The Young Adelaide Family: Possible Sibling to Datura?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Astronomy & Astrophysics manuscript no. ade ©ESO 2021 March 30, 2021 The young Adelaide family: Possible sibling to Datura? D. Vokrouhlický1, B. Novakovic´2, and D. Nesvorný3 1 Institute of Astronomy, Charles University, V Holešovickáchˇ 2, CZ-180 00 Prague 8, Czech Republic e-mail: [email protected] 2 Department of Astronomy, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Belgrade, Studentski trg 16, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia 3 Southwest Research Institute, 1050 Walnut St, Suite 300, Boulder, CO 80302, USA Received: March 30, 2021; accepted: ??? ABSTRACT Context. Very young asteroid families may record processes that accompanied their formation in the most pristine way. This makes analysis of this special class particularly interesting. Aims. We studied the very young Adelaide family in the inner part of the main belt. This cluster is extremely close to the previously known Datura family in the space of proper orbital elements and their ages overlap. As a result, we investigated the possibility of a causal relationship between the two families. Methods. We identified Adelaide family members in the up-to-date catalogue of asteroids. By computing their proper orbital elements we inferred the family structure. Backward orbital integration of selected members allowed us to determine the age of the family. Results. The largest fragment (525) Adelaide, an S-type asteroid about 10 km in size, is accompanied by 50 sub-kilometre fragments. This family is a typical example of a cratering event. The very tiny extent in the semi-major axis minimises chances that some significant mean motion resonances influence the dynamics of its members, though we recognise that part of the Adelaide family is affected by weak, three-body resonances. Weak chaos is also produced by distant encounters with Mars. Simultaneous convergence of longitude of node for the orbits of six selected members to that of (525) Adelaide constrains the Adelaide family age to 536 ± 12 kyr (formal solution). While suspiciously overlapping with the age of the Datura family, we find it unlikely that the formation events of the two families are causally linked. In all likelihood, the similarity of their ages is just a coincidence. Key words. Celestial mechanics – Minor planets, asteroids: general 1. Introduction relative terms, impossible to achieve for older families. This in- formation may in turn be crucial for potentially linking the fam- About 50 asteroid families, for the most part products of the col- ily’s formation events to the accretion record of terrestrial plan- lisions of two parent asteroids, have been identified in the main ets (e.g. Farley et al. 2006). A possible downside in the study belt to date (e.g. Nesvorný et al. 2015; Masiero et al. 2015). of young young families consists of the typically smaller size They represent a wide variety of all kinds of sizes, shapes, spec- of their parent bodies (which are statistically more likely to tral types, and/or ages. Large and old families are impressive as collisionally disrupt; e.g. Bottke et al. 2005). As a result, frag- they represent the outcomes of enormously energetic collisions. ments forming such families are also typically small objects, An analysis of their fragments may give us information about the many of which may not yet have been discovered by current interiors of giant planetesimals in terms of chemical composition sky surveys. This aspect is the most severe in very young as- and mechanical properties governing the fragmentation process. teroid families with ages less than 1 Myr, which often consist of They are also crucial tracers of the early epochs when the ter- only a few known members. The first examples in this category restrial planets experienced increased impact flux. However, the were discovered little more than a decade ago (Nesvorný et al. analysis of large families may hide difficulties. This is because 2006; Nesvorný & Vokrouhlický 2006). Only two rare cases of over the eons since their formation, many dynamical and phys- very young families with a numerous population of known frag- ical processes might have changed their properties. In addition, ments have been studied in detail so far, the Datura family (e.g. arXiv:2103.15398v1 [astro-ph.EP] 29 Mar 2021 large portions of the families may have been lost through ma- Vokrouhlický et al. 2009, 2017b) and the Schulhof family (e.g. jor resonances. Disentangling the histories of large families may Vokrouhlický & Nesvorný 2011; Vokrouhlický et al. 2016). thus be a great challenge and subject to large uncertainties. Novakovic´ & Radovic´ (2019) reported the discovery of a In contrast, the analysis of young families may be more very young family in the vicinity of the asteroid (525) Adelaide, straightforward because the dynamical and physical processes thence the Adelaide family. In this brief note the authors used that make them evolve have not had enough time to operate. backward orbital integration of identified members to infer an Therefore, young families are potentially left in a much more approximate age of ≃ 500 kyr from the dispersion of the nodal pristine state, providing better clues to their formation. Addi- longitudes. However, further details about this cluster, includ- tionally, families younger than about 10 Myr offer a unique pos- ing a list of the identified members, were not given. Our interest sibility of dating their origins using the direct integration of in the Adelaide family was primarily driven by the suggested heliocentric orbits of their members backwards in time. This age, which seems suspiciously similar to that of Datura family approach, first applied to the Karin family by Nesvorný et al. (Vokrouhlický et al. 2009). Moreover, both families are located (2002), may result in age estimations accurate to about ≤ 10% in in a very similar orbital zone. We considered the proper orbital Article number, page 1 of 15 A&A proofs: manuscript no. ade elements of (1270) Datura (semi-major axis aP = 2.2347 au, ec- of the light curve. This indicates Adelaide is a slowly rotating as- centricity eP = 0.1535, and sine of inclination sin IP = 0.0920), teroid likely having a near-spherical shape, justifying the above- and compared them with those of (525) Adelaide (semi-major mentioned simple estimate of the escape velocity (based on a axis aP = 2.2452 au, eccentricity eP = 0.1487, and sine of incli- spherical shape assumption). nation sin IP = 0.1170). After we reviewed the currently known population of members in the Adelaide family and determined its age using a somewhat more accurate approach (Sect. 2), we 2.2. Family identification discuss its hypothetical relation to the Datura family (Sect. 3). In Asteroid families are traditionally identified as statistically sig- particular, we considered a case of a causal relationship between nificant clusters in the space of proper orbital elements: semi- them, such that, for instance, the Adelaide family formed first major axis (aP), eccentricity (eP), and sine of inclination (sin IP) and soon afterwards a coherent stream of its fragments hit the (e.g. Kneževic´ et al. 2002). The hierarchical clustering method parent asteroid of the Datura family. If true, this would be the (HCM) is the most often adopted tool to discern these clusters first chain reaction between asteroids ever described. (though there are also other, less employed approaches) and to evaluate their statistical significance (e.g. Bendjoya & Zappalà 2002; Nesvorný et al. 2015). This requires us to introduce a 2. Adelaide family metric function in the three-dimensional space of proper ele- 2.1. The largest fragment ments in order to evaluate the distance between two asteroid orbits, and to analyse both the family population and the back- The largest fragment in this cluster, (525) Adelaide, is the ground populations of asteroids. It was realised that a problem only asteroid with some physical characterisation available. may occur for very young families with only a limited number Masiero et al. (2014) analysed WISE/NEOWISE infrared obser- of known members; in these cases it may be difficult to prove vations and reported Adelaide’s size D = 9.33 ± 0.24 km and the statistical significance of the family among the plethora geometric albedo pV = 0.22 ± 0.05. These results assume an of interloping background objects. Nesvorný et al. (2006) and absolute magnitude H = 12.4 mag in the visible band. More up- Nesvorný & Vokrouhlický (2006) observed that the problem oc- to-date absolute magnitude determinations across all standard curs due to the low dimensionality of the proper element space, databases (such as MPC, JPL, or AstDyS) indicate a slightly and proposed that working in a higher dimensional space may smaller value of absolute magnitude: H ≃ 12.1. The difference help solve the issue. At the same time, they noted that colli- of about 0.3 magnitude is a characteristic scatter in this param- sionally born clusters initially have very tightly clustered lon- eter reported by Pravec et al. (2012), who also noted that near gitude of node Ω and perihelion ̟, in addition to semi-major H ≃ 12 mag the systematic offset of the database-reported val- axis a, eccentricity e, and inclination I, and that it takes only ues should be small (becoming as large as −0.5 mag for smaller about 1 − 2 Myr to make these secular angles disperse into a objects). It is therefore possible that the true size of (525) Ade- whole range of possible values. Therefore, very young fami- laide is slightly larger, its geometric albedo slightly higher, or lies (aged less than 1 − 2 Myr) could be identified directly in a a combination of both. The answer will be found when pho- five-dimensional space of osculating orbital elements, excluding tometrically calibrated data of this asteroid are taken. Luckily, only longitude in orbit (which disperses much faster, on approx- this issue is not critical for our analysis.