Daily RC Article 9

Asteroids

Paragraph 1

Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about the solar system unaccompanied by satellites. These astronomers assumed this because they considered asteroidsatellite systems inherently unstable. Theoreticians could have told them otherwise: even minuscule bodies in the solar system can theoretically have satellites, as long as everything is in proper scale. If a bowling ball were orbiting about the Sun in the asteroid belt, it could have a pebble orbiting it as far away as a few hundred radii (or about 50 meters) without losing the pebble to the Sun’s gravitational pull.

Paragraph 2

Observations now suggest that asteroid satellites may exist not only in theory but also in reality. Several astronomers have noticed, while watching asteroids pass briefly in front of stars, that something besides the known asteroid sometimes blocks out the star as well. Is that something a satellite?

Paragraph 3

The most convincing such report concerns the asteroid Herculina, which was due to pass in front of a star in 1978. Astronomers waiting for the predicted event found not just one occultation, or eclipse, of the star, but two distinct drops in brightness. One was the predicted occultation, exactly on time. The other, lasting about five seconds, preceded the predicted event by about two minutes. The presence of a secondary body near Herculina thus seemed strongly indicated. To cause the secondary occultation, an unseen satellite would have to be about 45 kilometers in diameter, a quarter of the size of Herculina, and at a distance of 990 kilometers from the asteroid at the time. These values are within theoretical bounds, and such an asteroid-satellite pair could be stable.

Paragraph 4

With the Herculina event, apparent secondary occultations became “respectable”—and more commonly reported. In fact, so common did reports of secondary events become that they are now simply too numerous for all of them to be accurate. Even if every asteroid has as many satellites as can be fitted around it without an undue number of collisions, only one in every hundred primary occultations would be accompanied by a secondary event (one in every thousand if asteroidal satellite systems resembled those of the planets).

Paragraph 5

Yet even astronomers who find the case for asteroid satellites unconvincing at present say they would change their minds if a photoelectric record were made of a well-behaved secondary event. By “well-behaved” they mean that during occultation the observed brightness must drop sharply as the star winks out and must rise sharply as it reappears from behind the obstructing object, but the brightness during the secondary occultation must drop to that of the asteroid, no higher and no lower. This would make it extremely unlikely that an airplane or a glitch in the instruments was masquerading as an occulting body.

Topic and Scope:

Asteroids; specifically whether or not it’s possible for asteroids to have satellites.

Purpose and Main Idea:

The author examines the state of the evidence for asteroid satellites. While observations of “secondary occultations” have led some astronomers to accept the existence of such satellites, others remain unconvinced and are looking for specific further evidence (“well-behaved” secondary events).

Paragraph Structure:

Paragraph 1 introduces the topic, saying that while most astronomers used to think it was impossible for asteroids to have satellites, theoreticians knew all along that such a thing was possible.

Paragraph 2 supports the theoreticians; observations have led many astronomers to believe that asteroids can have satellites, because when asteroids pass in front of stars, “something besides the known asteroid sometimes blocks out the star as well.”

Paragraph 3 describes the “most convincing ... report” of an asteroid that might have a satellite. When the asteroid Herculina passed in front of a star, the occultation was preceded by another occultation, which led astronomers to believe that a satellite orbiting the asteroid had also passed in front of the star.

Paragraph 4 notes that, after the Herculina event, reports of secondary occultations became “respectable,” but warns that such reports have grown so numerous that they can’t possibly all be accurate.

Paragraph 5 concludes by saying that even astronomers who remain skeptical would be convinced by a “photoelectric record” of a “well-behaved” secondary occultation of a star, one definitely caused by a body accompanying an asteroid.

The Big Picture:

A firm grasp of the passage doesn’t mean absorbing all of its details (you can look them up if you need to). Rather, it means figuring out what the author’s doing in the text—in this instance, providing evidence that suggests that theoreticians have been correct all along about asteroid-satellite systems.
Although the author’s specific main idea isn’t entirely clear until you’ve read through the whole passage, topic, scope, and purpose are all revealed by line “Observations now suggest that asteroid satellites may exist not only in theory but also in reality”. That makes this passage an ideal place to start work on this RC section, even if you suffer from “science anxiety.” Topic, scope, and purpose, after all, are the three things that you need to grasp as quickly as possible in order to get the passage under control.

CAT Verbal Online Course

Previous Article Next Article

CAT Online Course @ INR 11999 only