Talk:Horseshoe orbit

message: I think this article needs better images.  Since this is the English Wikipedia, labels in images should be in English unless the labels are historic in nature. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: images

message: I've asked the authors of http://www.scielo.br/pdf/cam/v24n1/06v24n1.pdf for permission to publish their image on p105.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfast321 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  images removed - misleading 

message: I just noticed that the second section of this article has the following text:
:My non-expert calculation say that for an asteroid like 3753 Cruithne the inner and outer rings are less than a million km apart. So the horseshoe is very thin, more like the next diagram.
To my knowledge, Wikipedia isn't supposed to be written in first person. However, I'm not sure of any good way to replace this text. Perhaps someone with a little more experience should look into it and figure something out? - green_meklar 00:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I took it out, but have little to replace it with. :) 81.93.102.185 (talk) 11:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-encyclopedic content? 

message: :"gravitational exchange of energy changes the object's apparent direction"
What does this mean? A gravitational exchange would change an object's actual direction, not just the apparent. OrangeDog (talk • edits) 02:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It changes the apparent direction of an asteroid as observed from the Earth. The asteroid changes between falling behind and catching up.  However, relative to the Sun, both the Earth and the asteroid continue to orbit in the same direction as before.  Is that clear? - Fayenatic (talk) 13:36, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suspected nonsense 

message: The 2010 TK7 article contains such statements as "the asteroid orbited the Sun with a period of 365.389 days" and "its average period over long time intervals will exactly equal that of Earth", but neither that nor this article do not define what "period" and "average period" (relatively to Sun) mean for an aperiodic orbit. Possibly it can be defined in terms of longitude, but it should be defined before usage in articles. If someone is willing to rectify this, then look on 3753 Cruithne also – it is a good example how such complex things can be explained. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orbital period 

message: This section, Horseshoe orbit#Tadpole orbit, has a link to the page Tadpole orbit, which redirects back to this section. Either a separate page should be created, or the link should be removed. JMtB03 (talk) 00:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! It works best as a sub-section of this larger article, so I have removed the circular link. – Fayenatic London 18:47, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tadpole orbit 

message: The statement:  "The horseshoe becomes apparent only when mapping the movement of the asteroid relative to both the Sun and the Earth. " is completely true, as is the rest of the paragraph, but it is not enough. And that appears to be the source of confusion for several of the comments here. It needs to be elaborated that the horseshoe (and for that matter the tadpole) shape only occur if viewed in a frame of reference rotating with respect to the second body. If someone better than I at creating (for example) animated gifs can do one, showing both views - that is, a rotating and a non-rotating one - then this can be further discussed around that animation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.242.37 (talk) 00:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  More elaboration needed.