Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 30 references

Stability and bifurcations of resonances in ring's dynamics

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read In a triaxial ellipsoid ring model, the 1:3 resonance shows no bifurcations for eccentricities up to 0.5, while the 1:2 and corotation resonances do.

desk verdict Competent Hamiltonian analysis with a real 1:3 result, but the no-bifurcation claim is narrower than the abstract suggests; fix the truncation inconsistency and temper the 'greater probability' inference. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.15745 v1 pith:4TJDACIQ submitted 2025-07-21 math-ph math.MP

Alessandra Celletti , Irene De Blasi , Sara Di Ruzza This is my paper
classification math-phmath.MP MSC 70F1537J2070H08
keywords ringdynamicstriaxialellipsoidLindbladresonancecorotationepicyclicvariablesbifurcationKAMtheoryeccentricity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper studies a massless particle moving in a ring around a central body shaped as a homogeneous triaxial ellipsoid that rotates about its shortest axis, a model relevant to rings around small bodies such as Chariklo, Haumea, and Quaoar. Writing the Hamiltonian in epicyclic action-angle variables, the authors isolate three principal resonances—corotation, 1:2, and 1:3—and analyze their phase space, libration amplitudes, and bifurcations as the particle's eccentricity varies. Their central finding is that, in both a nearly spherical and a highly aspherical test case, the 1:3 resonance retains only a stable centre and a saddle for eccentricities up to 0.5, with no pitchfork or saddle-node bifurcations, whereas corotation and 1:2 do bifurcate. The authors interpret this as dynamical support for the preferential selection of 1:3 resonances in observed ring systems. They also verify Kolmogorov non-degeneracy of the normal form, which guarantees KAM tori that confine the resonant motion.

What carries the argument

The central object is the epicyclic action-angle Hamiltonian (3.9), obtained by expanding the potential around the resonant radius and writing the distance from resonance as $\rho = \sqrt{2J/|\kappa_*|}\,\sin\varphi$. The action $J$ is related to the particle's eccentricity by $J = \tfrac12 |\kappa_*| r_*^2 e^2$. For each resonance, a canonical transformation isolates the resonant combination of angles, producing a one-degree-of-freedom pendulum-like Hamiltonian whose equilibria are tracked as $e$ varies; the non-degeneracy of the normal form's Hessian (det $\neq 0$) is what licenses KAM confinement of the resonant motion.

What would settle it

Evaluate the equilibrium equations of the 1:3 resonant Hamiltonian (4.15) for several conserved-action surfaces $L_0$ spanning eccentricities in $[0,0.5]$, with the expansion extended to $\rho^{18}$ and $\ell=6$; any appearance of a third equilibrium or a stability change would falsify the no-bifurcation claim. An independent check would numerically integrate the full two-degree-of-freedom Hamiltonian near the 1:3 radius and look for a change in the number of fixed points as $e$ varies.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For a homogeneous triaxial ellipsoid rotating about its shortest axis, and a massless particle on its equatorial plane, the paper claims that the 1:3 Lindblad resonance is dynamically inert in the truncated Hamiltonian: in both test cases (almost spherical and highly aspherical), its two equilibria remain respectively a centre and a saddle for eccentricity up to 0.5, with no pitchfork or saddle-node bifurcations. The 1:2 resonance, by contrast, exhibits pitchfork bifurcations at low and high eccentricity, and corotation exhibits a saddle-node bifurcation in the highly aspherical case. The author's inference is that a ring particle trapped at 1:3 is not subject to the destabilizing topology changes that affect the other resonances, making 1:3 a more probable choice for ring systems around irregular small bodies.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that 1:3 never bifurcates is computed for a single conserved action surface (set by $e=10^{-3}$) and for a Hamiltonian truncated at a finite order; if another surface or a higher-order expansion changes the equilibrium topology, the inference to preferential 1:3 selection would not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the truncated model, the 1:3 resonance has exactly two equilibria—one centre and one saddle—for every eccentricity in $[0,0.5]$, in both the almost spherical and highly aspherical cases.
  • The 1:2 resonance undergoes pitchfork bifurcations: the $\psi=\pi$ equilibrium changes stability twice near $e\approx0.0029$ and $e\approx0.4467$ for the almost spherical case, and near $e\approx0.0638$ and $e\approx0.3491$ for the highly aspherical case.
  • The corotation resonance shows a saddle-node bifurcation in the highly aspherical case around $e\approx0.328$.
  • Libration amplitudes grow with the elongation of the central body and with eccentricity, so the highly aspherical case has substantially wider resonant islands than the almost spherical case.
  • Because 1:3 avoids bifurcations while 1:2 and corotation do not, the model supports a greater probability of 1:3 being the adopted resonance in ring systems around small bodies.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The dynamical argument suggests a selection mechanism, but the paper does not simulate ring formation or particle transport; a testable next step would be an ensemble simulation that compares how long particles linger near each resonance.
  • If the mechanism operates in nature, other small-body ring systems should be found preferentially near the 1:3 Lindblad radius; future occultation surveys can test this prediction.
  • The result is derived for a homogeneous triaxial ellipsoid with no satellites; adding a satellite's perturbation might introduce new resonances or bifurcations that could break the 1:3 stability.
  • The no-bifurcation property could be checked at higher truncation order; the paper's own error estimate (remainder near $10^{-6}$) implies the conclusion is robust, but that check is not performed here.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the dynamics of a massless particle in a ring around a homogeneous triaxial ellipsoid rotating about its shortest axis, with the particle confined to the equatorial plane. It derives a two-degree-of-freedom Hamiltonian in epicyclic action-angle variables, checks Kolmogorov non-degeneracy for truncated axisymmetric parts, and constructs resonant Hamiltonians for corotation (1:1), 1:2, and 1:3 Lindblad resonances. For two concrete test cases (almost spherical and highly aspherical bodies), the authors compute phase portraits, libration amplitudes, equilibrium positions, linear stability, and bifurcation diagrams as a function of eccentricity. The main claim is that, unlike the corotation and 1:2 resonances, the 1:3 resonance shows no bifurcations for eccentricities up to 0.5, and the abstract and conclusions use this to argue for a greater probability of selecting the 1:3 resonance.

Significance. If the robustness caveats below are addressed, this would be a useful contribution to ring dynamics and to the theory of resonances in non-axisymmetric potentials. The model is derived from first principles with no fitted parameters, the expansions and coefficient tables are explicit, and the two test cases are concrete and reproducible. The negative result for bifurcations of the 1:3 resonance is interesting and falsifiable by higher-order computations or by scanning the conserved action. However, the headline inference about preferential selection of the 1:3 resonance currently outruns the evidence presented in the manuscript.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.2.3, Eqs. (4.14)-(4.16)] The claim that the 1:3 resonance has no bifurcations for eccentricity up to 0.5 is established only for the reduced Hamiltonian (4.16) evaluated at the value L0 obtained from the initial condition rho = 10^{-3} r_{13} (or, if Figure 10 is meant to vary e by recomputing L0, then along one particular one-parameter family of L0 values). The coefficients alpha_i and delta_i depend on L0, so a different conserved action can change the balance between the normal form and the trigonometric terms and may create new equilibria or bifurcations. The manuscript reports no scan over L0 and no proof that the equilibrium count is independent of L0. Please either extend the analysis to a range of L0 values or provide a rigorous argument restricting L0 to the slice used.
  2. [Section 4.2, first paragraph] The statement that the remainder of the truncated Hamiltonian is 'of the order of 10^{-6}' for eccentricities up to 0.5, and that the truncation of the potential at ell = 5 leaves an error of the same order, is asserted without derivation or bound. Since the central conclusion is the absence of bifurcations up to e = 0.5, this is a load-bearing numerical claim rather than a side remark. Please provide either a rigorous remainder estimate for the truncation in rho and in ell, or a numerical convergence study at higher truncation orders that demonstrates stability of the bifurcation diagrams.
  3. [Section 4.2, Eqs. (4.9) and (4.13)] The stated truncation of the Hamiltonian (3.9) at i <= 5, j <= 8 is not consistent with the displayed resonant sums. In Eq. (4.9) the term i = 5 is cos(10 theta + 10 phi), which has j = 10; in Eq. (4.13) the term i = 4 is cos(8 theta + 16 phi), which has j = 16. The reader cannot tell which Hamiltonian was actually used for the numerical results. Please clarify the indexing convention or correct the truncation statement, because the bifurcation diagrams in Figures 7, 8, and 10 depend on the terms retained.
  4. [Abstract and Section 5] The inference from 'the 1:3 resonance does not experience bifurcations in the considered range of eccentricity' to 'a greater probability of selecting the 1:3 resonance' is not supported by the analysis. No probabilistic model, capture mechanism, or dynamical selection process is introduced; the paper only studies equilibria of a reduced one-degree-of-freedom system. At most the results show that, within the tested model and parameter range, the 1:3 resonance is more robust against bifurcations than the other two resonances. The stronger selection claim in the abstract and conclusions should be softened or justified by an explicit selection model.
  5. [Section 3.1, Proposition 12 and Eq. (3.26)] Kolmogorov non-degeneracy is checked only for the truncated axisymmetric average h0, while the perturbation f0 in Eq. (3.26) is never estimated in size. The determinant condition alone does not guarantee the persistence of KAM tori for the full Hamiltonian; one also needs a smallness condition on the non-axisymmetric and oscillating parts. Either provide a quantitative KAM applicability check (including the size of f0 and the relevant norms) or state more modestly that the non-degeneracy condition is verified as a necessary preliminary for a KAM theorem.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (4.9)] The term I^2/(2 r_*) appears in Eq. (4.9), while Eq. (3.13) and the earlier derivation give I^2/(2 r_*^2); this appears to be a typo and should be corrected.
  2. [Section 3.1, Eqs. (3.27)-(3.28)] The phrase 'terms of order greater or equal than 5/2 in the variable IJ' is ambiguous. Please specify the grading, e.g. with respect to (I, J^{1/2}), since I and J have different dimensions and the mixed half-integer order is otherwise unclear.
  3. [References] References [25] and [26] are the same published article (Sicardy et al., Nature Astronomy 2019) and should be merged or separately identified; the duplication likely also affects the in-text citation.
  4. [Throughout] The phrase 'Aknowledgement' in the unnumbered section before the appendices is a typo for 'Acknowledgement'.
  5. [Section 4.2.1, Eq. (4.7)] The pendulum half-width formula (4.7) is stated without indicating the sign conditions on alpha_2 and alpha_3; for the formula to give a real width one needs alpha_2 > 0 and alpha_3 < 0 (or the appropriate sign convention), which holds in the tables but is not stated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the resonance dynamics are computed from a first-principles triaxial-ellipsoid model with no fitted parameters; the 1:3 no-bifurcation claim is a numerical output, not a restatement of an input.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The gravitational potential (2.1)-(2.3) is taken from classical potential theory ([2],[4],[26]); the Hamiltonian (3.2) follows from standard canonical mechanics; epicyclic variables and frequencies (3.5)-(3.9) are definitions from the axisymmetric potential Us, not from the conclusions. The resonant Hamiltonians (4.4), (4.11), and (4.15) are truncations/averagings of this Hamiltonian, with coefficients (Tables 2-4, Appendices A-B) computed from the model parameters. No parameter is fitted to any observed ring or to the claimed 1:3 preference; the test cases AS/HA are chosen inputs, and L0 is fixed from an adopted eccentricity e=10^-3, which is an initial-condition choice rather than a fitted output. The statement in Section 4.2.3 that 1:3 has no bifurcations up to e=0.5 is a numerical consequence of solving the equilibria of (4.16), not an equation that reduces by construction to an assumption. The companion preprint [6] is cited as using the present findings, not as evidence for them; self-citations [7],[8],[10] concern standard KAM stability results and are not load-bearing. The main caveats—single L0 slice, fixed order (i<=5, j<=8), and the unproved 10^-6 remainder estimate—are robustness/truncation concerns that could weaken the physical inference, but they do not make the derivation circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central dynamical claims rest on the chosen shape parameters, the initial action L0, the truncation order, and the validity of the quoted potential expansion. No parameters are fitted to the ring observations; the selection conclusion is a qualitative inference from the model behavior.

free parameters (4)
  • AS/HA body parameters (a, b, c, MP, Trot) = AS: 1000 x 980 x 960 km, 1e21 kg, 8h; HA: 1000 x 650 x 400 km, 1e21 kg, 8h
    Chosen to represent almost spherical and highly aspherical small bodies (Table 1); the no-bifurcation result is only checked for these two shapes.
  • Initial eccentricity e0 = 1e-3
    Used to set the conserved action L0 for the 1:2 and 1:3 reductions; the bifurcation analysis is performed on this single L0 surface (Sections 4.2.2-4.2.3).
  • Eccentricity range = 0 to 0.5
    Chosen as the relevant range; the conclusion about selection probability depends on this range and is not derived.
  • Truncation orders (l = 5, rho^16, i <= 5, j <= 8) = l=5, i=5, j=8, rho^16
    The authors assert the remainder is on the order of 1e-6 without derivation; bifurcation thresholds could shift with higher order.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math KAM theorem guarantees stability via invariant tori when the integrable part is Kolmogorov non-degenerate
    Invoked in Definition 10 and Section 3.1 to conclude confinement of resonant motion.
  • domain assumption The gravitational potential expansion (2.1) with coefficients (2.3) is valid for a homogeneous triaxial ellipsoid
    Taken from [2,26]; Proposition 1 states it without proof.
  • domain assumption The particle is massless, moves in the equatorial plane, and the body rotates at constant angular velocity about its shortest axis
    Section 2; this restricts the model and ignores out-of-plane motion and satellites.
  • domain assumption The epicyclic action J is related to eccentricity through Kepler's relation J = 1/2 |kappa*| r*^2 e^2
    Proposition 9 uses the Keplerian eccentric anomaly; this is an approximation for a non-Keplerian potential.
  • ad hoc to paper Truncated resonant Hamiltonian retains only resonant Fourier terms and the normal part; non-resonant terms can be neglected
    Section 4.2, Proposition 15; the validity for the bifurcation conclusions is asserted, not proven.
  • ad hoc to paper A single L0 surface is representative of ring dynamics
    Sections 4.2.2-4.2.3 fix L0 from e = 1e-3; the conclusion of no bifurcation for 1:3 is not checked for other L0.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stability and bifurcations of resonances in ring's dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4TJDACIQ

@misc{pith2026250715745,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stability and bifurcations of resonances in ring's dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4TJDACIQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.15745}
}
abstract

We use perturbation theory and bifurcation theory to analyze the dynamical behavior of resonances, associated to a model describing a particle moving within a ring around a celestial object. The central body is modeled as a homogeneous triaxial ellipsoid, rotating about its shortest physical axis at a constant angular velocity. It is assumed that the massless ring particle moves within the equatorial plane of the ellipsoid. The dynamics of the particle is studied using epicyclic variables, that lead to a straightforward definition of corotation and Lindblad resonances. These resonances are associated to a Hamiltonian function with two degrees of freedom, for which we compute appropriate expansions for the normal form and the resonant Hamiltonian. Initially, the normal form is verified to be non--degenerate, thereby guaranteeing the existence of invariant KAM tori, providing the stability of the resonances, through their confinement in phase space. Subsequently, two exemplary test cases are examined: a nearly spherical ellipsoid and a highly aspherical ellipsoid. Furthermore, this study concentrates on three principal resonances: corotation, 1:2, and 1:3, for which we present results concerning their dynamical behavior obtained analyzing the Hamiltonian formulation of the model and the resonant normal form. Specifically, we examine the phase space structure, the amplitude of libration around the resonances, and the occurrence of bifurcations. Remarkably, in none of the two studied test cases the 1:3 resonance presents evidence of bifurcations for relevant values of the eccentricity. Our dynamical study thus supports a greater probability of selecting the $1:3$ resonance in comparison to the other resonances.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.15745 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A particle P moving in the equatorial plane of the ellipsoid with center O in an inertial frame (O, x, y, z); the coordinates of P are denoted as (r, L) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Top: almost spherical case. Bottom: highly aspherical case. Left: relative difference d between the radii computed through the third Kepler’s law (4.1) and considering the complete resonance equation (4.2) as the order of resonance p/q varies. Right: lengths of the resonance radii rpq (in km) using Eq. (4.2), from corotation to 1 : 3, compared with the reference radius R (in orange) and the biggest semi–axis a (in y… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Corotation resonance. Left: almost spherical. Right: highly aspherical. Variation of the semi–amplitude ∆I, according to Eq. (4.7), as the eccentricity varies up to 0.5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Corotation resonance. Left: almost spherical. Right: highly aspherical. Phase portraits at eccentricity e = 10−3 (top) and e = 0.35 (bottom). Red points stand for saddle equilibria, blue points stand for centre equilibria. let us introduce the canonical transformation …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Corotation resonance. Left: almost spherical. Right: highly aspherical. Bifurcation diagrams in the (e, θ)–plane as the eccentricity varies and for θ ∈ [0, π/2]. Red stands for saddle equilibria while blue stands for centre ones. where the constants γ1, ..., γ10 and th…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Phase portraits of the 1 : 2 resonance for the almost spherical case on the left panels and for the highly aspherical case on the right panels, for three different values of the eccentricity. Red points stand for saddle equilibria, blue stand for centre ones [PITH_FUL…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Resonance 1 : 2. Left: almost spherical. Right: highly aspher￾ical. Location and stability in the (e, G)–plane of the equilibria for ψ = 0 (top) and ψ = π (bottom) as the eccentricity varies. Blue stands for centre, red stands for saddle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Resonance 1 : 2. Left: almost spherical. Right: highly aspher￾ical. Bifurcation diagrams in the (e, ψ)–plane of the equilibria in ψ = 0, π. Blue stands for centre, red stands for saddle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Phase portraits of the 1 : 3 resonance for three different values of the eccentricity. Left: almost spherical. Right: highly aspherical. Red points stand for saddle equilibria, blue points stand for centre equilibria. In this study, we present components essential for …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Resonance 1 : 3. Left: almost spherical. Right: highly as￾pherical. Location and stability in the (e, G)–plane of the equilibrium for ψ = 0 (top) and ψ = π (bottom) as the eccentricity varies. Blue stands for centre, while red stands for saddle. specific resonances. I…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Proof of a Theorem of A. N. KOLMOGOROV on the Invari- ance of Quasi-Periodic Motions Under Small Perturbations of the Hamiltonian

    V. I. Arnol’d. “Proof of a Theorem of A. N. KOLMOGOROV on the Invari- ance of Quasi-Periodic Motions Under Small Perturbations of the Hamiltonian”. In: Russian Mathematical Surveys 18.5 (Oct. 1963), pp. 9–36. doi: 10 . 1070 / RM1963v018n05ABEH004130

    work page 1963

  2. [2]

    Gravitational Potential Harmonics from the Shape of an Ho- mogeneous Body

    Georges Balmino. “Gravitational Potential Harmonics from the Shape of an Ho- mogeneous Body”. In: Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 60.3 (Nov. 1994), pp. 331–364. doi: 10.1007/BF00691901

    doi:10.1007/bf00691901 1994

  3. [3]

    Description and behavior of streamlines in planetary rings

    N. Borderies and P. Y. Longaretti. “Description and behavior of streamlines in planetary rings”. In: Icarus 72.3 (Dec. 1987), pp. 593–603. doi: 10.1016/0019- 1035(87)90055-8

    doi:10.1016/0019- 1987

  4. [4]

    Comment on a Formula for the Gravitational Harmonic Coeffi- cients of a Triaxial Ellipsoid

    William Boyce. “Comment on a Formula for the Gravitational Harmonic Coeffi- cients of a Triaxial Ellipsoid”. In: Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 67.2 (Feb. 1997), pp. 107–110. doi: 10.1023/A:1008224825003

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1008224825003 1997

  5. [5]

    A ring system detected around the Centaur (10199) Chariklo

    F. Braga-Ribas et al. “A ring system detected around the Centaur (10199) Chariklo”. In: Nature 508.7494 (Apr. 2014), pp. 72–75. doi: 10.1038/nature13155 . arXiv: 1409.7259 [astro-ph.EP]

    arXiv 2014

  6. [6]

    Dynamical support to Haumea, Chariklo, Quaoar rings in a 1:3 spin-orbit resonance

    A. Celletti, I. De Blasi, and S. Di Ruzza. “Dynamical support to Haumea, Chariklo, Quaoar rings in a 1:3 spin-orbit resonance”. In: Preprint (2025)

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Analysis of resonances in the spin-orbit problem in Celestial Mechanics: Higher order resonances and some numerical experiments (Part II)

    Alessandra Celletti. “Analysis of resonances in the spin-orbit problem in Celestial Mechanics: Higher order resonances and some numerical experiments (Part II)”. In: Zeitschrift Angewandte Mathematik und Physik 41.4 (July 1990), pp. 453–479. doi: 10.1007/BF00945951. 42 REFERENCES

    doi:10.1007/bf00945951 1990

  8. [8]

    Analysis of resonances in the spin-orbit problem in Celes- tial Mechanics: The synchronous resonance (Part I)

    Alessandra Celletti. “Analysis of resonances in the spin-orbit problem in Celes- tial Mechanics: The synchronous resonance (Part I)”. In: Zeitschrift Angewandte Mathematik und Physik 41.2 (Mar. 1990), pp. 174–204. doi: 10.1007/BF00945107

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00945107 1990

Show all 30 references
  1. [9]

    Stability and Chaos in Celestial Mechanics

    Alessandra Celletti. Stability and Chaos in Celestial Mechanics . Springer-Verlag, Berlin; published in association with Praxis Publishing, Chichester, 2010, pp. xvi+261. isbn: 978-3-540-85145-5. doi: 10.1007/978- 3- 540- 85146- 2. url: http://dx. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85146-2

    2010 doi

  2. [10]

    KAM Stability and Celestial Mechanics

    Alessandra Celletti and Luigi Chierchia. KAM Stability and Celestial Mechanics . Vol. 187. 2007

    2007

  3. [11]

    Principles of stellar dynamics

    Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar. Principles of stellar dynamics . 1942

    1942

  4. [12]

    The stability around Chariklo and the confinement of its rings

    S. M. Giuliatti Winter et al. “The stability around Chariklo and the confinement of its rings”. In: Astron. & Astroph. 679, A62 (Nov. 2023), A62

    2023

  5. [13]

    The dynamics of planetary rings

    P. Goldreich and S. Tremaine. “The dynamics of planetary rings”. In: Ann. Rev. Astron. Astroph. 20 (Jan. 1982), pp. 249–283. doi: 10 . 1146 / annurev . aa . 20 . 090182.001341

    1982

  6. [14]

    On conservation of conditionally periodic mo- tions for a small change in Hamilton’s function

    Andrey Nikolaevich Kolmogorov. “On conservation of conditionally periodic mo- tions for a small change in Hamilton’s function”. In: Dokl. akad. nauk Sssr . Vol. 98. 1954, pp. 527–530

    1954

  7. [15]

    Regular and chaotic dynamics

    Allan J Lichtenberg and Michael A Lieberman. Regular and chaotic dynamics . Vol. 38. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    2013

  8. [16]

    Dynamics around non-spherical symmetric bodies - I. The case of a spherical body with mass anomaly

    G. Madeira et al. “Dynamics around non-spherical symmetric bodies - I. The case of a spherical body with mass anomaly”. In: MNRAS 510.1 (Feb. 2022), pp. 1450–

    2022

  9. [17]

    Ring dynamics around an oblate body with an inclined satel- lite: the case of Haumea

    Francesco Marzari. “Ring dynamics around an oblate body with an inclined satel- lite: the case of Haumea”. In: Astron. & Astroph. 643, A67 (Nov. 2020), A67. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038812. arXiv: 2008.13415 [astro-ph.EP]

    2020 arXiv

  10. [18]

    A dense ring of the trans-Neptunian object Quaoar outside its Roche limit

    B. E. Morgado et al. “A dense ring of the trans-Neptunian object Quaoar outside its Roche limit”. In: Nature 614.7947 (Feb. 2023), pp. 239–243. doi: 10.1038/s41586- 022-05629-6

    2023 doi

  11. [19]

    On invariant curves of area-preserving mappings of an annulus

    J M¨ oser. “On invariant curves of area-preserving mappings of an annulus”. In: Nachr. Akad. Wiss. G¨ ottingen, II (1962), pp. 1–20

    1962

  12. [20]

    Planetary Ring Dynamics

    Carl D. Murray. “Planetary Ring Dynamics”. In: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A 349.1690 (Nov. 1994), pp. 335–344. doi: 10.1098/rsta.1994.0136

    1994

  13. [21]

    Murray and Stanley F

    Carl D. Murray and Stanley F. Dermott. Solar System Dynamics . 1999. doi: 10. 1017/CBO9781139174817

    1999

  14. [22]

    The size, shape, density and ring of the dwarf planet Haumea from a stellar occultation

    J. L. Ortiz et al. “The size, shape, density and ring of the dwarf planet Haumea from a stellar occultation”. In: Nature 550.7675 (Oct. 2017), pp. 219–223. doi: 10.1038/nature24051. arXiv: 2006.03113 [astro-ph.EP]

    2017 arXiv

  15. [23]

    The two rings of (50000) Quaoar

    C. L. Pereira et al. “The two rings of (50000) Quaoar”. In: Astron & Astroph. 673, L4 (May 2023), p. L4. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346365 . arXiv: 2304.09237 [astro-ph.EP]. REFERENCES 43

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Dynamics around non-spherical symmetric bodies: II. The case of a prolate body

    T. Ribeiro et al. “Dynamics around non-spherical symmetric bodies: II. The case of a prolate body”. In: MNRAS 525.1 (Oct. 2023), pp. 44–56. doi: 10.1093/mnras/ stad2362

    2023 doi

  17. [26]

    Ring dynamics around non-axisymmetric bodies with application to Chariklo and Haumea

    B. Sicardy et al. “Ring dynamics around non-axisymmetric bodies with application to Chariklo and Haumea”. In: Nature Astronomy 3 (Apr. 2019), pp. 146–153. doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0616-8 . arXiv: 1811.09437 [astro-ph.EP]

    2019 arXiv

  18. [27]

    Dynamics of Planetary Rings

    Bruno Sicardy. “Dynamics of Planetary Rings”. In: Dynamics of Extended Celestial Bodies and Rings . Ed. by Jean Souchay. Vol. 682. 2006, p. 183. doi: 10.1007/3- 540-32455-0_9

    2006 doi

  19. [28]

    Resonances in Nonaxisymmetric Gravitational Potentials

    Bruno Sicardy. “Resonances in Nonaxisymmetric Gravitational Potentials”. In: As- tron. J. 159.3, 102 (Mar. 2020), p. 102. doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab6d06 . arXiv: 2001.06382 [astro-ph.EP]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Planetary Rings

    Matthew S. Tiscareno. “Planetary Rings”. In: Planets, Stars and Stellar Systems. Volume 3: Solar and Stellar Planetary Systems . Ed. by Terry D. Oswalt, Linda M. French, and Paul Kalas. 2013, p. 309. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-5606-9_7

    2013 doi

  21. [30]

    On the location of the ring around the dwarf planet Haumea

    O. C. Winter, G. Borderes-Motta, and T. Ribeiro. “On the location of the ring around the dwarf planet Haumea”. In: MNRAS 484.3 (Apr. 2019), pp. 3765–3771. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz246. arXiv: 1902.03363 [astro-ph.EP]. Department of Mathematics, University of Roma Tor Vergata, Via...

    2019 arXiv

  22. [1469]

    arXiv: 2112.01817 [astro-ph.EP]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3552. arXiv: 2112.01817 [astro-ph.EP]

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.