that's good, this is going to be incredible! Not a flyby but actually orbiting this comet as it goes around the sun! cool stuff. I cant wait for New Horizons to finally show us what Pluto looks like.
That's a very good point! With the gravity of the comet being so low, Rosetta will be able to orbit the comet only for maybe a few months before the activity increases enough that the push of all the gas and dust against the spacecraft makes it impossible to orbit the comet in any normal way. At that point, Rosetta can be better described as "escorting" the comet, flying back and forth with occasional dive-in passes.
Comet 67P has very little gravity, so, landing shouldn't be much of a problem. Finding a flat spot, then, synching-up with the comet's rotation should make the landing one of the simplest maneuvers of this encounter. After the Philae lander touches down, it will anchor itself to the comet. Because of its' low gravity, anchoring will be necessary. If it isn't anchored it could possibly be spun-off because of the rotation of the comet.
WHY ASCENDING THE ROVER INTO THE COMET THE DEVICE SHOULD MOVE CORRESPONDING WITH THE ROTATION OF COMET OTHERWISE THE MOVING LANDING POSITIONS WILL DESTROY THE PROBE.
I'm pretty sure NASA and the Max Planck Institute have made calculations that include the rotation of comet 67P and will make the appropriate adjustments. If they got this far, I'm sure syncing-up with the comet's rotation should be simple to figure out.
Which orbit are you referring to, the comet's orbit around the Sun, or Rosetta's orbit around comet 67P? Beside, why do you say Rosetta will orbit comet 67P at Rosetta's "apoapse"? Or, do you mean "apsides"? Or, apoapsis? Please clarify.
lorenguaylg That is true, we are learning every day, but to ignore what has already been discovered for the sake of continuing an illusion of science is a poor way for NASA to represent science. Comets are something other than what we were lead to believe, and there have been several missions which have proven that. With the recent discoveries of massive magnetic fields spanning the entire universe, how come it is so difficult to realize that electricity and magnetism coexist and therefore the electric nature of the universe around us is quite clear. This interconnectivity spans through all bodies in space, and it’s interactions are profound and abundant.
I agree...seems science is stuck in the "flat earth" mind set. ie, it a dirty snow ball...that is it, end of story. Global warming...it is fact...end of debate...science is becoming voo doo.
lorenguaylg I have been told for 40 years that comets are dirty snow balls and gravity rules the universe. There was always a problem I had...the Sun, via gravity draws in the lightest element, Hydrogen yet that same gravity draws in the heavier elements like Iron into the Earth's core? Anyway...you tube "thunderbolts project" then watch the Mars interpretation of its formation and compare it to what is taught...we are being duped by a bunch of guesses. You tube Electric Comet...open your mind...it that not the clique of the times? The "gravity model" is like the "flat earth" model. Those flat Earther insisted they were correct as well...debate over, well the debate has just begun! The Electric Universe model can be shown plainly in lab experiments where as the gravity model cannot...fact is no one can even describe what gravity is...only what it appears to do. Space/time does not exist. One cannot point in the direction of time. There are three dimensions...height, length and width, space is not "bent" and black holes do not exist in the manner we think.
