Paper detail

Mid-infrared spectra of comet nuclei

Jovian Trojan D-type asteroids have mid-infrared emissivity features strikingly similar to comet comae, suggesting that they have the same compositions and that the surfaces of the Trojans are highly porous. However, a direct comparison between a comet and asteroid surface has not been possible due to the paucity of spectra of comet nuclei at mid-infrared wavelengths. We present 5-35 μm thermal emission spectra of comets 10P/Tempel 2, and 49P/Arend-Rigaux observed with the Infrared Spectrograph on the Spitzer Space Telescope. Our analysis suggests the spectra are dominated by the comet nucleus. We fit each spectrum with the near-Earth asteroid thermal model (NEATM) and find sizes in agreement with previous values. However, the NEATM beaming parameters of the nuclei, 0.74 to 0.83, are systematically lower than the Jupiter-family comet population mean of 1.03+/-0.11, derived from 16- and 22-μm photometry. When the spectra are normalized by the NEATM model, a weak 10-μm silicate plateau is evident, with a shape similar to those seen in mid-infrared spectra of D-type asteroids. We compare, in detail, these comet nucleus emission features to those seen in spectra of the Jovian Trojan D-types (624) Hektor, (911) Agamemnon, and (1172) Aneas, as well as those seen in the spectra of seven comet comae. The comet comae present silicate features with two distinct shapes, either trapezoidal, or more rounded. The surfaces of Tempel 2, Arend-Rigaux, and Hektor best agree with the comae that present trapezoidal features. An emissivity minimum at 15 μm, present in the spectra of Tempel 2, Arend-Rigaux, Hektor, and Agamemnon, is also described, the origin of which remains unidentified. The compositional similarity between D-type asteroids and comets is discussed, and our data supports the hypothesis that they have similar origins in the early Solar System.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.