by Paul
Schlyter
from
TheNineTenPlanets
Website
University of Arizona
In 1841, John Couch Adams began
investigating the by then quite large residuals in the motion of
Uranus. In 1845, Urbain Le Verrier started to investigate them, too.
Adams presented two different solutions to the problem, assuming
that the deviations were caused by the gravitation from an unknown
planet. Adams tried to present his solutions to the Greenwich
observatory, but since he was young and unknown, he wasn’t taken
seriously. Urbain Le Verrier presented his solution in 1846, but
France lacked the necessary resources to locate the planet.
Le Verrier then instead turned to the
Berlin observatory, where Galle and his assistant d’Arrest found
Neptune on the evening of Sept 23, 1846. Nowadays, both Adams and Le
Verrier share the credit of having predicted the existence and
position of Neptune.
(Inspired by this success, Le Verrier attacked the problem of the
deviations of Mercury’s orbit, and suggested the existence of an
intra-mercurial planet, Vulcan, which later turned out to be
non-existent.)
On 30 Sept 1846, one week after the discovery of Neptune, Le Verrier
declared that there may be still another unknown planet out there.
On October 10, Neptune’s large moon Triton was discovered, which
yielded an easy way to accurately determine the mass of Neptune,
which turned out to be 2% larger than expected from the
perturbations upon Uranus. It seemed as if the deviations in Uranus’
motion really was caused by two planets -- in addition the real
orbit of Neptune turned out to be significantly different from the
orbits predicted by both Adams and Le Verrier.
In 1850 Ferguson was observing the motion of the minor planet
Hygeia.
One reader of Ferguson’s report was Hind, who checked the reference
stars used by Ferguson. Hind was unable to find one of Ferguson’s
reference stars. Maury, at the Naval Observatory, was also unable to
find that star. During a few years it was believed that this was an
observation of yet another planet, but in 1879 another explanation
was offered: Ferguson had made a mistake when recording his
observation -- when that mistake was corrected, another star nicely
fit his ’missing reference star’.
The first serious attempt to find a trans-Neptunian planet was done
in 1877 by David Todd. He used a "graphical method", and despite the inconclusivenesses of the residuals of
Uranus, he derived elements
for a trans-Neptunian planet: mean distance 52 a.u., period 375
years, magnitude fainter than 13. Its longitude for 1877.84 was
given 170 degrees with an uncertainty of 10 degrees. The inclination
was 1.40 degrees and the longitude of the ascending node 103
degrees.
In 1879, Camille Flammarion added another hint as to the existence
of a planet beyond Neptune: the aphelia of periodic comets tend to
cluster around the orbits of major planets. Jupiter has the greatest
share of such comets, and Saturn, Uranus and Neptune also have a few
each. Flammarion found two comets, 1862 III with a period of 120
years and aphelion at 47.6 a.u., and 1889 II, with a somewhat longer
period and aphelion at 49.8 a.u. Flammarion suggested that the
hypothetical planet probably moved at 45 a.u.
One year later, in 1880, professor Forbes published a memoir
concerning the aphelia of comets and their association with
planetary orbits. By about 1900 five comets were known with aphelia
outside Neptune’s orbit, and then Forbes suggested one
trans-Neptunian moved at a distance of about 100 a.u., and another
one at 300 a.u., with periods of 1000 and 5000 years.
During the next five years, several astronomers/mathematicians
published their own ideas of what might be found in the outer parts
of the solar system. Gaillot at Paris Observatory assumed two
trans-Neptunian planets at 45 and 60 a.u. Thomas Jefferson Jackson
See predicted three trans-Neptunian planets:
-
"Oceanus" at 41.25 a.u.
and period 272 years
-
"trans-Oceanus" at 56 a.u. and period 420
years
-
another one at 72 a.u. and period 610 years
Dr Theodor Grigull of Munster, Germany,
assumed in 1902 a Uranus-sized planet at 50 a.u. and period 360
years, which he called "Hades". Grigull based his work mainly on the
orbits of comets with aphelia beyond Neptune’s orbit, with a cross
check whether the gravitational pull of such a body would produce
the observed deviations in Uranus motion. In 1921 Grigull revised
the orbital period of "Hades" to 310-330 years, to better fit the
observed deviations.
In 1900 Hans-Emil Lau, Copenhagen, published elements of two
trans-Neptunian planets at 46.6 and 70.7 a.u. distance, with masses
of 9 and 47.2 times the Earth, and a magnitude for the nearer planet
around 10-11. The 1900 longitudes of those hypothetical bodies were
274 and 343 degrees, both with the very large uncertainty of 180
degrees.
In 1901, Gabriel Dallet deduced a hypothetical planet at 47 a.u.
with a magnitude of 9.5-10.5 and a 1900 longitude of 358 degrees.
The same year Theodor Grigull derived a longitude of a
trans-Neptunian planet less than 6 degrees away from Dallet’s
planet, and later brought the difference down to 2.5 degrees. This
planet was supposed to be 50.6 a.u. distant.
In 1904, Thomas Jefferson Jackson See suggested three
trans-Neptunian planets, at 42.25, 56 and 72 a.u. The inner planet
had a period of 272.2 years and a longitude in 1904 of 200 degrees.
A Russian general named Alexander Garnowsky suggested four
hypothetical planets but failed to supply any details about them.
The two most carefully worked out predictions for the Trans-Neptune
were both of American origin:
-
Pickering’s "A search for a planet
beyond Neptune" (Annals Astron. Obs. Harvard Coll, vol LXI part II
1909)
-
Percival Lowell’s "Memoir on a trans-Neptunian planet"
(Lynn, Mass 1915)
They were concerned with the same subject but
used different approaches and arrived at different results.
Pickering used a graphical analysis and suggested a "Planet O" at
51.9 a.u. with a period of 373.5 years, a mass twice the Earth’s and
a magnitude of 11.5-14. Pickering suggested eight other
trans-Neptunian planets during the forthcoming 24 years. Pickerings
results caused Gaillot to revise the distances of his two trans-Neptunians
to 44 and 66 a.u., and he gave them masses of 5 and 24 Earth masses.
All in all, from 1908 to 1932, Pickering proposed seven hypothetical
planets -- O, P, Q, R, S, T and U. His final elements for O and P
define completely different bodies than the original ones, so the
total can be set at nine, certainly the record for planetary
prognostication. Most of Pickerings predictions are only of passing
interest as curiosities. In 1911 Pickering suggested that planet Q
had a mass of 20,000 Earths, making it 63 times more massive than
Jupiter or about 1/6 the Sun’s mass, close to a star of minimal
mass. Pickering said planet Q had a highly elliptical orbit.
In later years only planet P seriously occupied his attention. In
1928 he reduced the distance of P from 123 to 67.7 a.u., and its
period from 1400 to 556.6 years. He gave P a mass of 20 Earth masses
and a magnitude of 11. In 1931, after the discovery of Pluto, he
issued another elliptical orbit for P: distance 75.5 a.u., period
656 years, mass 50 Earth masses, eccentricity 0.265, inclination 37
degrees, close to the values given for the 1911 orbit.
His Planet S, proposed in 1928 and given
elements in 1931, was put at 48.3 a.u. distance (close to Lowell’s
Planet X at 47.5 a.u.), period 336 years, mass 5 Earths, magnitude
15. In 1929 Pickering proposed planet U, distance 5.79 a.u., period
13.93 years, i.e. barely outside Jupiter’s orbit. Its mass was 0.045
Earth masses, eccentricity 0.26. The least of Pickering’s planets is
planet T, suggested in 1931: distance 32.8 a.u., period 188 years.
Pickering’s different elements for planet O were:
|
Mean dist |
Period |
Mass |
Magnitude |
Node |
Incl |
Longitude |
1908 |
51.9 |
373.5 y |
2 earth’s |
11.5-13.4 |
|
|
105.13 |
1919 |
55.1 |
409 y |
|
15 |
100 |
15 |
|
1928 |
35.23 |
209.2 y |
0.5 earth’s |
12 |
|
|
|
Percival Lowell, most well known as a proponent for canals on Mars,
built a private observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona. Lowell called his
hypothetical planet Planet X, and performed several searches for it,
without success. Lowell’s first search for Planet X came to an end
in 1909, but in 1913 he started a second search, with a new
prediction of Planet X: epoch 1850-01-01, mean long 11.67 deg, perih.
long 186, eccentricity 0.228, mean dist 47.5 a.u. long arc node
110.99 deg, inclination 7.30 deg, mass 1/21000 solar masses. Lowell
and others searched in vain for this Planet X in 1913-1915. In 1915,
Lowell published his theoretical results of Planet X.
It is ironical that this very same year,
1915, two faint images of Pluto was recorded at Lowell observatory,
although they were never recognized as such until after the
discovery of Pluto (1930). Lowell’s failure of finding Planet X was
his greatest disappointment in life. He didn’t spend much time
looking for Planet X during the last two years of his life. Lowell
died in 1916. On the nearly 1000 plates exposed in this second
search were 515 asteroids, 700 variable stars and 2 images of Pluto!
The third search for Planet X began in April 1927. No progress was
made in 1927-1928. In December 1929 a young farmer’s boy and amateur
astronomer, Clyde Tombaugh from Kansas, was hired to do the search.
Tombaugh started his work in April 1929. On January 23 and 29,
Tombaugh exposed the pair of plates on which he found Pluto when
examining them on February 18. By then Tombaugh had examined
hundreds of plate pairs and millions of stars. The search for Planet
X had come to an end.
Or had it? The new planet, later named Pluto, turned out to be
disappointingly small, perhaps only one Earth mass put probably only
about 1/10 Earth masses or smaller (in 1979, when Pluto’s satellite
Charon was discovered, the mass of the Pluto-Charon pair turned out
to be only about 1/1000 Earth mass!). Planet X must, if it was
causing those perturbations in the orbit of Uranus, be much larger
than that! Tombaugh continued his search another 13 years, and
examined the sky from the north celestial pole to 50 deg. south
declination, down to magnitude 16-17, sometimes even 18. Tombaugh
examined some 90 million images of some 30 million stars over more
than 30,000 square degrees on the sky.
He found one new globular cluster, 5 new
open star clusters, one new supercluster of 1800 galaxies and
several new small galaxy clusters, one new comet, about 775 new
asteroids -- but no new planet except Pluto. Tombaugh concluded that
no unknown planet brighter than magnitude 16.5 did exist -- only a
planet in an almost polar orbit and situated near the south
celestial pole could have escaped his detection. He could have
picked up a Neptune-sized planet at seven times the distance of
Pluto, or a Pluto-sized planet out to 60 a.u.
The naming of Pluto is a story by itself. Early suggestions of the
name of the new planet were: Atlas, Zymal, Artemis, Perseus, Vulcan,
Tantalus, Idana, Cronus. The New York Times suggested Minerva,
reporters suggested Osiris, Bacchus, Apollo, Erebus. Lowell’s widow
suggested Zeus, but later changed her mind to Constance. Many people
suggested the planet be named Lowell. The staff of the Flagstaff
observatory, where Pluto was discovered, suggested Cronus, Minerva,
and Pluto. A few months later the planet was officially named Pluto.
The name Pluto was originally suggested by Venetia Burney, an
11-year-old schoolgirl in Oxford, England.
The very first orbit computed for Pluto yielded an eccentricity of
0.909 and a period of 3000 years! This cast some doubt whether it
was a planet or not. However, a few months later, considerably
better orbital elements for Pluto was obtained. Below is a
comparison of the orbital elements of Lowell’s Planet X, Pickering’s
Planet O, and Pluto:
Lowell’s X Pickering’s O Pluto
a (mean dist) 43.0 55.1 39.5
e (eccentricity) 0.202 0.31 0.248
i (inclination) 10 15 17.1
N (long asc node) (not pred) 100 109.4
W (long perihelion) 204.9 280.1 223.4
T (perihelion date) Febr 1991 Jan 2129 Sept 1989
u (mean annual motion) 1.2411 0.880 1.451
P (period, years) 282 409.1 248
T (perihel. date) 1991.2 2129.1 1989.8
E (long 1930.0) 102.7 102.6 108.5
m (mass, Earth=1) 6.6 2.0 0.002
M (magnitude) 12-13 15 15 |
The mass of Pluto was very hard to determine. Several values were
given at different times -- the matter wasn’t settled until James W.
Christy discovered Pluto’s moon Charon in June 1978 -- Pluto was
then shown to have only 20% of the mass of our Moon!
That made Pluto hopelessly inadequate to
produce measurable gravitational perturbations on Uranus and
Neptune. Pluto could not be Lowell’s Planet X -- the planet found
was not the planet sought. What seemed to be another triumph of
celestial mechanics turned out to be an accident -- or rather a
result of the intelligence and thoroughness of Clyde Tombaugh’s
search.
The mass of Pluto:
Crommelin 1930: 0.11 (Earth masses)
Nicholson 1931: 0.94
Wylie, 1942: 0.91
Brouwer, 1949: 0.8-0.9
Kuiper, 1950: 0.10
1965: <0.14 (occultation of faint star by Pluto)
Seidelmann, 1968: 0.14
Seidelmann, 1971: 0.11
Cruikshank, 1976: 0.002
Christy, 1978: 0.002 (Charon discovered) |
Another short-lived trans-Neptunian suspect was reported on April 22
1930 by R.M. Stewart in Ottawa, Canada -- it was reported from
plates taken in 1924. Crommelin computed an orbit (dist 39.82 a.u.,
asc node 280.49 deg, inclination 49.7 deg!). Tombaugh searched for
the "Ottawa object" without finding it. Several other searches were
made, but nothing was ever found.
Meanwhile Pickering continued to predict new planets (see above).
Others also predicted new planets on theoretical grounds (Lowell
himself had already suggested a second trans-Neptunian at about 75 a.u.). In 1946,
Francis M. E. Sevin suggested a trans-Plutonian
planet at 78 a.u. He first derived this from a curious empirical
method where he grouped the planets and the erratic asteroid
Hidalgo, into two groups of inner and outer bodies:
Group I:
Mercury Venus
Earth Mars
Asteroids Jupiter
Group II: ?
Pluto Neptune Uranus
Saturn Hidalgo
He then added the logarithms of the
periods of each pair of planets, finding a roughly constant sum of
about 7.34. Assuming this sum to be valid for Mercury and the
trans-Plutonian too, he arrived at a period of about 677 years for "Transpluto".
Later Sevin worked out a full set of elements for "Transpluto": dist
77.8 a.u., period 685.8 years, eccentricity 0.3, mass 11.6 Earth
masses. His prediction stirred little interest among astronomers.
In 1950, K. Schutte of Munich used data from eight periodic comets
to suggest a trans-Plutonian planet at 77 a.u. Four years later, H.
H. Kitzinger of Karlsruhe, using the same eight comets, extended and
refined the work, finding the supposed planet to be at 65 a.u., with
a period of 523.5 years, an orbital inclination of 56 degrees, and
an estimated magnitude of 11. In 1957, Kitzinger reworked the
problem and arrived at new elements: dist 75.1 a.u., period 650
years, inclination 40 degrees, magnitude around 10.
After unsuccessful photographic
searches, he re-worked the problem once again in 1959, arriving at a
mean dist of 77 a.u., period 675.7 years, inclination 38 degrees,
eccentricity 0.07, a planet not unlike Sevin’s "Transpluto" and in
some ways similar to Pickering’s final Planet P. No such planet has
ever been found, though.
Halley’s Comet has also been used as a "probe" for trans-plutonian
planets. In 1942 R. S. Richardson found that an Earth-sized planet
at 36.2 a.u., or 1 a.u. beyond Halley’s aphelion, would delay
Halley’s perihelion passage so that it agreed better with
observations. A planet at 35.3 a.u. of 0.1 Earth masses would have a
similar effect. In 1972, Brady predicted a planet at 59.9 a.u.,
period 464 years, eccentricity 0.07, inclination 120 degrees (i.e.
being in a retrograde orbit), magnitude 13-14, size about Saturn’s
size. Such a trans-Plutonian planet would reduce the residuals of
Halley’s Comet significantly back to the 1456 perihelion passage.
This gigantic trans-Plutonian planet was also searched for, but
never found.
Tom van Flandern examined the positions of Uranus and
Neptune in the
1970s. The calculated orbit of Neptune fit observations only for a
few years, and then started to drift away. Uranus orbit fit the
observations during one revolution but not during the previous
revolution. In 1976 Tom van Flandern became convinced that there was
a tenth planet. After the discovery of Charon in 1978 showed the
mass of Pluto to be much smaller than expected, van Flandern
convinced his USNO colleague Robert S. Harrington of the existence
of this tenth planet. They started to collaborate by investigate the
Neptunian satellite system.
Soon their views diverged. van Flandern
thought the tenth planet had formed beyond Neptune’s orbit, while
Harrington believed it had formed between the orbits of Uranus and
Neptune. van Flandern thought more data was needed, such as an
improved mass for Neptune furnished by Voyager 2. Harrington started
to search for the planet by brute force -- he started in 1979, and
by 1987 he had still not found any planet. van Flandern and
Harrington suggested that the tenth planet might be near aphelion in
a highly elliptical orbit. If the planet is dark, it might be as
faint as magnitude 16-17, suggests van Flandern.
In 1987, Whitmire and Matese suggested a tenth planet at 80 a.u.
with a period of 700 years and an inclination of perhaps 45 degrees,
as an alternative to their "Nemesis" hypothesis. However, according
to Eugene M. Shoemaker, this planet could not have caused those
meteor showers that Whitmire and Matese suggested (see below).
In 1987, John Anderson at JPL examined the motions of the spacecraft
Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11, to see if any deflection due to unknown
gravity forces could be found. None was found -- from this Anderson
concluded that a tenth planet most likely exists! JPL had excluded
observations of Uranus prior to 1910 in their ephemerides, while
Anderson had confidence in the earlier observations as well.
Anderson concluded that the tenth planet
must have a highly elliptical orbit, carrying it far away to be
undetectable now but periodically bringing it close enough to leave
its disturbing signature on the paths of the outer planets. He
suggests a mass of five Earth masses, an orbital period of about
700-1000 years, and a highly inclined orbit. Its perturbations on
the outer planets won’t be detected again until 2600. Anderson hoped
that the two Voyagers would help to pin down the location of this
planet.
Conley Powell, from JPL, also analyzed the planetary motions. He
also found that the observations of Uranus suddenly did fit the
calculations much better after 1910 than before. Powell suggested a
planet with 2.9 Earth masses at 60.8 a.u. from the Sun, a period of
494 years, inclination 8.3 degrees and only a small eccentricity.
Powell was intrigued that the period was approximately twice Pluto’s
and three times Neptune’s period, suggesting that the planet he
thought he saw in the data had an orbit stabilized by mutual
resonance with its nearest neighbours despite their vast separation.
The solution called for the planet to be
in Gemini, and also being brighter than Pluto when it was
discovered. A search was performed in 1987 at Lowell Observatory for
Powell’s planet -- nothing was found. Powell re-examined his
solution and revised the elements: 0.87 Earth masses, distance 39.8 a.u., period 251 years, eccentricity 0.26, i.e. an orbit very
similar to Pluto’s! Currently, Powell’s new planet should be in Leo,
at magnitude 12, however Powell thinks it’s premature to search for
it, he needs to examine his data further.
Even if no trans-Plutonian planet ever was found, the interest was
focused to the outer parts of the solar system. The erratic asteroid
Hidalgo, moving in an orbit between Jupiter and Saturn, has already
been mentioned. In 1977-1984 Charles Kowal performed a new
systematic search for undiscovered bodies in the solar system, using
Palomar Observatory’s 48-inch Schmidt telescope. In October 1987 he
found the asteroid 1977 UB, later named Chiron, moving at mean
distance 13.7 a.u., period 50.7 years, eccentricity 0.3786,
inclination 6.923 deg, diameter about 50 km.
During his search, Kowal also found 5
comets and 15 asteroids, including Chiron, the most distant asteroid
known when it was discovered. Kowal also recovered 4 lost comets and
one lost asteroid. Kowal did not find a tenth planet, and concluded
that there was no unknown planet brighter than 20th magnitude within
3 degrees of the ecliptic.
Chiron was first announced as a "tenth planet", but was immediately
designated as an asteroid. But Kowal suspected it may be very
comet-like, and later it has even developed a short cometary tail!
In 1995 Chiron was also classified as a comet - it is certainly the
largest comet we know about.
In 1992 an even more distant asteroid was found: Pholus. Later in
1992 an asteroid outside Pluto’s orbit was found, followed by five
additional trans-Plutonian asteroids in 1993 and at least a dozen in
1994!
Meanwhile, the spacecraft Pioneer 10 and 11 and Voyagers 1 and 2 had travelled outside the solar system, and could also be used as
"probes" for unknown gravitational forces possibly from unknown
planets -- nothing has been found. The Voyagers also yielded more
accurate masses for the outer planets -- when these updated masses
were inserted in the numerical integrations of the solar system, the
residuals in the positions of the outer planets finally disappeared.
It seems like the search for "Planet X" finally has come to an end.
There was no "Planet X" (Pluto doesn’t really count), but instead an
asteroid belt outside Neptune/Pluto was found! The asteroids outside
Jupiter’s orbit that were known in August 1993 are as follows:
Asteroid a e Incl Node Arg perih Mean an Per Name
a.u. deg deg deg deg yr
944 5.79853 .658236 42.5914 21.6567 56.8478 60.1911 14.0 Hidalgo
2060 13.74883 .384822 6.9275 209.3969 339.2884 342.1686 51.0 Chiron
5145 20.44311 .575008 24.6871 119.3877 354.9451 7.1792 92.4 Pholus
5335 11.89073 .866990 61.8583 314.1316 191.3015 23.3556 41.0 Damocles
1992QB1 43.82934 .087611 2.2128 359.4129 44.0135 324.1086 290
1993FW 43.9311 .04066 7.745 187.914 359.501 0.4259 291
Epoch: 1993-08-01.0 TT |
In November 1994 these trans-Neptunian asteroids were known:
Asteroid a e Incl Node Arg perih Mean an Per Name
a.u. deg deg deg deg yr
944 5.79853 .658236 42.5914 21.6567 56.8478 60.1911 14.0 Hidalgo
2060 13.74883 .384822 6.9275 209.3969 339.2884 342.1686 51.0 Chiron
5145 20.44311 .575008 24.6871 119.3877 354.9451 7.1792 92.4 Pholus
5335 11.89073 .866990 61.8583 314.1316 191.3015 23.3556 41.0 Damocles
1992QB1 43.82934 .087611 2.2128 359.4129 44.0135 324.1086 290
1993FW 43.9311 .04066 7.745 187.914 359.501 0.4259 291
Epoch: 1993-08-01.0 TT
In November 1994 these trans-Neptunian asteroids were known:
Object a e incl R Mag Diam Discovery Discoverers
a.u. deg km Date
1992 QB1 43.9 0.070 2.2 22.8 283 1992 Aug Jewitt & Luu
1993 FW 43.9 0.047 7.7 22.8 286 1993 Mar Jewitt & Luu
1993 RO 39.3 0.198 3.7 23.2 139 1993 Sep Jewitt & Luu
1993 RP 39.3 0.114 2.6 24.5 96 1993 Sep Jewitt & Luu
1993 SB 39.4 0.321 1.9 22.7 188 1993 Sep Williams et al.
1993 SC 39.5 0.185 5.2 21.7 319 1993 Sep Williams et al.
1994 ES2 45.3 0.012 1.0 24.3 159 1994 Mar Jewitt & Luu
1994 EV3 43.1 0.043 1.6 23.3 267 1994 Mar Jewitt & Luu
1994 GV9 42.2 0.000 0.1 23.1 264 1994 Apr Jewitt & Luu
1994 JQ1 43.3 0.000 3.8 22.4 382 1994 May Irwin et al.
1994 JR1 39.4 0.118 3.8 22.9 238 1994 May Irwin et al.
1994 JS 39.4 0.081 14.6 22.4 263 1994 May Luu & Jewitt
1994 JV 39.5 0.125 16.5 22.4 254 1994 May Jewitt & Luu
1994 TB 31.7 0.000 10.2 21.5 258 1994 Oct Jewitt & Chen
1994 TG 42.3 0.000 6.8 23.0 232 1994 Oct Chen et al.
1994 TG2 41.5 0.000 3.9 24.0 141 1994 Oct Hainaut
1994 TH 40.9 0.000 16.1 23.0 217 1994 Oct Jewitt et al.
1994 VK8 43.5 0.000 1.4 22.5 273 1994 Nov Fitzwilliams et al.
Diameter is in km (and is based on the magnitudes and a guess at albedo,
and is given to too many significant figures)
|
The trans-Neptunian bodies seem to form two groups.
-
One group,
composed of Pluto, 1993 SC, 1993 SB and 1993 RO, have eccentric
orbits and a 3:2 resonance with Neptune.
-
The second group, including
1992 QB1 and 1993 FW, is slightly further out and in rather low
eccentricity.
|