🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec24.193342.29953@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, 
billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
 
> My definition of asteriod is: any body that orginated in the
> "asteriod belt" (between Mars and Jupiter). I have made no claim as to  
> where they can orbit. Jupiter is large enough to cause significant 
> perturbation to their orbits.

Well, that's nice, but you might want to check the astronomically accepted
definition instead.  And just how do you propose to define origins here?
Do you mean a body that coalesced from the primordial solar nebula at a
mean distance of between 1.4 and 5.2 AU from the center of that nebula?
How would you propose to show where all such bodies were now, or even if
the main belt asteroids all started out there?

> However, it is a long way from Jupiter to Neptune. I am waiting for someone
> to post a reference that states that there are asteriods (by my definition)
> that orbit that far out.

So who the heck are you?  President of the International Astronomical Union?
When Charlie Kowal discovered Chiron it was classed as an asteroid, and it's
orbit takes it well past Saturn.  Yes, Chiron now appears to contain more
volatiles than "typical" asteroids but so what?  

-Bill Gawne,  Space Telescope Science Institute