Paper detail

Accretion of Saturn's mid-sized moons during the viscous spreading of young massive rings: solving the paradox of silicate-poor rings versus silicate-rich moons

The origin of Saturn's inner mid-sized moons (Mimas, Enceladus, Tethys, Dione and Rhea) and Saturn's rings is debated. Charnoz et al. (2010) introduced the idea that the smallest inner moons could form from the spreading of the rings' edge while Salmon et al. (2010) showed that the rings could have been initially massive, and so was the ring's progenitor itself. One may wonder if the mid-sized moons may have formed also from the debris of a massive ring progenitor, as also suggested in Canup (2010). However, the process driving mid-sized moons accretion from the icy debris disks has not been investigated in details. In particular, this process does not seem able to explain the varying silicate contents of the mid-sized moons (from 6% to 57% in mass). Here, we explore the formation of large objects from a massive ice-rich ring (a few times Rhea's mass) and describe the fundamental properties and implications of this new process. Using a hybrid computer model, we show that accretion within massive icy rings can form all mid-sized moons from Mimas to Rhea. However in order to explain their current locations, intense dissipation within Saturn (with Qp<2000) would be required. Our results are consistent with a satellite origin tied to the rings formation at least 2.5 Gy ago, both compatible with either a formation concurrent to Saturn or during the Late Heavy Bombardment. Tidal heating related to high-eccentricity post-accretional episodes may induce early geological activity. If some massive irregular chunks of silicates were initially present within the rings, they would be present today inside the satellites' cores which would have accreted icy shells while being tidally expelled from the rings (via a heterogeneous accretion process)while those still present in the rings are interpreted as today Saturn's rings' propellers and ring-moons (like Pan or Daphnis).

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access10 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.