Paper detail

Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko: Constraints on its origin from OSIRIS observations

One of the main aims of the ESA Rosetta mission is to study the origin of the solar system by exploring comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko at close range. In this paper we discuss the origin and evolution of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko in relation to that of comets in general and in the framework of current solar system formation models. We use data from the OSIRIS scientific cameras as basic constraints. In particular, we discuss the overall bi-lobate shape and the presence of key geological features, such as layers and fractures. We also treat the problem of collisional evolution of comet nuclei by a particle-in-a-box calculation for an estimate of the probability of survival for 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko during the early epochs of the solar system. We argue that the two lobes of the 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko nucleus are derived from two distinct objects that have formed a contact binary via a gentle merger. The lobes are separate bodies, though sufficiently similar to have formed in the same environment. An estimate of the collisional rate in the primordial, trans-planetary disk shows that most comets of similar size to 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko are likely collisional fragments, although survival of primordial planetesimals cannot be excluded. A collisional origin of the contact binary is suggested, and the low bulk density of the aggregate and abundance of volatile species show that a very gentle merger must have occurred. We thus consider two main scenarios: the primordial accretion of planetesimals, and the re-accretion of fragments after an energetic impact onto a larger parent body. We point to the primordial signatures exhibited by 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko and other comet nuclei as critical tests of the collisional evolution.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.