Paper detail

Brief Follow-up on Recent Studies of Theia's Accretion

Kaib & Cowan (2015) recently used terrestrial planet formation simulations to conclude that the moon-forming impactor (Theia) had only a ~5% or less chance of having the same oxygen isotope composition as Earth, while Mastrobuono-Battisti et al. (2015) used seemingly similar simulations and methods to arrive at a higher value of ~20% or more. Here we derive the results of both papers from a single set of simulations. Compared to Kaib & Cowan (2015), the analysis of Mastrobuono-Battisti et al. (2015) systematically yields more massive Theia analogs and imposes flatter isotopic gradients across the original protoplanetary disk. Both of these effects diminish isotopic differences between Earth and Theia analogs. While it is notoriously difficult to produce systems resembling our actual terrestrial planets, the analysis of Kaib & Cowan (2015) more often selects and analyzes Earth and Mars analogs at orbital locations near the real planets. Given this, we conclude that the greater isotopic differences between Earth and Theia found in Kaib & Cowan (2015) better reflect the predictions of terrestrial planet formation models. Finally, although simulation uncertainties and a terrestrial contribution to Moon formation enhance the fraction of Theia analogs consistent with the canonical giant impact hypothesis, this fraction still remains in the 5-8% range.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.

Institutions

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.