Planetoid formation, spherical or not.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the minimum size required for a rocky planetoid to achieve a spherical shape, which is estimated to be around 250 km, influenced by its composition. The conversation references the Giant Impact Hypothesis, highlighting the need for a molten state during the formation of the Earth-Moon system and the implications of cooling rates for lunar ejecta. It raises questions about the ambient temperature in Earth’s orbit during this period and the challenges of heat dissipation in a near-perfect vacuum. The cooling process for ejecta is noted to be slow, complicating the timeline for achieving a solid form. Overall, the formation dynamics of planetoids, including factors like hydrostatic equilibrium, are emphasized as crucial to understanding their shapes.
anorlunda
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
11,326
Reaction score
8,750
I am interested in the minimum size of a rocky planetoid needed to "crush" it into spherical shape. I'm also interested in its initial temperature because liquid or plastic masses obviously need much less crushing.

The Wikipedia article "Giant Impact Hypothesis" says,

In 2007, researchers from the California Institute of Technology showed that the likelihood of Theia having an identical isotopic signature as the Earth was very small (less than 1 percent).[19] They proposed that in the aftermath of the giant impact, while the Earth and the proto-lunar disk were molten and vaporized, the two reservoirs were connected by a common silicate vapour atmosphere, and that the Earth–Moon system became homogenized by convective stirring while the system existed in the form of a continuous fluid. Such an "equilibration" between the post-impact Earth and the proto-lunar disk is the only scenario capable of explaining the isotopic similarities of the Apollo rocks with rocks from the Earth's interior. For this scenario to be viable, however, the proto-lunar disk must exist for a time period of about 100 years.

That makes me wonder about the ambient temperature around Earth orbit at that time and the rate of cooling of the initial Lunar ejecta. Ejecta staying molten for 100 years sounds like a long time in cold cold space.

Are there articles for laymen about solid spherical vs non-spherical vs rubble pile planetoid formation?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Try looking for keywords 'hydrostatic equilibrium' together with 'dwarf planet'. You should get some good hits.

Here's one good paper by Lineweaver and Norman:
The Potato Radius: a Lower Minimum Size for Dwarf Planets

It's relatively conversational and accessible for laymen.

And for the absolute laziest alternative: the answer is about 250 km give or take maybe a hundred, depending on composition.
 
  • Like
Likes |Glitch| and anorlunda
anorlunda said:
That makes me wonder about the ambient temperature around Earth orbit at that time and the rate of cooling of the initial Lunar ejecta. Ejecta staying molten for 100 years sounds like a long time in cold cold space.

In a near-perfect vacuum like space, the only way to get rid of heat is to radiate it away. This process takes MUCH longer than convection and conduction for the same difference in temperature between the hot and cold reservoirs. So while it may be cold in space, it's actually pretty difficult for an object to quickly get rid of heat.

Unfortunately I don't know how long it would take for the ejecta to cool.
 
  • Like
Likes anorlunda
Earth is not the ideal oblate spheroid which it *should* be.
It's actually more of a slightly off-center pear shaped thing, (more land above sea level in North hemisphere right now.)
 
  • Like
Likes anorlunda
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top