Re: Asteroid etc.belts

KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de wrote:
> 
> laserlight@quixnet.net schrieb:
> >
> > I didn't say it was exciting, just realistic.
> > If you want exciting, go right ahead.  You could say that
> > you're chasing someone through a jovian's trojan points,
> > or you find a meteor swarm or comet that's split up.  Of
> > course, most asteroids are small enough that you'd have a
> > hard time hitting them, if they're in the 1mu=1000km
> > scale.
> >
> > If you want a little more diversity, you could add Herbig
> > Haro objects, pulsars, black holes...
> 
> Or Moons of any size.
> 
> What's an Herbig Haro object ?

They are small-scale shock regions associated intimately with star
forming
regions. Localized dense regions of nebulae. I do not have a
particle-per-
square-cm number to give you, though. I may be able to find out later.

> BTW what would the on-table density of Saturn's rings be ?

Vertically? Not much. Less than 1000 km for the outer rings,
and less than a kilometer for the middle rings. Not all of
the thicknesses are known, though, but for the most part,
you can say less than 1000 km (which means 1 mu if you use
the accepted 1000 km = 1 mu ;-).

Horizontally, denser than your typical asteroid belt. But again,
I don't have a density number to supply. Most of it is small-scale
stuff, but would be damaging to a ship plowing through the area at
high speed (then again, beam weapons and SMs are damaging to ships,
too. ;-).  I'll try and look up this information later. But the rings
aren't a dispersed plane of debris, but are made up of ringlets, almost
like grooves on a record (that's one of those big plastic-like things
that was the predecessor to CDs for our younger members of the audience
;-)

Indy