Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site denelcor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!hao!denelcor!lmc
From: lmc@denelcor.UUCP (Lyle McElhaney)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: retrograde moons
Message-ID: <390@denelcor.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Apr-84 22:08:32 EST
Article-I.D.: denelcor.390
Posted: Thu Apr 12 22:08:32 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Apr-84 06:19:41 EST
References: <145@utastro.UUCP>
Organization: Denelcor, Aurora, CO
Lines: 17

I am aware of at least one theory concerning Neptune's retrograde moon.
That theory has Pluto and the moon behaving as normal moons about Neptune,
when some external gravitational influence (unspecified) caused them to
approach each other closely.  The interaction when they are closest caused
linear momentun to be transferred to Pluto, sufficient to force it
completely out of Neptune's grasp, and the other moon to fall to a much
lower orbit, in a new plane.

Seems farfetched, but then, it can explain the orbits of both Neptune's
moon and Pluto.  It doesn't explain the Pluto's moon; I heard of the theory
before the moon was discovered (one of Asimov's books, perhaps?).  But all
that means is that this particular explanation needs to be revamped, or
tossed out. That's what science is all about.  Is it easier to postulate
a creator with a sense for practical jokes?
-- 
		Lyle McElhaney
		(hao,brl-bmd,nbires,csu-cs,scgvaxd)!denelcor!lmc