论文标题
AD 363中Kreutz Sungrazers的前所未有的日光显示？
Unprecedented Daylight Display of Kreutz Sungrazers in AD 363?
论文作者
论文摘要
在最近提出的接触二进制模型（Sekanina 2021）的背景下，我调查了Kreutz Sungrazers在轨道上的第一次圆锥体的经历，在近735年的轨道上，在初步的近乎含量的祖细胞散布了Aristotle的Comet，Aristotle的372 BC的最初接近叙述。在这种分裂中的有利条件和次要片段化的发作中，碎片应该几乎同时到达其第一个围场，让人联想到两种效率模型的AD 356围场回报的预期结果（Sekanina＆Chodas 2004）。审查了一群克鲁兹日光浴者的相关案例，以评估罗马历史学家艾米亚努斯·马塞利诺斯（Ammianus Marcellinus）对简短言论的可能科学后果，即“在公元363年后期看到了“在广阔的日光彗星中”，仅七年后。经过测试的场景与Ammianus的叙述不矛盾，并且与接触二进制模型一致，它涉及一组白天可见的十个Sungrazers，所有这些都在4.6天内达到了围场。作为这项工作的一部分，我评论了迅速发展的辉煌后尾巴的作用；修改第一个也是最后一个裸眼目击事件的典型典型幅度；比较全白天，暮光和晚上的可见性条件；而且，第一次，有利于Comet X/1106 C1作为C/1843 D1的彗星的证据，而不是C/1882 R1和C/1965 S1。
In the context of the recently proposed contact-binary model (Sekanina 2021), I investigate the circumstances of the first perihelion passage of the Kreutz sungrazers in orbits with barycentric periods near 735 yr, following the initial near-aphelion splitting of the presumed progenitor, Aristotle's comet of 372 BC. Given favorable conditions at this breakup and at episodes of secondary fragmentation in its aftermath, the fragments should have arrived at their first perihelion nearly simultaneously, reminiscent of the anticipated outcome for the two-superfragment model's perihelion return of AD 356 (Sekanina & Chodas 2004). The relevant case of a swarm of Kreutz sungrazers is examined to appraise possible scientific ramifications of the brief remark by Ammianus Marcellinus, a Roman historian, that "in broad daylight comets were seen" in late AD 363, only seven years later. The tested scenario, which does not contradict Ammianus' narrative and is consistent with the contact-binary model, involves a set of ten sungrazers visible in the daytime, all reaching perihelion over a period of 4.6 days. As part of this work, I comment on the role of the rapidly developing, brilliant post-perihelion tail; revise the apparent magnitude typical for the first and last naked-eye sightings; compare the visibility conditions in full daylight, in twilight, and at night; and, for the first time, present circumstantial evidence that favors comet X/1106 C1 as the parent to C/1843 D1 rather than to C/1882 R1 and C/1965 S1.
