[sci.astro] Transits of Planets

randall@ncr-sd.UUCP (Randall Rathbun) (11/13/86)

Alright, my curiosity has gotten the best of me. Does somebody know if all 3
planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth) transit the Sun from Mars, all 4 from Jupiter,
all 5 from Saturn, etc,etc. Are there some, from which transits are never seen
of all the inferior planets (Pluto?) How often do the above transits occur?
Would appreciate this information. Thanks.

freeman@spar.SPAR.SLB.COM (Jay Freeman) (11/14/86)

In article <1240@ncr-sd.UUCP> randall@ncr-sd.UUCP (0000-Randall Rathbun) writes:
>Alright, my curiosity has gotten the best of me. Does somebody know if all 3
>planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth) transit the Sun from Mars, all 4 from Jupiter,
>all 5 from Saturn, etc,etc. Are there some, from which transits are never seen
>of all the inferior planets (Pluto?) How often do the above transits occur?
>Would appreciate this information. Thanks.

NEWSGROUPS: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Transits of Planets
Summary: 
Expires: 
References: <1240@ncr-sd.UUCP>
Sender: 
Reply-To: freeman@spar.UUCP (Jay Freeman)
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: Schlumberger Palo Alto Research
Keywords: Transits

<*munch*>

In article <1240@ncr-sd.UUCP> randall@ncr-sd.UUCP (0000-Randall Rathbun) writes:

>                                                   Does somebody know if all 3
> planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth) transit the Sun from Mars, all 4 from Jupiter,
> all 5 from Saturn, etc,etc. Are there some, from which transits are never seen
> of all the inferior planets (Pluto?) How often do the above transits occur?
> Would appreciate this information. Thanks.

    Each planet should see transits of all planets inferior to itself.  Proof:
The orbital planes of every pair of planets necessarily intersect in at least a
line.  By happenstance, sooner or later both planets will both be on the same
side of the Sun, "on" that line.  At that time, the superior planet will see
a transit of the inferior.

    The "on" is in quotes because what I really mean is "sufficiently close to
the line that the angle Sun-superior-inferior is less than the angular radius of
the Sun's disc as seen from the superior planet."

    Actually, if the angle between the two orbital planes is sufficiently small,
the two planets can both be quite far from the actual intersecting line, in the
same direction around the orbits, and still have a transit.  If both planets
orbited in the same plane or sufficiently close to it, there would be a transit
every time the inferior one caught up to the superior and passed it.

    Stroboscopic effects might lead to long intervals in which no transits
were seen.

    A way to think about the probabilities is:  At the distance from the Sun of
the superior planet's oribt, how wide is the cone of space within which an
observer would see the inferior planet in transit?  What are the odds that the
orbit of the superior planet lies within that cone?  What are the odds that the
superior planet is in the right place in its orbit at that time?

Jay Freeman -- Schlumberger Palo Alto Research -- Canonical Disclaimer

freeman@spar.SPAR.SLB.COM (Jay Freeman) (11/14/86)

<*munch*>

In article <1240@ncr-sd.UUCP> randall@ncr-sd.UUCP (0000-Randall Rathbun) writes:

>                                                   Does somebody know if all 3
> planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth) transit the Sun from Mars, all 4 from Jupiter,
> all 5 from Saturn, etc,etc. Are there some, from which transits are never seen
> of all the inferior planets (Pluto?) How often do the above transits occur?
> Would appreciate this information. Thanks.

    Each planet should see transits of all planets inferior to itself.  Proof:
The orbital planes of every pair of planets necessarily intersect in at least a
line.  By happenstance, sooner or later both planets will both be on the same
side of the Sun, "on" that line.  At that time, the superior planet will see
a transit of the inferior.

    The "on" is in quotes because what I really mean is "sufficiently close to
the line that the angle Sun-superior-inferior is less than the angular radius of
the Sun's disc as seen from the superior planet."

    Actually, if the angle between the two orbital planes is sufficiently small,
the two planets can both be quite far from the actual intersecting line, in the
same direction around the orbits, and still have a transit.  If both planets
orbited in the same plane or sufficiently close to it, there would be a transit
every time the inferior one caught up to the superior and passed it.

    Stroboscopic effects might lead to long intervals in which no transits
were seen.

    A way to think about the probabilities is:  At the distance from the Sun of
the superior planet's orbit, how wide is the cone of space within which an
observer would see the inferior planet in transit?  What are the odds that the
orbit of the superior planet lies within that cone?  What are the odds that the
superior planet is in the right place in its orbit at that time?

Jay Freeman -- Schlumberger Palo Alto Research -- Canonical Disclaimer

news@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Usenet netnews) (11/15/86)

Organization : California Institute of Technology
Keywords: Transits
From: jon@oddhack.Caltech.Edu (Jon Leech)
Path: oddhack!jon

In article <13@spar.SPAR.SLB.COM> freeman@spar.UUCP (Jay Freeman) writes:
>
>    Each planet should see transits of all planets inferior to itself.  Proof:
>The orbital planes of every pair of planets necessarily intersect in at least a
>line.  By happenstance, sooner or later both planets will both be on the same
>side of the Sun, "on" that line.  At that time, the superior planet will see
>a transit of the inferior.
>
	It seems to me that with the right sort of resonant orbits
this would not always be true (nitpicking admittedly). I'd be interested
in hearing more about this from someone better informed.

    -- Jon Leech (jon@csvax.caltech.edu || ...seismo!cit-vax!jon)
    Caltech Computer Science Graphics Group
    __@/

freeman@spar.SPAR.SLB.COM (Jay Freeman) (11/18/86)

<*MUNCH*>

In article <1183@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> jon@cit-vax.UUCP (Jon Leech) writes:
>In article <13@spar.SPAR.SLB.COM> freeman@spar.UUCP (Jay Freeman) writes:
>>    Each planet should see transits of all planets inferior to itself.  Proof:
>>The orbital planes of every pair of planets necessarily intersect in at least a
>>line.  By happenstance, sooner or later both planets will both be on the same
>>side of the Sun, "on" that line.  At that time, the superior planet will see
>>a transit of the inferior.
>>
>	It seems to me that with the right sort of resonant orbits
>this would not always be true (nitpicking admittedly). I'd be interested
>in hearing more about this from someone better informed.

Bill Jefferys also made a similar comment in private mail,
which I was unable to answer directly due to mailer problems:

Subject: Re: Transits of Planets

> Interestingly enough, your argument fails for Pluto. Neptune and
> Pluto are locked in an exact 3:2 resonance, so it is possible that
> the configuration you propose would never come about for these
> two planets. (You implicitly recognize this possibility when you 
> mention "stroboscopic effects", of course.)

> Cheers, Bill Jefferys

    I indeed intended to include resonance in "stroboscopic effects",
but now I am curious.  Let's see, now.  If Neptune and Pluto
are in 3:2 resonance, that means that whenever Pluto is at ecliptic
longitude (say) zero, then Neptune is at either ecliptic longitude
theta or ecliptic longitude theta plus pi, for some particular value
of theta.  My question is, how strong is the resonance?  In specific,
in what manner does theta vary over the long term?  A range of theta
of pi radians would be sufficient to make the proposed transit
possible.  (Did I get that all right?)
    A truly constant value of theta is only likely in an undergraduate
classical mechanics course.  A quite strong resonance might have theta
oscillating quasiperiodically about a constant value, in which case
transits could happen only if the range of oscillation were greater
than pi or in case of fortuitous near coincidence of theta-nought and
the line of intersecion of the orbital planes.  A still weaker
resonance might have theta not "bound" (in the sense of an oscillator)
but still changing at a very slow rate compared to the rates of
revolution of the planets.  (Possible opportunity to quibble about the
precise definition of "resonance".)  Do you happen to know what
condition obtains with Pluto / Neptune?

     I wonder if anyone has attempted numerical searches for times of
planetary transits as seen from other planets than Earth?

     Are transits of Neptune in fact visible from Pluto, or not?

     Hmnn.  With a lot of luck on the orbital elements of the two
planets, it might be possible that instead of a transit one would
have an eclipse of the Sun, by Neptune, as seen from Pluto.  (The
perihelion of Pluto is inside the orbit of Neptune -- the issue is
where the orbit of Pluto crosses the orbital plane of Neptune.  I
know the orbits themselves do not intersect.)  (At the distance
of Neptune from the Sun, Neptune's umbra is on the order of one
astronomical unit long.)


                                    Cordially,
                                    Jay Freeman