Talk:Lissajous orbit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lissajous orbit article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
	The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

[edit] Request for help

Could anyone please read over this article to check for (at least) basic correctness? Thanks! Sdsds 01:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WTF?

I am really interested in space and orbits and orbital mechanics. I have a (non-technical) doctorate degree. That said, I can't make heads or tails of this article. Should't it be written so that a non-scientist can get something out of it? Kjdamrau 03:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)kjdamrau

[edit] Correctness

I believe the Lissajous orbit is a more eccentric/complicated orbit than a halo orbit. However, the article describes it as non-coplanar in contrast to the halo orbit. The halo orbit is not coplanar to the two main masses (see my last sentence), in fact it's exactly perpendicular to the line between the masses. If the smaller mass were the earth, a halo orbit would trace a 'halo' above the earth around the Lagrange point, hence the name. I'd extend that to say that a Lissajous orbit would be a tilted and/or elliptical halo.

I won't change the article though, as I have a suspicion that my understanding of the use of the word 'planar' isn't appropriate in this context :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnitaBSc (talk • contribs) 01:53, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Ha ha! I think you are right -- that a halo orbit is planar but out of the plane of the two larger bodies' orbits, and that a lissajous orbit is more complicated. I suspect a lissajous orbit may not even be planar, which would explain the strange wording about it being an "orbital trajectory". If only there were an available source for the math involved! (sdsds - talk) 01:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I took the plunge! "Coplanar" was just too confusing. I've replaced it by first describing halo orbits as being in the perpendicular plane, then contrasting the Lissajous orbit. Hope you find this an improvement. Yoyo 124.191.50.199 19:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)