REVIEW 1 cited by
What do we Really Know about Uranus and Neptune?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
The internal structures and compositions of Uranus and Neptune are not well constrained due to the uncertainty in rotation period and flattening, as well as the relatively large error bars on the gravitational coefficients. While Uranus and Neptune are similar in mass and radius, they differ in other physical properties such as thermal emission, obliquity, and inferred atmospheric enrichment. In this letter we consider the uncertainty in the planetary rotation periods, show that rotation periods more consistent with the measured oblateness imply that Uranus and Neptune have different internal structures, and speculate on the source of that difference. We conclude that Uranus and Neptune might have very different structures and/or compositions despite their similar masses and radii. We point out that understanding these differences can have important implications for our view of the formation and evolution of Uranus and Neptune as well as intermediate-mass extra-solar planets in general.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Accretion of Uranus and Neptune: confronting different giant impact scenarios
Both the equal-mass-embryo scenario and the high-mass-ratio impact scenario form Uranus and Neptune analogues with comparable low probability (~0.1-1%), so neither is dynamically preferred.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.