The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has classified the interstellar object 3I/ATLAS as a comet, citing evidence from spectral data and observable characteristics. This classification, however, faces scrutiny from Harvard physicist Avi Loeb, who argues that certain anomalies in the object’s trajectory raise questions about its natural origins.
According to NASA, 3I/ATLAS displays classic comet features, including a visible coma and a gas-emitting tail, along with spectral data indicating the presence of water. The agency asserts that these characteristics align with typical cometary behavior, leaving little room for interpretations suggesting an artificial origin. Data collected from various observatories support this view, reinforcing the consensus that 3I/ATLAS is a natural celestial body.
In contrast, Professor Loeb emphasizes that the object exhibits peculiar traits that cannot be easily explained by standard comet science. He has identified what he refers to as the “13th anomaly,” which he believes indicates a level of precision in its trajectory that is statistically improbable for a natural object. He highlights that 3I/ATLAS is set to pass nearly precisely along the edge of Jupiter’s Hill sphere, the region where Jupiter’s gravitational influence surpasses that of the Sun.
Loeb’s analysis reveals that the closest approach of 3I/ATLAS, approximately 53.445 million kilometers from Jupiter, aligns with remarkable precision to the gravitational boundary of the giant planet. He points out that this alignment is accurate within 0.06 million kilometers, a detail he suggests is unlikely to occur by chance. Moreover, he posits that the object’s non-gravitational acceleration and jet activity differ significantly from typical comet behavior, further fueling his hypothesis of an engineered origin.
In a recent post on Medium, Loeb elaborated on his theory, proposing that 3I/ATLAS might have been designed to deploy smaller crafts into stable orbits around Jupiter’s Lagrange points. He speculates that if the object utilized small jets to adjust its trajectory, it may have intentionally aimed for this flyby.
“If 3I/ATLAS is technological in origin, it might have fine-tuned its trajectory with the help of thrusters to arrive at Jupiter’s Hill radius,” Loeb wrote. He explained that the optimal timing for any such maneuver would coincide with perihelion, when gravitational assists from the Sun could be leveraged for the adjustment.
Loeb’s hypothesis suggests that if the object were indeed a ‘mothership’ capable of delivering technological devices, entering Jupiter’s Hill radius would be crucial. This region allows for the retention of slower-moving objects, providing a stable environment for any potential satellites or devices to remain intact without being pulled away by the Sun’s gravity.
The professor further details that the ideal locations for such devices would be the L1 and L2 Lagrange points, which are situated at the edge of Jupiter’s Hill radius. These points are inherently stable, requiring minimal fuel for maintenance, making them suitable for long-term observation purposes.
While Loeb does not assert definitively that 3I/ATLAS is alien technology, he advocates for an open-minded investigation into its unusual characteristics. He argues that dismissing the data in favor of more comfortable explanations could overlook significant discoveries.
“If we find technological satellites of Jupiter that we did not send, it would imply that Jupiter is of interest to an extraterrestrial civilization,” Loeb stated. He added that the absence of similar devices near Earth could be disheartening, suggesting that our interstellar visitors may not have any interest in our planet.
As the debate continues, the scientific community remains engaged in discussions about the true nature of 3I/ATLAS. The contrasting views from NASA and Loeb highlight the complexities of interpreting interstellar phenomena and the ongoing quest to understand the universe beyond our own.
