Paper detail

The Size Distribution of the Neptune Trojans and the Missing Intermediate Sized Planetesimals

We present an ultra-deep survey for Neptune Trojans using the Subaru 8.2-m and Magellan 6.5-m telescopes. The survey reached a 50% detection efficiency in the R-band at 25.7 magnitudes and covered 49 square degrees of sky. This depth corresponds to Neptune Trojans that are about 16 km in radius (assuming an albedo of 0.05). A paucity of smaller Neptune Trojans (radii < 45 km) compared to larger ones was found. The brightest Neptune Trojans appear to follow a steep power-law slope (q = 5+-1) similar to the brightest objects in the other known stable reservoirs such as the Kuiper Belt, Jupiter Trojans and main belt asteroids. We find a roll-over for the Neptune Trojans that occurs around a radii of r=45+-10 km (23.5+-0.3 mags), which is also very similar to the other stable reservoirs. All the observed stable regions in the the solar system show evidence for Missing Intermediate Sized Planetesimals (MISPs). This indicates a primordial and not collisional origin, which suggests planetesimal formation proceeded directly from small to large objects. The scarcity of intermediate and smaller sized Neptune Trojans may limit them as being a strong source for the short period comets.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

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.