Paper detail

Explaining the low luminosity of Uranus: A self-consistent thermal and structural evolution

The low luminosity of Uranus is a long-standing challenge in planetary science. Simple adiabatic models are inconsistent with the measured luminosity, which indicates that Uranus is non-adiabatic because it has thermal boundary layers and/or conductive regions. A gradual composition distribution acts as a thermal boundary to suppress convection and slow down the internal cooling. Here we investigate whether composition gradients in the deep interior of Uranus can explain its low luminosity, the required composition gradient, and whether it is stable for convective mixing on a timescale of some billion years. We varied the primordial composition distribution and the initial energy budget of the planet, and chose the models that fit the currently measured properties (radius, luminosity, and moment of inertia) of Uranus. We present several alternative non-adiabatic internal structures that fit the Uranus measurements. We found that convective mixing is limited to the interior of Uranus, and a composition gradient is stable and sufficient to explain its current luminosity. As a result, the interior of Uranus might still be very hot, in spite of its low luminosity. The stable composition gradient also indicates that the current internal structure of Uranus is similar to its primordial structure. Moreover, we suggest that the initial energy content of Uranus cannot be greater than 20% of its formation (accretion) energy. We also find that an interior with a mixture of ice and rock, rather than separated ice and rock shells, is consistent with measurements, suggesting that Uranus might not be "differentiated". Our models can explain the luminosity of Uranus, and they are also consistent with its metal-rich atmosphere and with the predictions for the location where its magnetic field is generated.

preprint2019arXivOpen 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.

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 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.