Why hasn't the Oort cloud converged to a disk shape?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the shape of the Oort cloud and why it has not converged to a disk shape, despite the expectation that such a configuration would be more stable. Participants explore various theoretical and observational aspects related to the dynamics of the Oort cloud, including energy loss mechanisms, gravitational interactions, and the nature of collisions among its constituents.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the Oort cloud's spherical shape is stable and that a transition to a disk shape would require a reduction in total dynamic energy, which is influenced by electromagnetic interactions.
  • Others introduce the concept of dynamical friction, noting that gravitational interactions in denser regions of the solar system could lead to energy redistribution, which is less likely in the sparse Oort cloud.
  • A participant raises the idea of modeling the Oort cloud as a collection of point masses, questioning the effects of collisions on energy dissipation and whether elastic or inelastic collisions are necessary for disk formation.
  • Some argue that the Oort cloud may still be in the process of joining the Kuiper belt, with high inclination orbits being cleared by Kozai resonance, suggesting a dynamic evolution rather than a static state.
  • Participants discuss the implications of the Oort cloud having zero total angular momentum, which may prevent it from settling into a disk shape, and question how this angular momentum is determined.
  • Estimates of the total mass of the Oort cloud are mentioned, highlighting the uncertainty in these figures based on the detection of comets and other bodies with elliptical orbits.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the dynamics of the Oort cloud and its shape. There is no consensus on the mechanisms preventing the Oort cloud from forming a disk or the implications of its angular momentum.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on assumptions about the nature of collisions, the role of electromagnetic forces, and the observational challenges in determining the properties of distant Oort cloud objects.

  • #31
Marochnik has several papers dealing with the Oort cloud. I had seen references to them. Thanks for the clarification. But. It remains that the Oort cloud has non zero angular momentum. IMO.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #32
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/001910359190097D
abstract:
Marochnik et al. (1988, Science 242, 547–550) estimated that the angular momentum of the Oort cloud is between 5 × 1052 and 2 × 1053 g cm2 sec-1, two to three orders of magnitude greater than the total angular momentum of the planetary system. However, most of the angular momentum in the present-day Oort cloud is the result of the action of external perturbers over the history of the solar system. In addition, some Oort cloud parameters used by Marochnik et al. tend to be higher than current best estimates. It is shown that the total angular momentum of the current Oort cloud is likely between 6.0 × 1050 and 1.1 × 1051 g cm2 sec-1, and the original angular momentum was likely a factor of 5 less than that.

Another non-zero estimate. Simply assuming zero angular momentum because the estimates are, well, fuzzy, is not logically justified. Why? All of the other objects [in however to define the limits of the solar system] have angular momentum. You could place an object like Deimos at 50,000 AU (one conservative estimate of the outer limits of the Oort Cloud.), then accelerate it. It would have a LOT of angular momentum. Move it out to 100K AU (another different estimate)
and even more angular momentum. I do not think that current technology would be able to "perceive" something like that. You may know. Which is why we get estimates that vary.

https://theplanets.org/deimos/
 
  • #33
Yes, that lower estimate is from Weissman, but again, that's just a sum of individual values. No one's arguing that individual objects don't have non-zero angular momenta, or that the estimates are fuzzy and therefore don't exist; current observations don't seem to find any preferential direction for cometary orbits - there are just as many prograde orbits as retrograde. Which is why the Oort cloud hasn't settled into a disk, which is the question that began this thread. You're right, we can't observe comets out to the distance of the Oort cloud; they're much too dim. Estimates for their brightness put them at magnitude 60, while the brightness of the background sky is magnitude 27...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jonathan212 and lomidrevo
  • #34
So speaking generally about formations like the Oort cloud, the Kuiper belt, others that may exist elsewhere, or even smaller-scale ones like the rings of Saturn, why don't they all have zero total angular momentum?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K