 | This is not a Wikipedia article: It is an individual user's work-in-progress page, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable. For guidance on developing this draft, see
Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft. Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL |
Notes and resources
Current draft: Capture of Triton
Neptune's largest moon Triton is likely to have been captured into Neptune orbit, as opposed to forming around Neptune.
History
Early attempts to explain Triton's unusual orbit included a hypothesis first proposed by astronomer R. A. Lyttleton in 1936, proposing that both Triton and Pluto were once large regular moons of Neptune. Mutual interactions between the two would then eject Pluto and flip Triton's orbit, explaining the former's then-apparent isolation and the latter's retrograde orbit. [1] However, the original hypothesis was borne out of heavily overestimated masses for both Pluto and Triton; as estimates for their masses approached their true values, it was recognized that Pluto could not realistically reverse Triton's orbit. To address this, in 1979 a team of astronomers led by P. Farinella proposed a "hybrid" model, where only Pluto was an indigenous satellite of Neptune and Triton is a captured object. [2]: 419–420 Alternatively, astronomers R. S. Harrington and T. C. van Flandern proposed that same year that an encounter with a rogue object several times more massive than Earth could provide the gravitational influence and energy necessary to eject Pluto and reverse Triton's orbit whilst disrupting the rest of the Neptune system. [3] This "encounter" model failed to explain why Neptune's orbit was not disrupted despite encountering such a massive object. Thus, into the 1980's capture models began to grow more accepted. [4]
Models invoking catastrophic interactions between Pluto and Triton were refuted by W. B. McKinnon in 1984, demonstrating that such a scenario was impossible given the energies required. Instead, McKinnon proposed that both Triton and Pluto are leftover icy planetesimals from the early Solar System, with Triton being later captured into Neptune orbit. [5] Following the Voyager 2 spacecraft's flyby of the Neptune system, Triton's physical parameters were measured with great precision for the first time.
Initial capture
Capture mechanisms
Subsequent effects
Tidal heating
Disruption of primordial moons
Eventual destruction
Alternatives to capture
See also
References
- ^ Lyttleton, R. A. (30 October 1936). "On the possible results of an encounter of Pluto with the Neptunian system". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 97: 108. Bibcode: 1936MNRAS..97..108L. doi: 10.1093/mnras/97.2.108. Retrieved 10 June 2024.
- ^ Farinella, P.; Milani, A.; Nobili, A. M.; Valsecchi, G. B. (June 1979). "Tidal evolution and the Pluto-Charon system". The Moon and the Planets. 20 (4): 415–421. Bibcode: 1979M&P....20..415F. doi: 10.1007/BF00897349.
- ^ Harrington, R. S.; van Flandern, T. C. (June 1979). "The Satellites of Neptune and the Origin of Pluto". Icarus. 39 (1): 131–136. Bibcode: 1979Icar...39..131H. doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(79)90106-4.
- ^ Farinella, P.; Milani, A.; Nobili, A. M.; Valsecchi, G. B. (December 1980). "Some remarks on the capture of Triton and the origin of Pluto". Icarus. 44 (3): 810–812. Bibcode: 1980Icar...44..810F. doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(80)90148-7.
- ^ McKinnon, William B. (27 September 1984). "On the origin of Triton and Pluto". Nature. 311: 355–358. doi: 10.1038/311355a0.
| This is not a Wikipedia article: It is an individual user's work-in-progress page, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable. For guidance on developing this draft, see
Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft. Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL |
Notes and resources
Current draft: Capture of Triton
Neptune's largest moon Triton is likely to have been captured into Neptune orbit, as opposed to forming around Neptune.
History
Early attempts to explain Triton's unusual orbit included a hypothesis first proposed by astronomer R. A. Lyttleton in 1936, proposing that both Triton and Pluto were once large regular moons of Neptune. Mutual interactions between the two would then eject Pluto and flip Triton's orbit, explaining the former's then-apparent isolation and the latter's retrograde orbit. [1] However, the original hypothesis was borne out of heavily overestimated masses for both Pluto and Triton; as estimates for their masses approached their true values, it was recognized that Pluto could not realistically reverse Triton's orbit. To address this, in 1979 a team of astronomers led by P. Farinella proposed a "hybrid" model, where only Pluto was an indigenous satellite of Neptune and Triton is a captured object. [2]: 419–420 Alternatively, astronomers R. S. Harrington and T. C. van Flandern proposed that same year that an encounter with a rogue object several times more massive than Earth could provide the gravitational influence and energy necessary to eject Pluto and reverse Triton's orbit whilst disrupting the rest of the Neptune system. [3] This "encounter" model failed to explain why Neptune's orbit was not disrupted despite encountering such a massive object. Thus, into the 1980's capture models began to grow more accepted. [4]
Models invoking catastrophic interactions between Pluto and Triton were refuted by W. B. McKinnon in 1984, demonstrating that such a scenario was impossible given the energies required. Instead, McKinnon proposed that both Triton and Pluto are leftover icy planetesimals from the early Solar System, with Triton being later captured into Neptune orbit. [5] Following the Voyager 2 spacecraft's flyby of the Neptune system, Triton's physical parameters were measured with great precision for the first time.
Initial capture
Capture mechanisms
Subsequent effects
Tidal heating
Disruption of primordial moons
Eventual destruction
Alternatives to capture
See also
References
- ^ Lyttleton, R. A. (30 October 1936). "On the possible results of an encounter of Pluto with the Neptunian system". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 97: 108. Bibcode: 1936MNRAS..97..108L. doi: 10.1093/mnras/97.2.108. Retrieved 10 June 2024.
- ^ Farinella, P.; Milani, A.; Nobili, A. M.; Valsecchi, G. B. (June 1979). "Tidal evolution and the Pluto-Charon system". The Moon and the Planets. 20 (4): 415–421. Bibcode: 1979M&P....20..415F. doi: 10.1007/BF00897349.
- ^ Harrington, R. S.; van Flandern, T. C. (June 1979). "The Satellites of Neptune and the Origin of Pluto". Icarus. 39 (1): 131–136. Bibcode: 1979Icar...39..131H. doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(79)90106-4.
- ^ Farinella, P.; Milani, A.; Nobili, A. M.; Valsecchi, G. B. (December 1980). "Some remarks on the capture of Triton and the origin of Pluto". Icarus. 44 (3): 810–812. Bibcode: 1980Icar...44..810F. doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(80)90148-7.
- ^ McKinnon, William B. (27 September 1984). "On the origin of Triton and Pluto". Nature. 311: 355–358. doi: 10.1038/311355a0.