Paper detail

Observational Constraints on the Catastrophic Disruption Rate of Small Main Belt Asteroids

We have calculated 90% confidence limits on the steady-state rate of catastrophic disruptions of main belt asteroids in terms of the absolute magnitude at which one catastrophic disruption occurs per year (HCL) as a function of the post-disruption increase in brightness (delta m) and subsequent brightness decay rate (tau). The confidence limits were calculated using the brightest unknown main belt asteroid (V = 18.5) detected with the Pan-STARRS1 (Pan-STARRS1) telescope. We measured the Pan-STARRS1's catastrophic disruption detection efficiency over a 453-day interval using the Pan-STARRS moving object processing system (MOPS) and a simple model for the catastrophic disruption event's photometric behavior in a small aperture centered on the catastrophic disruption event. Our simplistic catastrophic disruption model suggests that delta m = 20 mag and 0.01 mag d-1 < tau < 0.1 mag d-1 which would imply that H0 = 28 -- strongly inconsistent with H0,B2005 = 23.26 +/- 0.02 predicted by Bottke et al. (2005) using purely collisional models. We postulate that the solution to the discrepancy is that > 99% of main belt catastrophic disruptions in the size range to which this study was sensitive (100 m) are not impact-generated, but are instead due to fainter rotational breakups, of which the recent discoveries of disrupted asteroids P/2013 P5 and P/2013 R3 are probable examples. We estimate that current and upcoming asteroid surveys may discover up to 10 catastrophic disruptions/year brighter than V = 18.5.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access18 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.