Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T16:07:52.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

One of the problems of long-term integrations of cometary orbits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

A. Carusi ,
E. Perozzi ,
E.M. Pittich  and
G.B. Valsecchi
A. Carusi
Affiliation:
IAS-Reparto di Planetologia, C.N.R., Viale Università, 11, 00185 Rome, Italy
E. Perozzi
Affiliation:
IAS-Reparto di Planetologia, C.N.R., Viale Università, 11, 00185 Rome, Italy
E.M. Pittich
Affiliation:
Astronomical Institute, S.A.V., 84228 Bratislava, Czechoslovakia
G.B. Valsecchi
Affiliation:
IAS-Reparto di Planetologia, C.N.R., Viale Università, 11, 00185 Rome, Italy

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

One of the problems of the numerical integrations of cometary orbits is that of their numerical stability. For those bodies which undergo close encounters with the giant planets the problem has a specific feature. Apart from the numerical instability of integrations in the mathematical sense, there is an additional source of instability due to the inaccuracy of initial data, i.e. the orbital elements. An example of this case is presented in this paper by the numerical integration of the motion of comet P/Shajn-Schaldach over an interval of 368.4 years, within which six close encounters with Jupiter occurred. The inaccuracy of the starting orbital elements of this comet is modelled by changes in the last digit of each element of the central orbit, determined by the set of the best orbital elements. In the process of integration, eight model orbits experience differential perturbations with respect to the central orbit. The numerical instability, caused by the inaccuracy of starting orbital elements and represented by the dispersion of these orbits, tends to increase abruptly beyond each encounter with Jupiter. It is shown that, with the attainable accuracy of the osculating elements representing the observations, one or two approaches to within 1 AU from Jupiter can make the orbit entirely indeterminate.

Type
Section IV. Dynamics of Comets: Numerical Modelling
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 83: Dynamics of Comets: Their Origin and Evolution , 1985 , pp. 227 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

References

Bettis, D.G., and Szebehely, V.: 1972, in “Gravitational N-Body Problem” (Lecar, M. ed.), IAU Coll. 10, pp. 388–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carusi, A., Kresák, L., and Valsecchi, G.B: 1981, Astron. Astrophys. 99, 262–269.Google Scholar
Carusi, A., Kresák, L., Perozzi, E., and Valsecchi, G.B: 1984, IAS Internal Report n. 12.Google Scholar
Carusi, A., Perozzi, E., Pittich, E.M., and Valsecchi, G.B: 1985, in preparation.Google Scholar
Everhart, E.: 1974a, Celestial Mechanics 10, 35–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everhart, E.: 1974b, Denver Research Institute Technical Report.Google Scholar
Marsden, B.G: 1971, Quart. J. 12, 268.Google Scholar
Marsden, B.G: 1977, private communication.Google Scholar
Marsden, B.G: 1978a, Quart. J. 19, 52.Google Scholar
Marsden, B.G: 1978b, Quart. J. 19, 54.Google Scholar
Nakano, S.: 1984, Nakano Circ. 450.Google Scholar
Newhall, XX, Standish, E.M., and Williams, J.G: 1983, Astron. Astrophys. 125, 150–167.Google Scholar
Oikawa, S., and Everhart, E.: 1979, Astron. J. 84, 134–139.Google Scholar
Pittich, E.M: 1981, Bull. Astron. Inst. Czechosl. 32, 340–345.Google Scholar
Roy, A.E., Moran, P.E., and Black, W.: 1972, Celestial Mechanics 6, 468–482.Google Scholar
Schubart, J., and Stumpff, P.: 1966, Veroff. Astron. Rechen-Inst., Heidelberg, n. 18, Karlsruhe.Google Scholar
Sitarski, G.: 1979, Acta Astronomica 29, 401–411.Google Scholar
Szebehely, V., and Bettis, D.G: 1972, in “Gravitational N-Body Problem” (Lecar, M. ed.), IAU Coll. 10, pp. 136–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar