Talk:Triton (moon)

message: Cosmic Biology: How Life Could Evolve on Other Worlds, Louis Neal Irwin, Dirk Schulze-Makuch, New York, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London: Springer-Praxis Books, 2011, page 266.
http://books.google.com/books?id=b7XhonTq2s8C&pg=PA266&dq=Triton+ammonia&hl=en&ei=snVWT4XhCMnHsQLWp_XtCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=book-thumbnail&resnum=5&ved=0CFEQ6wEwBA#v=onepage&q=Triton%20ammonia&f=false “  .  .  tiny water-ammonia-saline ice inclusions within the bulk of water ice that makes up much of the mantle.  .  ”“  .  .  thin films of liquid N2 between overlying frozen N2 and an underlying solid substrate  like frozen H2O, or liquid N2 inclusions embedded in frozen N2.  The seasonally driven geysers that appear to result from solar heating of underlying volatiles show that liquefaction of frozen N2 happens.  Tnin layers of liquid N2, or liquid N2 inclusions, could thus exist.“  .  .  The third habitat would be the major one for life beneath the surface of Triton.  This would be whatever is left of the global ocean that likely enshrouded the satellite for some time after its capture by Neptune.  Circumstantial evidence that liquid water still exists underground on Triton includes the compelling case for cryovolcanism which is probably still occurring, and the cantaloupe terrain, wich is easiest to explain by the dynamic action of subsurface liquid reservoirs.  To be sure, the cantaloupe terrain is like no other seen in the Solar System, so whatever gives rise to it might be quite an exotic cocktail of subsurface liquids.  But given the amount of Triton’s bulk composition estimated to be water, it must be a water-based cocktail to a substantial degree.  .  ”
:Currently, the last sentence of our Physical characteristics section reads "If present, a layer of liquid water would suggest the possibility, however unlikely, of life.[29]"  I'm not sure we know enough about exobiology to make even that qualifying statement of "however unlikely."  Using the one example of Earth, the tentative conclusion seems to be that single-cell life is easy and multi-cell life is hard.   FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 21:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That's just pure speculation. No one knows the mechanism of how life evolved - they put together organic molecules and sunlight and/or lightning and !poof! life started - but we have NO IDEA of what actually happened billions of years ago, scientists look at the fossil record and geophysical records and guess. All deep-sea life on our planet migrated there from earlier forms in shallow seas, rather than from the "bottom up" - so what happens under kilometers of frozen ice w/o sunlight is anyone's guess.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.51.247 (talk) 22:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  liquids and thus possibility of life? 

message: "The orbit of Triton ... " graphic is ambiguous in it's presentation of a retrograde orbit (red) compared to a typical moon (green).  If the observer sees Triton's orbit as "inside" the example moons orbit, then Retrograde is portrayed.  However if the observer see Triton's orbit as "outside" the example moons orbit, then Prograde is portrayed.  Clarification could be accomplished by a slight shift of view, such that the orbit or Triton also passes in front of (or behind) Neptune.  SquashEngineer (talk) 15:11, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The orbit of Triton graphic 

message: The orbital period listed as -5.9 days is inconsistent with an inclination of 157°. If we consider Triton to be orbiting with a negative period, then its total number of orbits completed from a given epoch would be decreasing (this is strange by itself). Therefore, each orbit, counting upward, would be moving back in time, and in a counterclockwise (prograde) direction. So it's either orbiting at 157° in +5.9 days, or 23° in -5.9 days. The page currently shows 157° in -5.9 days. I argue that the former makes much more sense and is less likely to create even more inconsistencies.
Also, if we're using negative numbers for retrograde orbital periods (something I find to be illogical in many ways), what would a perfectly polar (90°) orbit's period be? Positive or negative? Why? "That's irrelevant because it couldn't be perfectly polar" is just avoiding the question.
JustinTimeCuber (talk) 18:34, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not completely illogical. The negative period makes intuitive sense out of why Triton's orbit is decaying even though it is outside Neptune-synchronous orbit. The tidal bulges raised by Triton on Neptune are behind Triton in its orbit, not ahead of it, and putting a negative number down as Triton's period makes this case of a retrograde period consistent with the other case of tidal deceleration (in which the moon's revolution period is positive, but less than the planet's rotation period). I agree with your point about exactly polar orbits, but this is the sort of question that is usually avoided. As a similar example, the IAU definition of the geographic north pole of a planet refers to which celestial hemisphere the pole is relative to the invariable plane of the Solar System, which presents a problem if it happens to be exactly on the celestial equator (which of course will not happen in reality). Double sharp (talk) 15:30, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negative orbital period is inconsistent. 

message: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0019103583710419
©Geni (talk) 07:43, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Paper on various UV observations

message: The term "limb" is used several times in this article and elsewhere, but it seems not to have the usual meaning. I'd be grateful if anyone could explain to me what it means here? ManlyMatt (talk) 11:50, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limb of Triton 

message: It might make sense to clarify that Triton's status as the second largest moon relative to its host planet is in terms of radius, as by mass Titan would actually take second place. The ambiguity of the article might lead to a misconception.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anti-Aliased-User (talk • contribs) 20:49, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification on the Relative Size of Triton. 

message: Triton's obliquity (axial tilt) is listed as zero with no source. Oniow (talk) 22:20, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for Triton's obliquity