ESG7@DFVLROP1.BITNET (11/18/86)
My assertion that the TAU may be a boondoggle induced response from many readers. Steve Willner correctly states that the prime mission for the TAU is to measure stellar distances by parallax. Accuracy through this method can be achieved through either having a large and accurately known base leg with a telescope of modest resolution, or a short and even more accurately known base leg with a high resolution telescope. It seems to me that limited space and astrophysics funds are better served with a high resolution telescope which can do something other than astrometry. Also the comparison of TAU with Voyager is a specious argument. It is true that the Voyagers 1 & 2 and Pioneers 10 & 11 are going "nowhere". However in their endless journey they did pass some extremely interesting places, i.e. Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and (hopefully) Neptune. It's my understanding that TAU goes directly into interstellar space. If the planetary program of JPL and NASA Ames were adequately funded I wouldn't raise a peep about TAU. However when the government won't even fund a lunar polar orbiter it seems ludicrous to study something with as bad of a science-vs-cost tradeoff as the TAU. Also on my admittedly crazy idea about Pluto being a rogue planet, Steve brought in some misconceptions. Pluto's orbit **does** intersect with Neptune's orbit along the line of nodes in Neptune's orbital plane. During this month Pluto has an inclination of 17.1362 degrees to the eciliptic while Neptune has the much more nomial inclination of 1.7696 degrees. Pluto's perihelion is within Neptune's orbit. One would expect Pluto to have a highly inclined orbit if it was a rogue planet that was captured through a near miss with Neptune's Triton. I should emphasize that this crazy theory of mine is **not** "respectable science". Main stream views on Pluto reject a Neptune connection because Pluto has a resonant orbit with Neptune. However the gravitational interactions between Uranus, Neptune and Pluto are very strong. Take a look at the longitude of perihelion for Neptune and you'll be amazed by how much it varies. Long term computer projections are impossible because round-off error will invalidate any result. We don't even have accurate mass values for Pluto, so this subject is wide open to speculation. However there is circumstantial evidence supporting my crazy idea. Pluto is a double planet. It has a large moon named Charon. One would expect Pluto to be broken up by tidal forces when it passed Triton. Triton is larger in size than Pluto. Therefore it could have provided the necessary kinetic energy sink to capture Pluto. Triton has an absolutely wacky orbit that is retrograde at 159.0 degrees to Neptune's equator and is remarkably close to the planet's surface. Neptune's second moon Nereid has the highest eccentricity of any moon tabulated in the 1986 Ephemeris and is also highly inclined. The crazy orbits of Pluto, Nereid and Triton are evidence that something strange has happened. If Pluto was a rogue planet its scientific impact would be incalculable. For this reason I think a Pluto orbiter is a mission worth considering. Gary Allen