Series of bumps sent Uranus into its sideways spin

October 7, 2011

Series of bumps sent Uranus into its sideways spin

Enlarge

Near-infrared views of Uranus reveal its otherwise faint ring system, highlighting the extent to which it is tilted. Credit: Lawrence Sromovsky, (Univ. Wisconsin-Madison), Keck Observatory.

(PhysOrg.com) -- Uranus’s highly tilted axis makes it something of an oddball in our Solar System. The accepted wisdom is that Uranus was knocked on its side by a single large impact, but new research to be presented on Thursday 6th October at the EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting in Nantes rewrites our theories of how Uranus became so tilted and also solves fresh mysteries about the position and orbits of its moons. By using simulations of planetary formation and collisions, it appears that early in its life Uranus experienced a succession of small punches instead of a single knock-out blow. This research has important ramifications on our theories of giant planet formation.

Uranus is unusual in that its spin axis is inclined by 98 degrees compared to its orbital plane around the Sun. This is far more pronounced than other , such as Jupiter (3 degrees), Earth (23 degrees), or Saturn and Neptune (29 degrees). is, in effect, spinning on its side.

The generally accepted theory is that in the past a body a few times more massive than the Earth collided with Uranus, knocking the planet on its side. There is, however, one significant flaw in this notion: the moons of Uranus should have been left orbiting in their original angles, but they too lie at almost exactly 98 degrees.

This long-standing mystery has been solved by an international team of scientists led by Alessandro Morbidelli (Observatoire de la Cote d’Azur in Nice, France), who will be presenting his group’s research on Thursday 6th October at the EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting in Nantes, France.

Morbidelli and his team used simulations to reproduce various impact scenarios in order to ascertain the most likely cause of Uranus’ tilt. They discovered that if Uranus had been hit when still surrounded by a protoplanetary disk – the material from which the moons would form – then the disk would have reformed into a fat doughnut shape around the new, highly-tilted equatorial plane. Collisions within the disk would have flattened the doughnut, which would then go onto form the moons in the positions we see today.

However, the simulation threw up an unexpected result: in the above scenario, the moons displayed retrograde motion – that is to say, they orbited in the opposite direction to that which we observe. Morbidelli’s group tweaked their parameters in order to explain this. The surprising discovery was that if Uranus was not tilted in one go, as is commonly thought, but rather was bumped in at least two smaller collisions, then there is a much higher probability of seeing the moons orbit in the direction we observe.

This research is at odds with current theories of how planets form, which may now need adjusting. Morbidelli elaborates: “The standard planet formation theory assumes that Uranus, Neptune and the cores of Jupiter and Saturn formed by accreting only small objects in the protoplanetary disk. They should have suffered no giant collisions. The fact that Uranus was hit at least twice suggests that significant impacts were typical in the formation of giant planets. So, the standard theory has to be revised.”

Provided by Europlanet

4.5 /5 (4 votes)  

Filter


Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.


Display comments: newest first

Nanobanano
Oct 07, 2011

Rank: 1.7 / 5 (6)
I can offer an alternative explanation, which I've explained in the past.

If Uranus had a close encounter with one or more object(s) from a different orbital plane (i.e. above or below it's own orbit the way Pluto and Sedna are,) the gravitation would cause it's spin axis to be tilted, and moreover, it would capture objects as moons along a plane orthogonal to it's own orbital plane.

This is actually to be expected over alleged cosmic time scales when you have an asymetric group of orbiting objects on many different orbiting planes: i.e. planets, moons, asteroids, comets, etc.

The gravity and other force enteractions will tend to push all objects more and more towards the plane where the most mass was: which happens to be the same as the "eight" major planets.

Over time, orbital planes would become tilted enough that planetesmals which eventually became the enclined moons would have close encounters with Uranus.
Nanobanano
Oct 07, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
Well, you might say, "Well then why aren't Saturn and Jupiter tilted, if that's the case."

Well, because they are so much more massive that it would take a much, much larger impact or close encounter to alter their spin axis. In fact, about the only way to alter Jupiter's spin axis significantly would be if something the size of Saturn had a head on collision with it at one of it's poles...So J and S could absorb a non-planar collision and show little evidence of it due to mass...

Now Uranus is far enough out there, and massive enough, to encounter many, many TNO (trans-neptunian objects) during it's life time, which are on different planes above and below itself.

Whenever it encounters these objects, some are collisions, some are captured as moons, some are ejected from the system. In all cases, some of their non-planar angular momenta is transfered to the planet, tilting it's axis.
Nanobanano
Oct 07, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
Then you will say, "Well, why doesn't that happen to Neptune."

Well, Neptune's orbit is much larger, and so it takes much longer time scales for "events" to happen that far out from the Sun.

We know Neptune and Pluto orbit on different orbital planes, but that they also "cross" so that they change in relative distance to the Sun.

Over cosmic time scales, the gravitational attraction between Neptune and Pluto should cause their obits to seek the same plane. I mean several billion years, not thousands, millions or even one billion. Like if they manage to survive the Sun's red giant phase...

So eventually, if the universe the SS is around that long, there would be a close encounter between Neptune and Pluto, and they will either collide, or Pluto will be captured as a non-planar moon, or one of them will be ejected (probably Pluto.) Neptune's axis will be tilted from the normal when this happens.
bwvandorn
Oct 07, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
When a "solution" to a small problem requires revision to a larger standard theory, I tend to doubt the solution. If Uranus & Neptune formed between the orbits of Jupiter & Saturn, as some current theories propose, then Uranus being perturbed by a close encounter with Jupiter or Saturn on it's outward migration requires no impacts at all. A close encounter with Saturn may also help explain Saturn's 29 degree tilt as you would expect little or no tilt (such as Jupiter's 3 degrees) for such a relatively large planet.
emsquared
Oct 07, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
"Series of bumps sent Uranus into its sideways spin"

That's what she said!!

C'mon... did no one else honestly pick up on that.
mikedraghici
Oct 07, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
I wrote an article on how the earth got it's tilt and fault lines, also from an impact, if you search google for this title you can read it "Cosmic Impact Site That Created Earths Axial Tilt and Fault Lines"
RealScience
Oct 07, 2011

Rank: 4.5 / 5 (2)
Coalescing bodies are likely to have L4 and L5 companions of considerable mass coalescing at the same time.
Lagrange point 4 and Lagrange point 5 orbits are metastable in multi-planet systems, so such companions are likely to eventually strike their larger siblings.
The speed of an L4/5 companion impacting would be just right to have formed earth's moon (this was first suggested at least a decade ago).
An L4 and an L5 collision would be good candidates to tilt Uranus.
antialias_physorg
Oct 08, 2011

Rank: 2.8 / 5 (4)
Another alternative could be that Uranus isn't an original member of our solar system but formed (along with its moons) on its own somewhere else.
Gas and material can coalesce gravitationally anywhere - not only in the vicinity of a sun.

In that case we could see any kind of axis inclination/moon orbit without having to resort to impact theories. (Not saying that the impact theories are wrong, just that we should keep in mind the larger picture - i.e. the rest of the galaxy)
Nanobanano
Oct 08, 2011

Rank: 2.7 / 5 (3)
Another alternative could be that Uranus isn't an original member of our solar system but formed (along with its moons) on its own somewhere else.
Gas and material can coalesce gravitationally anywhere - not only in the vicinity of a sun.


Well, see, that's unlikely. Not saying it's impossible, but Uranus orbits on the same plane as the other 7 major planets. It's just tilted very much on it's axis.

So for example, it's more likely that Pluto or Sedna came from some place else, rather than Uranus.

I'm not saying it's impossible, just saying that statistically it's highly unlikely for a capture event from another star system or a rogue planet to just so happen to line up perfectly with the local orbital planes.

In my theory, everything was created near the Sun on it's own orbital planes, and they migrated to the averages, this "squeezed" some of the planetesmals' orbital planes down into Uranus' gravitational environment, and it captured them as moons.
Nanobanano
Oct 08, 2011

Rank: 3 / 5 (3)
I admit there are problems with my theory as well, because Uranus' moons should not all orbit on or even near the "exact" same plane, but should be rather chaotic, perhaps oriented as much as plus or minus 30 degrees from one another. however, it's possible over cosmic time scales that their gravity caused them to seek an average plane as well....

Then again, the impact theories do not explain that either.
antialias_physorg
Oct 08, 2011

Rank: 3 / 5 (3)
Well, see, that's unlikely. Not saying it's impossible, but Uranus orbits on the same plane as the other 7 major planets. It's just tilted very much on it's axis.


Planets that would orbit on any other plane would very quickly be brought down to that plane. Any time a planet orbits above the plane there would be a net downward gravitational force and vice versa. Being close to the plane is the only stable configuration for a planet (native to our solar system or not)

Smaller panets should be more likely to have some sort of extraplanar orbit because they are much more affected by flybys of other, massive objects. Se eccentricity of smaler planes would be less surprising than those of larger planets.

Of course then there is Venus. If we say Uranus is tilted by 93 degrees then Venus is even more of a poser since it is tilted 177 degrees.
omatumr
Oct 09, 2011

Rank: 1.7 / 5 (6)
Given the chaos of supernova debris, it is remarkable that the spin axis of most plants is still so close to their orbital plane around the Sun.

www.omatumr.com/Origin.htm

"Neutron Repulsion", The APEIRON Journal, in press (2011)

http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1
Shootist
Oct 09, 2011

Rank: 2 / 5 (3)
Of course then there is Venus. If we say Uranus is tilted by 93 degrees then Venus is even more of a poser since it is tilted 177 degrees.


Why does it require an impact or large scale interactions with other large bodies? Mars has been modeled to have a plus/minus 90 degree wobble in its axis of rotation. Why not Venus and Uranus? Perhaps we've just happened to catch them at their oddball best?
d_robison
Oct 11, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
@Nanobanano

One large problem with this theory is where are these bodies that are large enough to cause Uranus to tilt as much as it has? If there were such an object would it not effect Neptune as well? The general pattern for objects in the far edge of the solar system (that aren't Uranus and Neptune) are small icy bodies; the largest of which, Eris, has a fairly inclined orbit, but it has a mass of only .23 moons (not nearly enough to tilt Uranus through gravitational forces alone).

Gravitational forces could have had some effect on Uranus' extreme axis tilt, but the contribution is likely small. Object collisions (especially in early solar system formation) are frequent and extremely powerful.
d_robison
Oct 11, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
@Nanobanano

One large problem with this theory is where are these bodies that are large enough to cause Uranus to tilt as much as it has? If there were such an object would it not effect Neptune as well? The general pattern for objects in the far edge of the solar system (that aren't Uranus and Neptune) are small icy bodies; the largest of which, Eris, has a fairly inclined orbit, but it has a mass of only .23 moons (not nearly enough to tilt Uranus through gravitational forces alone).

Gravitational forces could have had some effect on Uranus' extreme axis tilt, but the contribution is likely small. Object collisions (especially in early solar system formation) are much more frequent and extremely powerful.
antialias_physorg
Oct 11, 2011

Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
One large problem with this theory is where are these bodies that are large enough to cause Uranus to tilt as much as it has?

They either crashed into Uranus and just merged with it or (if it was glancig blows) were ejected from the solar system. If the objects were puverized to less than a few dozen or maybe a few hundred kilometers in diameter 'particles' then they could still be around and we just haven't detected them yet. It's very hard to detect planets that far out wih such little mass.

The question is: Statistically multiple impacts should average out. The more impacts we propose the more likely the resulting change in tilt is close to zero.
d_robison
Oct 11, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
One large problem with this theory is where are these bodies that are large enough to cause Uranus to tilt as much as it has?

They either crashed into Uranus and just merged with it or (if it was glancig blows) were ejected from the solar system. If the objects were puverized to less than a few dozen or maybe a few hundred kilometers in diameter 'particles' then they could still be around and we just haven't detected them yet. It's very hard to detect planets that far out wih such little mass.

The question is: Statistically multiple impacts should average out. The more impacts we propose the more likely the resulting change in tilt is close to zero.


If they merged with Uranus that would be considered a collision which is not what Nanobanano is claiming. If they did not collide with Uranus, and were massive enough to tilt it essentially 90 degrees, then one would expect a much more eccentric or inclined orbit rather than a fairly circular and non-inclined orbit
JonSilveus
Oct 12, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
"This long-standing mystery has been solved" - I definitely do not see such arrogance to be qualified here. For one, they had to "tweak their data" to get it to match their desired outcome, so then it would be equally (if not more) plausible for the scenario to have been different than what they wished it. I do understand tweaking models can have positive results, but the opposite is also common (particularly in the case of paradigm paralysis).

I am surprised to not see binary companion postulations on the perturbations since a long period companion (such as Tyche) could well fit the needed modulations. Or is such still a taboo with too many?
Rank 4.5 /5 (4 votes)
Tags

Relevant PhysicsForums posts
  • Distance of planets from stars and revolution
    created3 hours ago
  • revamping general concept and cosmological principle
    createdMay 25, 2012
  • Transiting Exoplanet Light Curve
    createdMay 25, 2012
  • Math behind Theoretical Physics
    createdMay 24, 2012
  • Do we know whats at the center of galaxies yet?
    createdMay 23, 2012
  • Structure of the Milky Way?
    createdMay 20, 2012
  • More from Physics Forums - General Astronomy

More news stories

Land and sea species differ in climate change response: study

(Phys.org) -- Marine and terrestrial species will likely differ in their responses to climate warming, new research by Simon Fraser University and Australia’s University of Tasmania has found.

Space & Earth / Environment

created 55 minutes ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 1 | with audio podcast

Yale study concludes public apathy over climate change unrelated to science literacy

Are members of the public divided about climate change because they don't understand the science behind it? If Americans knew more basic science and were more proficient in technical reasoning, would public consensus match ...

Space & Earth / Environment

created 2 hours ago | popularity 4 / 5 (1) | comments 10 | with audio podcast

10 million years needed to recover from mass extinction

It took some 10 million years for Earth to recover from the greatest mass extinction of all time, latest research has revealed.

Space & Earth / Earth Sciences

created 2 hours ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 1 | with audio podcast

Sophisticated simulations predict future warming

The chances of our planet being hit by a global warming of 3 degrees Celsius by 2050 is as likely as it being hit by an increase of 1.4 degrees, new research shows. Presented in the journal Nature Geoscience, the British study ...

Space & Earth / Earth Sciences

created May 22, 2012 | popularity 4.4 / 5 (9) | comments 51

Aliens don't want to eat us, says former SETI director

Alien life probably isn’t interested in having us for dinner, enslaving us or laying eggs in our bellies, according to a recent statement by former SETI director Jill Tarter.

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created May 25, 2012 | popularity 4.4 / 5 (14) | comments 39


Almost half of new vets seek disability

(AP) -- America's newest veterans are filing for disability benefits at a historic rate, claiming to be the most medically and mentally troubled generation of former troops the nation has ever seen.

'Unzipped' carbon nanotubes could help energize fuel cells, batteries

Multi-walled carbon nanotubes riddled with defects and impurities on the outside could replace some of the expensive platinum catalysts used in fuel cells and metal-air batteries, according to scientists at ...

T cells 'hunt' parasites like animal predators seek prey, study shows

By pairing an intimate knowledge of immune-system function with a deep understanding of statistical physics, a cross-disciplinary team at the University of Pennsylvania has arrived at a surprising finding: T cells use a movement ...

Computer model used to pinpoint prime materials for efficient carbon capture

When power plants begin capturing their carbon emissions to reduce greenhouse gases – and to most in the electric power industry, it's a question of when, not if – it will be an expensive undertaking.

Change in developmental timing was crucial in the evolutionary shift from dinosaurs to birds: study

At first glance, it's hard to see how a common house sparrow and a Tyrannosaurus Rex might have anything in common. After all, one is a bird that weighs less than an ounce, and the other is a dinosaur that ...

Nvidia trumpets Tegra 3 phone design wins for 2012

(Phys.org) -- Nvidia’s competitive war paint has a name, Tegra 3. On the heels of Nvidia announcements about lowering costs of its Tegra 3 processors and Nvidia-enabled tablets running Android Ice Cream ...