Talk:(19308) 1996 TO66

Neptune resonance

 * copied from User_talk:Nrco0e

An update: After trying to find what the problem was with (19308) 1996 TO66, I eventually found a simple error that screw up my simulation for it (sorry). I ran the simulation again, and this time found the expected intermittent resonance, with
 * $$ \phi = \rm 19\cdot\lambda - \rm 11\cdot\lambda_{\rm N} - \rm 8\cdot\varpi - \rm 5\cdot\Omega$$

See here for the resonant angle of the nominal JPL orbit. The "breaks" in the resonance are this time governed by changes in its eccentricity. The resonance is broken when the eccentricity is highest, and the object's orbit gets closest to Neptune. See here for its eccentricity over the same time scale. I can upload either to Commons, if that helps.

I also did the same simulation for the nominal orbit as of 2007 (the time of the Ragozzine&Brown paper), and found that the resonance appeared a bit stronger with that orbit, but the overall shape remains the same, with (smaller) breaks in the same positions. As with Haumea, Buie would classify neither as resonant because of those breaks. Renerpho (talk) 13:40, 12 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Renerpho@undefined It looks like TO66 will leave the res in about 200k yrs. Am I interpreting that right?
 * Yes, from about 200-400k yrs, and then again from 2050-2300k yrs. Right when the eccentricity is at maximum. Renerpho (talk) 20:54, 12 November 2019 (UTC)