DOCSLIB.ORG

Gary Bernstein (University of Pennsylvania)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gary Bernstein (University of Pennsylvania) An HST/ACS Survey of the Kuiper Belt Gary Bernstein (University of Pennsylvania) #ith co-I%s Lynne A&en (UBC), Mike Brown (Cal Tech), Mat' Holman (CfA), Renu Malhotra (LPL), & David Tri&ing (Penn➙Steward) and for Astrometry: N. Zacharias (USNO) & J. A. Smith (LANL) ☀ Background Image: section of summed Funded by GO-9433 grants ACS TNO search-field data. The Kuiper Belt as an accretion and dynamics laboratory Design and Execution of the ACS Survey TNO Discoveries & Followup Implications for Solar System Evolution Light Curves and Astrometry Planet Formation Scenario: Theoretical Expectation: Observational Evidence: Collapse of gas/dust cloud Nebular/dust phases are to form protostar and nebular observed around other stars disk. Coagulation of grains, runaway gravitational growth of planetesimals Planetesimal phase Oligarchic growth of planetesimals. is observable only in our outer "fossilized" Solar System - the Kuiper Belt. Gas accretion onto largest bodies, dissipation of gas, ejection of small bodies Giant planets have been Mature planetary system detected around other stars Known Outer Solar-System Bodies (as of 2003 April 19) Key Plutino Scattered Other TNO Centaur Comet Asteroid Uranus Giant Planet Neptune Open symbols denote orbits uncertain due to short arcs. Pluto Outer Solar System Objects (as of 4/03) 0.6 Neptune-crossing 5:2 Resonant 2:1 0.4 3:2 y t i c i r t n e c c E Pluto 0.2 1:1 Uranus (Trojan) Neptune 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Semimajor Axis (AU) KBO Resonances and Planetary Migratio( 3:2 Resonances inNeptune frame(Malhotra 1995) Pluto and many KBOs (”Plutinos”) are locked in 3:2 resonance with Neptune, crossing Neptune’s orbit yet avoiding ejection. Malhotra (1993) explains “accident” of Pluto’s resonance by positing an outward migration by ~8 AU of Neptune during the clearing of the planetesimal disk. Resonances “sweep” through the population, acting like phase-space traps. Orbit of 2001 QR322 in Neptune frame(Chiang et al 2003) Prediction is that many KBOs should be found in 3:2 and 2:1 resonances KBOs have been found in following resonances (Chiang et al ‘03):1:1 (”Trojan”), 5:4, 4:3, 3:2 (”Plutino”), 5:3, 7:4, 2:1, 7:3, 5:2Resonance sweeping can only explain some of these, obviously not 1:1. Outer Solar System Objects (as of 4/03) Centaurs 0.6 Neptune-crossing 5:2 Resonant 2:1 0.4 3:2 y t i c i "Scattered r t n Disk" e c c E Pluto 0.2 CAUTION: "Classical" Belt Strong Selection Effects 1:1 Uranus (Trojan) Cold Primordial Disk? Neptune 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Semimajor Axis (AU) Finding Faint TNOs 4 Recall that distant TNOs have f r− ∝ Traditional response to fainter target is longer integration, but S/N gain for moving objects stops when object trails across sky background. TNOs move few arcsec per hour. Non-sidereal tracking of telescope only works for one preselected motion vector, not appropriate for a survey < Ground-based exposures limited to ~10 minutes before trailing, or m 24 R ∼ Digital Tracking: Take short exposures, shift and add digitially to follow any candidate orbit, then run detection algorithm. Used successfully from ground in 1992 by GMB, with Cochran et al WFPC2 data, many other times since. a) Original Single Exposure (c) Single Exposure, Fixed Objects Subtracted/Masked R=25.5 R=25.0 R=24.5 R=24.0 R=23.5 R=23.0 C o r w T r r e r a o c c n t k l g y e d t r r a a a t c e t k e d (b) Combined Image (d) Combined Image Track at Sidereal Rate Track at KBO rate Ground-Based Survey of 1.5 Square Degrees A&en, Bernstein, & Malhotra (2001) Neptune E J S U u a p a ra rt i tu n Pluto h te r u r n s 300 6.5 ) m k ( t 7 c e j b 200 O f H o r e t e old 8 m sh a e i r th D n tio ec ) 100 et 26 d > 9 w (R lo e B 10 11 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Heliocentric Distance (AU) Size Distribution of KBOs Diameter at 35 AU (km, albedo=0.04) 100 10 105 CLSD/WFPC2 ABM01 ??? For fixed distance, mag GL98/01 104 distribution is the size LJ98 distribution. JLT98 TJL01 e 1000 CB99 e r g Fa01 e Faintest two points on this plot d La01 e 100 known to be contaminated by r a u false positives! q Keck data s r e 10 p ) Data seem consistent with a m < ( single power law, N 1 g o l 0.63(m 23) 0.1 N(< m) = 10 − Number vs Mag (~size) for Trans-Neptunian Objects dN q r− , q = 4.0 0.5 ⇒ dr ∝ ± 0.01 20 22 24 26 28 30 R Magnitude Theoretical Expectations for Size Distributio( Single power law must break down to avoid divergent mass, t = 0 Myr t = 5 Myr surface brightness. t = 25 Myr t = 50 Myr t = 100 Myr t = 130 Myr t = 265 Myr Modelling of collisional t = 1000 Myr accretion and erosion requires detailed numerical study, assumptions about fracturing, dynamics, etc. Model by Davis et al Dohnanyi shows that q=3.5 is a point of steady-state collisional cascade under scale-free Does this size break exist? Kuiper fracturing laws. Expect this Belt is perhaps our only opportunity below some disruption scale. to test an accretion model! Outstanding Kuiper Belt Questions What is the size (magnitude) distribution of objects? Are the dynamical classes physically distinct? What event(s) or process(es) heated the planetesimal disk? Is there truly a truncation? What caused it? Are any of the dynamical classes viable source reservoir for the observed 1-10 km Jupiter family comets? What can we learn about the history of the solar system, and planetary systems in general? Plan for the ACS Survey Six ACS fields, 0.02 square degrees (12x HDF) Observe each field 22 ksec over 5 days Sum flux over 30 exposures in 1014 candidate orbits≈ Wait 5 days; most TNOs pass stationary points and reverse Observe another 15 ksec to confirm discoveries Detection limits: m<29.2 in F606W Expect 85 detections under extrapolation. Diameter at 35 AU (km, albedo=0.04) 100 10 105 ABM01 GL98/01 104 LJ98 Expected ACS Result JLT98 TJL01 ? pe lo e 1000 s CB99 yi e n r a hn g Fa01 Do e to k d La01 a e br e 100 r a u q s r e 10 p ) m < ( N 1 g o l 0.1 Number vs Mag (~size) for Trans-Neptunian Objects 0.01 20 22 24 26 28 30 R Magnitude A& it takes is 116 orbit Cycle 11 allocation (executed in 125 orbits, thanks Tony Roman!) 30,000 lines of C++ code New Fourier-domain PSF characterization method PSF interpolation across ACS Image registration & distortion (Anderson) Image combining with reduced PSF distortion Image subtraction Digital tracking addition & detection Orbit calculation and trailed-PSF fitting directly to images. Several CPU-years on P4 processors Schedul) Feb 2002: Phase II request Aug 2002: Preparations begin in earnest Jan 26 2003: First TNO observation Feb 09 2003: Last observation April 14 2003: All candidates identified April 29 2003: Keck retrieval run (Magellan clouded out) August 2003: Deep search complete I&ustration of ACS Data Quality 180 X Position of 2000 FV53 170 in part of ACS Data 160 ) c e 150 s c r 140 a ( n o 2 i t i s 1 o P 0 -1 ...linear trend removed -2 -3 -60-40 -20020 Time (Hours) 0.4 0.2 0.0 -0.2 predicted parallax from HST orbit at 39 AU -0.4 -70-65 -60-55 -50 TNO Discoveries in the ACS Survey 2000 FV53 2003 BF91 2003 BG91 2003 BH91 m=23.4 m=26.95 m=28.15 m=28.38 Single Exposure 400 seconds S/N=90 Summed Orbit 2000 seconds Summed Visit 6000 seconds Faintest solar system All Data objects ever detected! 38,000 seconds 1.5 arcsec 1 photon per 5 S/N=73 S/N=26 S/N=23 seconds at HST Distance: 40.26 AU 42.14 AU 42.55 AU Inclination: 2.5 deg 1.5 deg 2.0 deg Eccentricity: 0.07 ?? ?? Diameter: 44 km 28 km 25 km Analysis of a& survey data 1000 TB ) Combine data from all large, well- 2 Larsen g 100 e characterized surveys within 3 D d TJL ( e 10 t a degrees of the invariable plane. 10 e e c r ABM t i A 1 o Gladman n h s c 0.1 Deviation from single power law at r a ACS high confidence. e 0.01 CB S 1 0 ) 100 Split the TNO sample into 2 - g “Classical” KB and “Excited” e 10 d populations. CKBs defined as: 1 - 1 g All TNO a 0.1 CKB 38AU d 55AU m ( ≤ ≤ ) 0.01 Excited m i < 5◦ ( Σ 0.001 LFs of dynamical classes distinct at 18 20 22 24 26 28 96% confidence. R Magnitude Double-power-law fits to the Magnitude Distributio( Excited 0.6 CKB 1 ) 2 - 0.4 g e ) d g 1 - CKBO a g 2 a α m 0.2 m e ( r p ) o 3 e l 2 - s p m d ( 6 n s .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Surface Characteristics of Transneptunian Objects and Centaurs from Photometry and Spectroscopy
    Barucci et al.: Surface Characteristics of TNOs and Centaurs 647 Surface Characteristics of Transneptunian Objects and Centaurs from Photometry and Spectroscopy M. A. Barucci and A. Doressoundiram Observatoire de Paris D. P. Cruikshank NASA Ames Research Center The external region of the solar system contains a vast population of small icy bodies, be- lieved to be remnants from the accretion of the planets. The transneptunian objects (TNOs) and Centaurs (located between Jupiter and Neptune) are probably made of the most primitive and thermally unprocessed materials of the known solar system. Although the study of these objects has rapidly evolved in the past few years, especially from dynamical and theoretical points of view, studies of the physical and chemical properties of the TNO population are still limited by the faintness of these objects. The basic properties of these objects, including infor- mation on their dimensions and rotation periods, are presented, with emphasis on their diver- sity and the possible characteristics of their surfaces. 1. INTRODUCTION cally with even the largest telescopes. The physical char- acteristics of Centaurs and TNOs are still in a rather early Transneptunian objects (TNOs), also known as Kuiper stage of investigation. Advances in instrumentation on tele- belt objects (KBOs) and Edgeworth-Kuiper belt objects scopes of 6- to 10-m aperture have enabled spectroscopic (EKBOs), are presumed to be remnants of the solar nebula studies of an increasing number of these objects, and signifi- that have survived over the age of the solar system. The cant progress is slowly being made. connection of the short-period comets (P < 200 yr) of low We describe here photometric and spectroscopic studies orbital inclination and the transneptunian population of pri- of TNOs and the emerging results.
    [Show full text]
  • Trans-Neptunian Objects a Brief History, Dynamical Structure, and Characteristics of Its Inhabitants
    Trans-Neptunian Objects A Brief history, Dynamical Structure, and Characteristics of its Inhabitants John Stansberry Space Telescope Science Institute IAC Winter School 2016 IAC Winter School 2016 -- Kuiper Belt Overview -- J. Stansberry 1 The Solar System beyond Neptune: History • 1930: Pluto discovered – Photographic survey for Planet X • Directed by Percival Lowell (Lowell Observatory, Flagstaff, Arizona) • Efforts from 1905 – 1929 were fruitless • discovered by Clyde Tombaugh, Feb. 1930 (33 cm refractor) – Survey continued into 1943 • Kuiper, or Edgeworth-Kuiper, Belt? – 1950’s: Pluto represented (K.E.), or had scattered (G.K.) a primordial, population of small bodies – thus KBOs or EKBOs – J. Fernandez (1980, MNRAS 192) did pretty clearly predict something similar to the trans-Neptunian belt of objects – Trans-Neptunian Objects (TNOs), trans-Neptunian region best? – See http://www2.ess.ucla.edu/~jewitt/kb/gerard.html IAC Winter School 2016 -- Kuiper Belt Overview -- J. Stansberry 2 The Solar System beyond Neptune: History • 1978: Pluto’s moon, Charon, discovered – Photographic astrometry survey • 61” (155 cm) reflector • James Christy (Naval Observatory, Flagstaff) – Technologically, discovery was possible decades earlier • Saturation of Pluto images masked the presence of Charon • 1988: Discovery of Pluto’s atmosphere – Stellar occultation • Kuiper airborne observatory (KAO: 90 cm) + 7 sites • Measured atmospheric refractivity vs. height • Spectroscopy suggested N2 would dominate P(z), T(z) • 1992: Pluto’s orbit explained • Outward migration by Neptune results in capture into 3:2 resonance • Pluto’s inclination implies Neptune migrated outward ~5 AU IAC Winter School 2016 -- Kuiper Belt Overview -- J. Stansberry 3 The Solar System beyond Neptune: History • 1992: Discovery of 2nd TNO • 1976 – 92: Multiple dedicated surveys for small (mV > 20) TNOs • Fall 1992: Jewitt and Luu discover 1992 QB1 – Orbit confirmed as ~circular, trans-Neptunian in 1993 • 1993 – 4: 5 more TNOs discovered • c.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamics of Plutinos
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CERN Document Server The dynamics of Plutinos Qingjuan Yu and Scott Tremaine Princeton University Observatory, Peyton Hall, Princeton, NJ 08544-1001, USA ABSTRACT Plutinos are Kuiper-belt objects that share the 3:2 Neptune resonance with Pluto. The long-term stability of Plutino orbits depends on their eccentric- ity. Plutinos with eccentricities close to Pluto (fractional eccentricity difference < ∆e=ep = e ep =ep 0:1) can be stable because the longitude difference librates, | − | ∼ in a manner similar to the tadpole and horseshoe libration in coorbital satellites. > Plutinos with ∆e=ep 0:3 can also be stable; the longitude difference circulates ∼ and close encounters are possible, but the effects of Pluto are weak because the encounter velocity is high. Orbits with intermediate eccentricity differences are likely to be unstable over the age of the solar system, in the sense that encoun- ters with Pluto drive them out of the 3:2 Neptune resonance and thus into close encounters with Neptune. This mechanism may be a source of Jupiter-family comets. Subject headings: planets and satellites: Pluto — Kuiper Belt, Oort cloud — celestial mechanics, stellar dynamics 1. Introduction The orbit of Pluto has a number of unusual features. It has the highest eccentricity (ep =0:253) and inclination (ip =17:1◦) of any planet in the solar system. It crosses Neptune’s orbit and hence is susceptible to strong perturbations during close encounters with that planet. However, close encounters do not occur because Pluto is locked into a 3:2 orbital resonance with Neptune, which ensures that conjunctions occur near Pluto’s aphelion (Cohen & Hubbard 1965).
    [Show full text]
  • Alactic Observer
    alactic Observer G John J. McCarthy Observatory Volume 14, No. 2 February 2021 International Space Station transit of the Moon Composite image: Marc Polansky February Astronomy Calendar and Space Exploration Almanac Bel'kovich (Long 90° E) Hercules (L) and Atlas (R) Posidonius Taurus-Littrow Six-Day-Old Moon mosaic Apollo 17 captured with an antique telescope built by John Benjamin Dancer. Dancer is credited with being the first to photograph the Moon in Tranquility Base England in February 1852 Apollo 11 Apollo 11 and 17 landing sites are visible in the images, as well as Mare Nectaris, one of the older impact basins on Mare Nectaris the Moon Altai Scarp Photos: Bill Cloutier 1 John J. McCarthy Observatory In This Issue Page Out the Window on Your Left ........................................................................3 Valentine Dome ..............................................................................................4 Rocket Trivia ..................................................................................................5 Mars Time (Landing of Perseverance) ...........................................................7 Destination: Jezero Crater ...............................................................................9 Revisiting an Exoplanet Discovery ...............................................................11 Moon Rock in the White House....................................................................13 Solar Beaming Project ..................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • The Kuiper Belt Luminosity Function from Mr = 22 to 25 Jean-Marc Petit, M
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Archive Ouverte en Sciences de l'Information et de la Communication The Kuiper Belt luminosity function from mR = 22 to 25 Jean-Marc Petit, M. Holman, B. Gladman, J. Kavelaars, H. Scholl, T. Loredo To cite this version: Jean-Marc Petit, M. Holman, B. Gladman, J. Kavelaars, H. Scholl, et al.. The Kuiper Belt lu- minosity function from mR = 22 to 25. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Oxford University Press (OUP): Policy P - Oxford Open Option A, 2006, 365 (2), pp.429-438. 10.1111/j.1365- 2966.2005.09661.x. hal-02374819 HAL Id: hal-02374819 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02374819 Submitted on 21 Nov 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 000, 1{11 (2005) Printed 7 September 2005 (MN LATEX style file v2.2) The Kuiper Belt's luminosity function from mR=22{25. J-M. Petit1;7?, M.J. Holman2;7, B.J. Gladman3;5;7, J.J. Kavelaars4;7 H. Scholl3 and T.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Mass of the Kuiper Belt · 9Th Planet PACS 95.10.Ce · 96.12.De · 96.12.Fe · 96.20.-N · 96.30.-T
    Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Mass of the Kuiper Belt E. V. Pitjeva · N. P. Pitjev Received: 13 December 2017 / Accepted: 24 August 2018 The final publication ia available at Springer via http://doi.org/10.1007/s10569-018-9853-5 Abstract The Kuiper belt includes tens of thousands of large bodies and millions of smaller objects. The main part of the belt objects is located in the annular zone between 39.4 au and 47.8 au from the Sun, the boundaries correspond to the average distances for orbital resonances 3:2 and 2:1 with the motion of Neptune. One-dimensional, two-dimensional, and discrete rings to model the total gravitational attraction of numerous belt objects are consid- ered. The discrete rotating model most correctly reflects the real interaction of bodies in the Solar system. The masses of the model rings were determined within EPM2017—the new version of ephemerides of planets and the Moon at IAA RAS—by fitting spacecraft ranging observations. The total mass of the Kuiper belt was calculated as the sum of the masses of the 31 largest trans-neptunian objects directly included in the simultaneous integration and the estimated mass of the model of the discrete ring of TNO. The total mass −2 is (1.97 ± 0.30) · 10 m⊕. The gravitational influence of the Kuiper belt on Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune exceeds at times the attraction of the hypothetical 9th planet with a mass of ∼ 10 m⊕ at the distances assumed for it.
    [Show full text]
  • Unseen 'Planetary Mass Object' Signalled by Warped Kuiper Belt 22 June 2017, by Daniel Stolte
    Unseen 'planetary mass object' signalled by warped Kuiper Belt 22 June 2017, by Daniel Stolte orbital tilts (inclinations) that average out to what planetary scientists call the invariable plane of the solar system, the most distant of the Kuiper Belt's objects do not. Their average plane, Volk and Malhotra discovered, is tilted away from the invariable plane by about eight degrees. In other words, something unknown is warping the average orbital plane of the outer solar system. "The most likely explanation for our results is that there is some unseen mass," says Volk, a postdoctoral fellow at LPL and the lead author of the study. "According to our calculations, something A yet to be discovered, unseen "planetary mass object" as massive as Mars would be needed to cause the makes its existence known by ruffling the orbital plane of warp that we measured." distant Kuiper Belt objects, according to research by Kat Volk and Renu Malhotra of the UA's Lunar and Planetary The Kuiper Belt lies beyond the orbit of Neptune Laboratory. The object is pictured on a wide orbit far and extends to a few hundred Astronomical Units, beyond Pluto in this artist's illustration. Credit: Heather or AU, with one AU representing the distance Roper/LPL between Earth and the sun. Like its inner solar system cousin, the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, the Kuiper Belt hosts a vast number of minor planets, mostly small icy bodies (the An unknown, unseen "planetary mass object" may precursors of comets), and a few dwarf planets. lurk in the outer reaches of our solar system, according to new research on the orbits of minor For the study, Volk and Malhotra analyzed the tilt planets to be published in the Astronomical angles of the orbital planes of more than 600 Journal.
    [Show full text]
  • Distant Ekos: 2012 BX85 and 4 New Centaur/SDO Discoveries: 2000 GQ148, 2012 BR61, 2012 CE17, 2012 CG
    Issue No. 79 February 2012 r ✤✜ s ✓✏ DISTANT EKO ❞✐ ✒✑ The Kuiper Belt Electronic Newsletter ✣✢ Edited by: Joel Wm. Parker [email protected] www.boulder.swri.edu/ekonews CONTENTS News & Announcements ................................. 2 Abstracts of 8 Accepted Papers ......................... 3 Newsletter Information .............................. .....9 1 NEWS & ANNOUNCEMENTS There was 1 new TNO discovery announced since the previous issue of Distant EKOs: 2012 BX85 and 4 new Centaur/SDO discoveries: 2000 GQ148, 2012 BR61, 2012 CE17, 2012 CG Objects recently assigned numbers: 2010 EP65 = (312645) 2008 QD4 = (315898) 2010 EN65 = (316179) 2008 AP129 = (315530) Objects recently assigned names: 1997 CS29 = Sila-Nunam Current number of TNOs: 1249 (including Pluto) Current number of Centaurs/SDOs: 337 Current number of Neptune Trojans: 8 Out of a total of 1594 objects: 644 have measurements from only one opposition 624 of those have had no measurements for more than a year 316 of those have arcs shorter than 10 days (for more details, see: http://www.boulder.swri.edu/ekonews/objects/recov_stats.jpg) 2 PAPERS ACCEPTED TO JOURNALS The Dynamical Evolution of Dwarf Planet (136108) Haumea’s Collisional Family: General Properties and Implications for the Trans-Neptunian Belt Patryk Sofia Lykawka1, Jonathan Horner2, Tadashi Mukai3 and Akiko M. Nakamura3 1 Astronomy Group, Faculty of Social and Natural Sciences, Kinki University, Japan 2 Department of Astrophysics, School of Physics, University of New South Wales, Australia 3 Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Kobe University, Japan Recently, the first collisional family was identified in the trans-Neptunian belt (otherwise known as the Edgeworth-Kuiper belt), providing direct evidence of the importance of collisions between trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs).
    [Show full text]
  • Journal Pre-Proof
    Journal Pre-proof A statistical review of light curves and the prevalence of contact binaries in the Kuiper Belt Mark R. Showalter, Susan D. Benecchi, Marc W. Buie, William M. Grundy, James T. Keane, Carey M. Lisse, Cathy B. Olkin, Simon B. Porter, Stuart J. Robbins, Kelsi N. Singer, Anne J. Verbiscer, Harold A. Weaver, Amanda M. Zangari, Douglas P. Hamilton, David E. Kaufmann, Tod R. Lauer, D.S. Mehoke, T.S. Mehoke, J.R. Spencer, H.B. Throop, J.W. Parker, S. Alan Stern, the New Horizons Geology, Geophysics, and Imaging Team PII: S0019-1035(20)30444-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2020.114098 Reference: YICAR 114098 To appear in: Icarus Received date: 25 November 2019 Revised date: 30 August 2020 Accepted date: 1 September 2020 Please cite this article as: M.R. Showalter, S.D. Benecchi, M.W. Buie, et al., A statistical review of light curves and the prevalence of contact binaries in the Kuiper Belt, Icarus (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2020.114098 This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Resonant Kuiper Belt Objects
    Resonant Kuiper Belt Objects - a Review Renu Malhotra Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA Email: [email protected] Abstract Our understanding of the history of the solar system has undergone a revolution in recent years, owing to new theoretical insights into the origin of Pluto and the discovery of the Kuiper belt and its rich dynamical structure. The emerging picture of dramatic orbital migration of the planets driven by interaction with the primordial Kuiper belt is thought to have produced the final solar system architecture that we live in today. This paper gives a brief summary of this new view of our solar system's history, and reviews the astronomical evidence in the resonant populations of the Kuiper belt. Introduction Lying at the edge of the visible solar system, observational confirmation of the existence of the Kuiper belt came approximately a quarter-century ago with the discovery of the distant minor planet (15760) Albion (formerly 1992 QB1, Jewitt & Luu 1993). With the clarity of hindsight, we now recognize that Pluto was the first discovered member of the Kuiper belt. The current census of the Kuiper belt includes more than 2000 minor planets at heliocentric distances between ~30 au and ~50 au. Their orbital distribution reveals a rich dynamical structure shaped by the gravitational perturbations of the giant planets, particularly Neptune. Theoretical analysis of these structures has revealed a remarkable dynamic history of the solar system. The story is as follows (see Fernandez & Ip 1984, Malhotra 1993, Malhotra 1995, Fernandez & Ip 1996, and many subsequent works).
    [Show full text]
  • Orbital Resonances and Chaos in the Solar System
    Solar system Formation and Evolution ASP Conference Series, Vol. 149, 1998 D. Lazzaro et al., eds. ORBITAL RESONANCES AND CHAOS IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM Renu Malhotra Lunar and Planetary Institute 3600 Bay Area Blvd, Houston, TX 77058, USA E-mail: [email protected] Abstract. Long term solar system dynamics is a tale of orbital resonance phe- nomena. Orbital resonances can be the source of both instability and long term stability. This lecture provides an overview, with simple models that elucidate our understanding of orbital resonance phenomena. 1. INTRODUCTION The phenomenon of resonance is a familiar one to everybody from childhood. A very young child is delighted in a playground swing when an older companion drives the swing at its natural frequency and rapidly increases the swing amplitude; the older child accomplishes the same on her own without outside assistance by driving the swing at a frequency twice that of its natural frequency. Resonance phenomena in the Solar system are essentially similar – the driving of a dynamical system by a periodic force at a frequency which is a rational multiple of the natural frequency. In fact, there are many mathematical similarities with the playground analogy, including the fact of nonlinearity of the oscillations, which plays a fundamental role in the long term evolution of orbits in the planetary system. But there is also an important difference: in the playground, the child adjusts her driving frequency to remain in tune – hence in resonance – with the natural frequency which changes with the amplitude of the swing. Such self-tuning is sometimes realized in the Solar system; but it is more often and more generally the case that resonances come-and-go.
    [Show full text]
  • Collision Probabilities in the Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt
    Draft version April 30, 2021 Typeset using LATEX default style in AASTeX63 Collision Probabilities in the Edgeworth-Kuiper belt Abedin Y. Abedin,1 JJ Kavelaars,1 Sarah Greenstreet,2, 3 Jean-Marc Petit,4 Brett Gladman,5 Samantha Lawler,6 Michele Bannister,7 Mike Alexandersen,8 Ying-Tung Chen,9 Stephen Gwyn,1 and Kathryn Volk10 1National Research Council of Canada, Herzberg Astronomy and Astrophysics, 5071 West Saanich Road, Victoria, BC V9E 2E7, Canada 2B612 Asteroid Institute, 20 Sunnyside Avenue, Suite 427, Mill Valley, CA 94941, USA 3DIRAC Center, Department of Astronomy, University of Washington, 3910 15th Avenue NE, Seattle, WA 98195, USA 4Institut UTINAM, CNRS-UMR 6213, Universit´eBourgogne Franche Comt´eBP 1615, 25010 Besan¸conCedex, France 5Department of Physics and Astronomy, 6224 Agricultural Road, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 6Campion College and the Department of Physics, University of Regina, Regina SK, S4S 0A2, Canada 7University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand 8Minor Planet Center, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, US 9Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Taiwan 10Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona: Tucson, AZ, USA Submitted to AJ ABSTRACT Here, we present results on the intrinsic collision probabilities, PI , and range of collision speeds, VI , as a function of the heliocentric distance, r, in the trans-Neptunian region. The collision speed is one of the parameters, that serves as a proxy to a collisional outcome e.g., complete disruption and scattering of fragments, or formation of crater, where both processes are directly related to the impact energy. We utilize an improved and de-biased model of the trans-Neptunian object (TNO) region from the \Outer Solar System Origins Survey" (OSSOS).
    [Show full text]