Pioneer 10 received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 13, 2004, June 13, 2005, June 13, 2006, June 13, 2007, December 3, 2010, June 13, 2011, June 13, 2013, June 13, 2019, and June 13, 2022. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Albeit by accident of science experiments' unintended consequences, it appears that probably Pioneer 10 was actually the 3rd artificial object to leave the solar system:
"Jay Hereford November 26 at 8:39 PM The fastest manmade object isn't a hypersonic jet or spacecraft, but a large manhole cover.... When the US started doing underground nuclear testing, nobody really knew what would happen. One test bomb was placed at the bottom of a 485-foot deep shaft on July 26, 1957, and someone thought it was a good idea to put a half-ton iron manhole cover on top to contain the explosion. The bomb turned the shaft into the world's largest Roman candle, and the manhole cover was nowhere to be found. Robert Brownlee, an astrophysicist who designed the test, wanted to repeat the experiment with high-speed cameras so he could figure out what happened to the cover. So another experiment was created, this time 500-feet deep, and a similar half-ton manhole cover was placed on top. On August 27, 1957, they detonated the bomb. The high-speed cameras barely caught a view of the cover as it left the top of the shaft and headed into oblivion. Brownlee used the frames to calculate the speed to be more than 125,000 miles per hour.... more than five times the escape velocity of the Earth, and the fastest man-made object in history. Physicists have debated the whereabouts of the two manhole covers ever since. Recently, with the help of supercomputers and a lot more scientific knowledge, physicists are certain that they wouldn't have had time to burn up completely before exiting the atmosphere. This means both of the remaining pieces would have passed Pluto's orbit sometime around 1961 and are way beyond the edge of the solar system by now. " 24.165.150.190 ( talk) 06:00, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
I contend that the statement that Pioneer was the first to leave the Solar System when it passed the orbit of Neptune is incorrect as the boundary of the solar system is now said to be the Oort Cloud which presumably Pioneer 10 won't reach for some years to come. 23skidoo 18:42, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The Pioneer Plaque page states the following:
"The mean time for the spacecraft to come within 30 astronomical units of a star is longer than the current age of the galaxy."
However, this page states the spacecraft is heading toward Aldebaran, and will reach it in 2 million years.
-jcrocker
Would adding a reference to the movie "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" be appropriate? Pioneer 10 is depicted in this movie. (See last paragraph of http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Pioneer_10 ) 66.92.165.123 10:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Matterson52 made a change that seems to reflect a misunderstanding of the article text and misinformation about the planet Pluto. Calling Neptune "the outermost planet" has nothing to do with the discovery of Pluto, which occurred some 38 years earlier. It has to do with the fact that Neptune was, at the time, closer to the Sun than Pluto. [unsigned]
I've added a comment that there will be a final attempt on this date (see http://www.planetary.org/programs/projects/pioneer_anomaly/update_200511.html, "Day 2",first paragraph). Are there any other references available that confirm this ?
The article would benefit from a knowledgeable person adding a paragraph about Pioneer 10's location anomaly. At a site linked to by Slashdot today there's a discussion about how under our current theory, Pioneer 10 should be in a different location than it is now, so even at this late date the spacecraft is contributing to science. Tempshill 19:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
A paper published 27 March 2010 describes the source of the location anomaly. http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1103/1103.5222v1.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.62.51.2 ( talk) 15:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
The page on Aldebaran states that the star is moving away form us at ~11.3 au/yr, faster than Pioneer is moving toward it. Adding a note here, and removing the comment on Aldebaran. Potatoswatter 00:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
The background on which these paths are drawn is an image generated by the JPL Solar System Simulator, and attribution should be given. It isn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.206.222.8 ( talk) 02:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
i started to convert some of the italic representations of Pioneer 10 to remove then, but fast realized there's a boatload of them. is there any reason for this? i don't think it's necessary, but if someone feels it improves readability i'm good with that. Anastrophe ( talk) 07:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Just because Voyager is more popular and more faster, doesn't mean we have to forget all about Pioneer. It was the first spacecraft to cross the asteroid belt and the first to visit Jupiter and Saturn. I have best wishes that the Pioneer Spacecraft will continue to go on and enjoy the Journey through Interstellar Space.
Good Luck Pioneer! Philip Graham 122.105.113.11 ( talk) 09:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
AU is not explained and not even converted to any other unit. Please see the Voyager 1 article, where you have at least the covnersion. for example: "As of June 19, 2009, Voyager 1 was at a distance of 110.239 AU (approximately 16.49 terameters, 10.22 billion miles, or 0.0017 light years) from the Sun,..". What do you think? Thanks Kvsh5 ( talk) 15:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
First use of "AU" linked to page on "Astronomical unit". 86.7.22.39 ( talk) 20:53, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
If deceleration is (8.74 ± 1.33) × 10−10 m/s2 then since general relativity predicts roughly (7.0 ± 0.3) × 10−10 m/s2 I don't see any "anomaly" except that amateurs are taking the measurements (3 digits of sigma accuracy!). Maybe if the project were taken over by professional physicists who understand not only Newtonian gravitation the problem disappears? Jim ( talk) 15:08, 14 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding [[Wikipedia:
The Pioneer 10 article says that this is the first artificial object to leave the solar system, yet the article on Voyger 1 say it is the furthest artificial object from the earth, can they both be correct? 62.228.0.20 ( talk) 15:20, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Some of the images in the Encounter with Jupiter section look like poor quality scans of halftone pictures. I suspect there must be better quality images somewhere. Regards, RJH ( talk) 16:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
The following content from the "Loss of signal" section was tagged as unsourced. I couldn't find suitable references, and possibly it is OR, in which case it doesn't belong in the article. Hence, I'm moving it here until suitable sources turn up, if any. [unsigned]
The article seems to be okay without this information. Regards, RJH ( talk) 23:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
"The trajectory of the spacecraft took it along the magnetic equator of Jupiter, where the ion radiation was concentrated. Peak intensities for these electrons 10,000 times stronger than the maximum around Earth."
I can't make any sense of the second sentence. Could someone fix it? I put on a clarify tag, although I'm a bit uncertain if it was the right one to use. Whitecroc ( talk) 17:13, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Could someone with knowledge of the situation create a single image that shows the paths of both Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11? It would make it much easier for me at least to understand the directionality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkness Productions ( talk • contribs) 17:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
I removed a wikilink from the first paragraph of the "Launch and trajectory" sub-section of the "Mission profile" section, because it pointed to the "SM-65 Atlas" article, which has nothing about the TE364-4, nor about the Pioneer missions. The sentence in this article reads, "The third stage consisted of a solid fuel TE364-4 developed specifically for the Pioneer missions." If the TE364-4 was "developed specifically for the Pioneer missions" why is the wikilink pointing to a "Redirect" page which points to the "SM-65 Atlas"? If you know the answer to this question would you please write a full-fledged article at that redirect. Thanks, Nick Beeson ( talk) 13:37, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
This seems wrong: "...by 2005 the total power output was 65 W. As a result, later in the mission only selected instruments could be operated at any one time." We lost contact in 2003, so the mission couldn't have continued to 2005, could it?
And this: "The data transmission rate at launch was 256 bit/s" is contradicted by Encyclopedia Astronautica. One of these two sources has confused bits with bytes, but I don't know which one. Kendall-K1 ( talk) 16:54, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
The dates P10 crossed the orbits of Saturn & Uranus probably should be listed, since this was the first probe to do so. Also, in the timeline table, the date of the start of Jupiter encounter is the same as the entry into the Asteroid Belt, which isn't likely (the date is correct for the Asteroid Belt entry). The formal Jovian encounter phase would have began sometime AFTER leaving the Belt, around 2 or 3 months before the actual FB in December. CFLeon ( talk) 18:45, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
We now have the Pioneer anomaly in two places, one under Deep Space and one under Current Status. Could these be combined? Kendall-K1 ( talk) 01:47, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
In case anyone is wondering why I removed the bit about Pioneer 10 passing by
Barnard's Star, the reason is simple: it won't do any such thing. The source for this "fact" was a book about
Concorde, which also mentions
Project Daedalus for some reason (I'm not going to read the whole thing to find out why...) and has a throwaway mention about the probe passing within 3.8ly of the star in about 10,000 years. However, the fact that Barnard's Star itself will be within 3.8ly of the Earth at that point rang some alarm bells when I read the same thing (now deleted) in its article. How could the distance be the same if the probe were headed toward the star? A little (unoriginal) research established that Pioneer 10 will be about 0.4ly away from Earth in 10,000 years, and - here's the important point - it's currently heading in nearly the opposite direction to Barnard's Star. Anyone reading this should be able to check that for themselves quite easily, so I hope that's sufficient evidence that the Concorde book is not only not a reliable source, but just plain wrong.
Just in case my other edits need justifying, I also removed the "ref" column from the table, since there's now only one reference, which is cited in the preceding paragraph. And took out the value of the probe's current speed, which is given in the section immediately above (and the two values didn't agree in any case).
78.146.214.216 (
talk) 20:04, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm thinking of removing the whole "Timeline of the future" table altogether, even though its source is the NASA [1], because of a strikingly similar problem with star Ross 248. Both the table and the cited NASA report says Pioneer 10 will "come within 3.2 LY of the red dwarf star Ross?248 in the Andromeda Nebula in 32,605 years". Big problem, according to this Wikipedia graphic [2] Ross 248 will itself be about 3.1-3.3 ly from Earth at that time: passing at 3.2 ly of a star that itself is at 3.2 ly from your starting point is not what I'd call "passing close": the above argument for the Barnard star applies. Furthermore, if Pioneer 10 is headed to (the general direction of) Aldebaran in Taurus how can it come close to any star in Andromeda ? (I don't know is Ross 248 will still be in Andromeda by 34000 though). Looks like someone confused "reach about the same distance from Earth as star X" with "pass close star X". But even then I wonderr, if you're right about Pioneer 10 being 0.4ly away from Earth in 10,000 years, how can it even attain Proxima's distance in 26,000 years, since that distance should then also be about 3 ly according to the mentioned graphic ? --FvdP ( talk) 19:43, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
After further examination the numbers given by the cited NASA source don't even add up. The "current" speed of P10 they say is 45,000 km/h. (Somewhat larger than the latest number given by our article on P10). That is, if I computed things right, about 4.17e-5 ly/year. At that speed, in 26,118 years (the time they say P10 will pass Proxima) P10 cannot be further than 1.1 ly away: a far cry from Proxima's 3 ly. (P10 must be slowing down to escape Sun, it cannot accelerate to make up for the difference.) Similarly for the alledged "passing by" Ross 248 in 32,605 years from now, my computation gives an upper bound of 1.4 ly then for P10's distance to the Sun with Ross 248 at 3+ ly. What might add up is the passing of Aldebaran in about 2,000,000 years: if P10 keeps the 45,000 km/h speed (which it will not) it should be 83 ly away by then, that's at least plausibly in the same ball park (given the approximations) and on the right side of the inequality. The other reason I keep the Aldebaran reference (for now) is that's it's the only one mentioned in other sources. --FvdP ( talk) 20:07, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Pioneer 10. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.heavens-above.com/solar-escape.aspxWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:22, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on Pioneer 10. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:59, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
It is requested that an astronomy diagram or diagrams be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots or diagrams can be requested at the
Graphic Lab. For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images. |
Please generate a starmap of the skypath of Pioneer 10 similiar to that for Voyager 1, which can be seen on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Voyager_1_skypath_1977-2030.png !
At present the article has "Voyager 2 is expected to pass Pioneer 10 around April 2023." A source or citation for this is not provided. I was curious about this and calculated August 15, 2023.
I got my data from https://www.heavens-above.com/SolarEscape.aspx
Pioneer 10 | Voyager 2 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Distance from Sun (AU) | 131.859 | 131.197 | |
Speed relative to Sun (km/s) | 11.904 | 15.296 | |
Speed relative to Sun (AU/year) | 2.511 | 3.227 | |
1. Distance between Voyager 2 and Pioneer 10 (AU) | 0.662 | Math is V2 minus P10 | |
2. Relative speed (km/s) | 3.392 | Math is V2 minus P10 | |
3. Relative speed (AU/year) | 0.716 | Math is V2 minus P10 | |
4. Years to matching distance | 0.924581006 | Math is line 1 divided by line 3 | |
5. Days to matching distance | 337.472067 | Math is line 4 times 365 | |
6. Today | 9/12/2022 | Today's date as m/d/yyyy | |
7. Today + days | 8/15/2023 | Math is Line 5 plus line 6 | |
8. Overtake distance | 134.1806229 | 134.1806229 | Math is the spacecraft's distance from the Sun in AU plus its speed relative to Sun (AU/year) times line 4. It's the same result for both spacecraft. |
Did I make a mistake, is the article wrong, or are both of us wrong? -- Marc Kupper| talk 23:30, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
As the contact to the spacecraft was lost two decades ago, maybe we should do the same thing as for other wikipedia articles about satellites whose mission has permanently ended, that is, change the tense of the article into past tense. El Roih ( talk)
I've seen on this link: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/48527/when-will-voyager-2-overtake-pioneer-10-as-the-2nd-most-distant-spacecraft-from
That Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 as the second farthest spacecraft from the Sun this month (May 2023). I was also checking distances between the Sun and both of this spacecraft using NASA Eyes app for Windows and theskylive.com.
Using this I've seen that Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 as the second farthest spacecraft from the Sun between July 19 and July 20, 2023. (according to theskylive.com). Note that I wasn't able to find what will be speeds of both spacecraft relative to the sun as of that time, I only got speeds as of today. This table says the distance between the Sun, Voyager 2 and Pioneer 10 as of July 19, 2023 (according to theskylive.com).
Pioneer 10 | Voyager 2 | |
---|---|---|
Distance from Sun (km) | 20033.88 Billion | 20033.81 Billion Km |
Speed relative to Sun (km/s) | 11.9 | 15.3 |
Speed relative to Sun (AU/year) | 2.511 | 3.227 |
Days to matching distance | 79 | |
Today | 05/01/2023 | |
Matching distance date | 07/19/2023 |
This table says the distance between Voyager 2 and Pioneer 10 as of July 20, 2023 (according to theskylive.com).
Pioneer 10 | Voyager 2 | |
---|---|---|
Distance from Sun (km) | 20034.91 Billion | 20035.11 Billion |
Speed relative to Sun (km/s) | 11.9 | 15.3 |
Speed relative to Sun (AU/year) | 2.511 | 3.227 |
Days to matching distance | 80 | |
Today | 05/01/2023 | |
Matching distance date | 07/20/2023 |
95.134.111.98 ( talk) 15:42, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
I recently was able to find a distance in AU at which Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 as the second farthest spacecraft from the Sun on July 19, 2023, see details below.
Pioneer 10 | Voyager 2 | |
---|---|---|
Overtake distance (AU) | 133.93 | 133.93 |
Overtake distance date | July 19, 2023 | July 19, 2023 |
Days to overtake distance | 33 | 33 |
I don't think that Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 in May 2023. Using this link, I checked distance between the Sun and Voyager 2. Using this link, I checked distance between the Sun and Pioneer 10. I have added a subject about this on Talk:List of artificial objects leaving the Solar System. Per my earlier calculations, I calculated that V2 will overtake Pioneer 10 on July 20, 2023. Per my new calculation, Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 as the second farthest spacecraft from the Sun between 7:24 and 7:35, on July 19, 2023. I'm going to change 05-2023 to 07-2023 in the timeline section of the Pioneer 10 article. Would be this correct or not? 188.60.199.127 ( talk) 15:18, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
The following links below:
Say that Voyager 2 will overtake Pioneer 10 as the second farthest spacecraft from the Sun on July 19, 2023. 178.95.99.242 ( talk) 11:29, 21 June 2023 (UTC)