Paper detail

The Luminosity Function of the Hot and Cold Kuiper belt Populations

Abridged. We have performed an ecliptic survey of the Kuiper belt, with an areal coverage of 8.9 square degrees to a 50% limiting magnitude of r'=24.7, and have detected 88 Kuiper belt objects, roughly half of which received follow-up one to two months after detection. Using this survey data alone, we have measured the luminosity function of the Kuiper belt, thus avoiding any biases that might come from the inclusion of other observations. We have found that the Cold population defined as having inclinations less than 5 degrees has a luminosity function slope alpha=0.82+-0.23, and is different from the Hot population, which has inclinations greater than 5 degrees and a luminosity function slope alpha=0.35+-0.21. As well, we have found that those objects closer than 38 AU have virtually the same luminosity function slope as the Hot population. This result, along with similar findings of past surveys demonstrates that the dynamically cold Kuiper belt objects likely have a steep size distribution, and are unique from all of the excited populations which have much shallower distributions. This suggests that the dynamically excited population underwent a different accretion history and achieved a more evolved state of accretion than the cold population. As well, we discuss the similarities of the Cold and Hot populations with the size distributions of other planetesimal populations. We find that while the Jupiter family comets and the scattered disk exhibit similar size distributions, a power-law extrapolation to small sizes for the scattered disk cannot account for the observed influx of comets. As well, we have found that the Jupiter Trojan and Hot populations cannot have originated from the same parent popuation, a result that is difficult to reconcile with scattering models similar to the NICE model.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.