it wrong, because when I read that page I got the impression he had found a different NEA.

After you posted the text I read it again. No mention of j002e2 (or j002e3). The object he found was designated 2002BJ2 . With an aphelion of 3.4 and a period of 1071 days, it is definitely not orbiting the Earth.

That's no moon

[Alec Varezz]

It's the LEXX!!

J002E2

[flogger]

If I decide to start doing something actively in the field of space/astronomy (In addition to Seti@home) I will find an asteroid and name it "SLASHDOT" instead of something like J002E2 (Pronounced how?). Then everyone can make silly posts about the REAL slashdot effect that will end the world.

That's no moon...

[CoffeeJedi]

It's a space station!
c'mon... SOMEBODY had to say it

DeConstruction Zone

[theCat]

Oh, that would be the Vogon advanced surveying team, laying out a new interspace by-pass. Everyone don't forget your towel!

Aliens!!!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the second part of the invasion force. Once the crop circles start appearing, I am going to save up lots of glasses of water and buy a baseball bat. :)

What's wrong with that?

[Anonymous Coward]

I named my first "Lucy", my second "Linus" and the third "Rerun"

Frank van Pelt

52nd state of america

[Anonymous Coward]

What Spain? It was discovered by Americans and thus it belongs to Americans. Go and discover your own moon!

On a second thought, if this space junk is just one of lost ships of Columbus then it is a property of Spain. But then get rid this junk from American sky!

What about the Mushroom Planet?

[Some Wanker]

I could swear that I read about the Mushroom planet and several "voyages" to it when I was younger. It was not really a planet of course, as it orbited the earth, closer than the moon. But it was small so I am sure the center of gravity was within the earth. Inhabited too as I recall....

Anybody known how to read NEO listings?

[kalidasa]

According to NEO, "J002E3 was not a minor planet (Sept. 6.68 UT)". Does this means that they've already confirmed that it's space junk?

First Hubble Image!

[Corbin Dallas]

The boys an NASA pointed the Hubble space telescope at our 'third moon' today to confirm or deny the concept that it is space junk rather than a celestial body. The image hubble returned shocked the scientific community. Dr. Steven Beckwith, director of the Space Telescope Science Institute ( which carries out the scientific mission of the Hubble Space Telescope ), was quoted as saying, "My God, it's full of stars."

In that case....

[Anonymous Coward]

...then, since the barycenter is inside the Earth, the Moon is a moon.

If that's considered a moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Then we are living on a moon that belongs to the Sun.

Ah semantics

[machine of god]

Technically we did pay taxes on the moon. The parts didn't come from nowhere you know. Thankyou for your time.

XENU has returned.

[Anonymous Coward]

Great. Now he can take all the scientologists and leave us in peace.

Re:XENU has returned.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dr. Ulrich Buehler Heidenheim 1992
"I can cure any homosexual with a couple hours of auditing"

No definite size to be a "moon"

[Dirtside]

Whether or not something is a "moon" is really a function of the language, more than the details of its size, orbital distance, etc. Remember that, at least in English, dictionaries are descriptive, not proscriptive -- that is, they give usages, not definitions. The language changes and evolves on its own; what is considered "correct" is really nothing more than popular opinion. Of course, different ways of communicating can be more or less useful or efficient, so it's not like it doesn't matter whether we use a word to mean one thing or another.

But there's no "official" definition of what a "moon" is, unless you happen to accept the particular definition of a particular person or group. If it's useful to call this 3-mile chunk of rock a "moon," then people probably will. If it's misleading or confusing, then (hopefully) people won't.

No, no, you have it wrong

[0xdeadbeef]

Luna is a harsh mistress.

Cruithne is a drunken whore.

This little thing is a street urchin that gives blow jobs for crack money.

Pass the shotgun, buba...

[BLAG-blast]

...we've got company coming.

How to find out whether it was captured

[mike449]

After the parameters of its orbit are known with good precision, one can calculate the object's position in any time in the past and see if it "goes away" at some time in the past.

Of course, capture is only possible in 3-body system (or more). Eart alone can only "capture" an object by its surface or the atmosphere. Assistance of Moon, Sun or other planets is required, so they must be included in calculations.

UFO

[Mark_MacRae]

Obviously it must be a UFO.

It's Elvis!

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't they just rename those two poor all-number buggers "Elvis" and "Kurt" so a lot of people can stop wondering?

Re:It's Elvis!

[Anonymous Coward]

(* Can't they just rename those two poor all-number buggers "Elvis" and "Kurt" *)

Name the fat one Elvis, and the fuzzy one Kurt.

I'm sorry, but there can't be a third moon.

[Anonymous Coward]

As it interferes with my business model. So, I demand this object cease and desist all orbiting activity or I will buy a law to enforce everyone to take an oath stating a third moon does not exist. Any CONSUMER will be imprisioned without trial if caught promoting, discussing, or thinking of the idea of a third moon.

As for Cruithne

[KewlPC]

As for our second alleged moon: it is not a moon!

It orbits the sun in a horseshoe-shaped orbit that goes quite a distance above and below the elliptical plane. The horseshoe orbits overlap, but don't take 770 years. However, because these horseshoe-shaped orbits overlap, Cruithne eventually goes all the way around the sun. It is this that takes 770 years.

It is affected by Earth's gravity (indeed, that is why its orbit is shaped like a horseshoe), but that doesn't make it a satellite of Earth.

Therefore, this "third" moon is actually the second. :b

The second coming

[BHS_Turf]

It is the end of the world! it is the second coming of Christ! and this time he's coming as a HAxx0r:

Much uncertainty surrounds the mysterious object, designated J002E2.

AHH never mind. false alarm. I thought it was JE2002...

Microsoft's been caught...

[Anonymous Coward]

...but we already knew that.

I'm pretty sure you're correct

[GePS]

I'm quite sure that Luna is the techincal name for the first moon that humans noticed orbiting Earth. Why do I think this? It fits the pattern of the true name of the sun, the other major body that is readibly visible to us earthlings.

"the sun" actually = "sol" (latin in origin, i believe)

"the moon" actually = "luna" (latin in origin, i believe).

It makes sense to me, but then again, I dunno what validity that holds. :)

That's no moon...

[JahToasted]

I sense a great disturbance in the force.

Sorry, someone had to say it...

More Obscure References

[Binome]

I just thought of the old LucasArts adventure game, "The Dig." I poked around on the LucasArts website for any info on it, but couldn't find anything. I could google, but I'm lazy. I'll just describe the thing.

Big rock shows up in orbit around Earth. Five people head up to take a look-see. Three people go EVA and discover it's hollow. They fiddle around inside it for a bit and it whips off and ridiculously high speeds to whisk them away to a mostly dead planet. They fix the planet, even though the German guy went nuts.

Anyone else remember this game?

Re:More Obscure References

[Corporate Troll]

Oh, yes, I remember that game. We played it (and finished it) on one of those lazy wednesday afternoons we were supposed to be in class. This was many springs ago.
Ah, memories! I'd love to play it again... Just I don't have it anymore. Since it's *not* abandonware you won't find it anywhere. Still, can buy it at Lucasarts I believe.

Center, not gravity

[fm6]

Yes, but from a geocentric viewpoint, the moon's path describes a circle with the earth at the center. From that same POV, Cruithne follows a kind of horseshoe with the sun at the center.

Affectation, but no proximity

[fm6]

It's always near the earth, is affected by the earth, so you can call it a moon, just not a true satellite.

Well, it's affected by the earth, sure. But it's hardly close. Its average distance is about an AU -- as far from the Earth as the Earth is from the sun. By the end of the century, Cruithne will regularly move as far away as 2.5 AUs. That's almost as far away as Mars gets its on the other side of the sun!

SECOND moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Luna is not actually a "moon" of the earth. It is the other half of a bi-planetary system due to its large size; enough to signifigantly alter the course the earth takes around the sun (it makes us wobble back and forth).

Videotape telescope output - select sharpest

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe it had been known for a long time by the non-amateurs...

Couldn't we image this with the technique that one guy uses, like videotape the telescope output, then search for individual frames where the sharpness is subjectively best. Then combine them with Gimp, Photoshop or such.

Obi wan

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats not a space station , it's a small moon

They have arrived!

[richie2000]

That's not a moon, that's the mothership! Mama, come and get me! I'm ready!

Mac Hall DMCA space weapon

[Anonymous Coward]

If anyone reads Mac Hall comics ( http://www.machall.com ) then they will recognise the music piracy defence satellite when they see it. Now if only there was a way to shoot it down....

Seb

Guys, there are more....

[The Cydonian]

Specifically, there are two two more near-Earth asteroids known to be currently in resonant states similar to those of Cruithne.

Wow

[Yer Mom]

So that's what Nethack meant when it said "be careful - new moon tonight"...

Scientists suspect object is space junk

[AndroidCat]

Scientists suspect object orbiting Earth is space 'junk'

Scientists think a newly-found object orbiting the Earth could be a remnant from the Apollo era.

Experts at Nasa's Jet Propulsion Laboratory believe its brightness and distance shows it's a rocket booster.

'J002E3' was discovered on September 3 and listed by scientists as a minor planet or asteroid.

But Nasa's Donald Yeomans believes that designation is erroneous.

He told Space.com: "It's most likely a spacecraft. It's not likely to be a natural object, not in that kind of orbit."

He said minor planets or asteroids tend to be on strange orbits gravitationally-influenced by the Sun. This does not appear to be the case with this object.

Nasa are currently running computer calculations and expect to be able to identify the object conclusively soon.

Story filed: 10:39 Thursday 12th September 2002

Re:Scientists suspect object is space junk

[n1vux]

A new and informative article has, in addition to the news that it's been traced back to Apollo 12, both discussions of how to test the hypothesis and

this MPEG video (1.7MB) to see how J002E3 may have been captured by the Earth

which shows that it is at least in a true-moon orbit and not the horseshoe orbit of moons #2,3,4. Unlike moons 2,3,4, it's more likely to smash into the Moon or our atmosphere than be re-released to solar orbit.

Another Criteria

[Royster]

If the path of an object is concave with respect to the sun, the object is a planet.

In the case of the Earth/Moon system, it is called a double planet because the path of the moon from the point of view of the sun in strictly concave -- that is it dosn't loop back on itself as do other moons.

And in the movie Moonstruck

[Royster]

Que Luna! Que bella Luna!

Re:4th moon hopes dashed.

[majestyk2000]

I hear they have not worked out all the kinks yet

Don't you mean chinks? Sorry.

maybe it's

[Magius_AR]

The comet probe we just sent out and lost contact with :)

Magius_AR

How to find out

[Tablizer]

Couldn't they take the *spectrum* of the object? That should be able to determine if it is man-made (Apollo left-overs, for example), or a space rock.

Perhaps it is too dim to get a spectrum of. But, if they try hard/long enough eventually you can get a "print" I believe.

call me when Ramma1 arrives

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not news - call me when Ramma1 arrives, or when a large hollowed out asteroid arrives - which looks normal on the outside, but on the inside, has a singularity stretching out to infinity...

Descended command, give me a sign!

rerun: a moon is...

[ChristTrekker]

I posted this last time. Hope it helps.

The funny thing is, I followed the link to the older story, and started reading comments. I was reading this one and thought, "Hey I remember reading that book. Wow this is written in a way I can really understand. OK that makes sense." Then I noticed that I'd written it.

NASA JPL

[Tibe]

Just a link to some more info.