REVIEW 1 cited by
The density of mid-sized Kuiper belt objects from ALMA thermal observations
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 densities of mid-sized Kuiper belt objects are a key constraint into understanding the assembly of objects in the outer solar system. These objects are critical for understanding the currently unexplained transition from the smallest Kuiper belt objects with densities lower than that of water to the largest objects with significant rock content. Mapping this transition is made difficult by the uncertainties in the diameters of these objects, which maps into an even larger uncertainty in volume and thus density. The substantial collecting area of the Atacama Large Millimeter Array allows significantly more precise measurements of thermal emission from outer solar system objects and could potentially greatly improve the density measurements. Here we use new thermal observations of four objects with satellites to explore the improvements possible with millimeter data. We find that effects due to effective emissivity at millimeter wavelengths make it difficult to use the millimeter data directly to find diameters and thus volumes for these bodies. In addition, we find that when including the effects of model uncertainty, the true uncertainties on the sizes of outer solar system objects measured with radiometry are likely larger than those previously published. Substantial improvement in object sizes will likely require precise occultation measurements.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Where are the missing Kuiper Belt binaries?
Kuiper belt binary systems are rare in the 10^19 to 10^20 kg mass range, suggesting a mix of formation effects and observational bias.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.