English

The curiously warped mean plane of the Kuiper belt

Earth and Planetary Astrophysics 2017-10-13 v3

Abstract

We measured the mean plane of the Kuiper belt as a function of semi-major axis. For the classical Kuiper belt as a whole (the non-resonant objects in the semi-major axis range 42--48~au), we find a mean plane of inclination im=1.8i_m=1.8^{\circ}0.4+0.7^{+0.7^{\circ}}_{-0.4^{\circ}} and longitude of ascending node Ωm=77\Omega_m=77^{\circ}14+18^{+18^{\circ}}_{-14^{\circ}} (in the J2000 ecliptic-equinox coordinate system), in accord with theoretical expectations of the secular effects of the known planets. With finer semi-major axis bins, we detect a statistically significant warp in the mean plane near semi-major axes 40--42~au. Linear secular theory predicts a warp near this location due to the ν18\nu_{18} nodal secular resonance, however the measured mean plane for the 40.3-42~au semi-major axis bin (just outside the ν18\nu_{18}) is inclined 13\sim13^{\circ} to the predicted plane, a nearly 3-σ\sigma discrepancy. For the more distant Kuiper belt objects of semi-major axes in the range 50--80~au, the expected mean plane is close to the invariable plane of the solar system, but the measured mean plane deviates greatly from this: it has inclination im=9.1i_m=9.1^{\circ}3.8+6.6^{+6.6^{\circ}}_{-3.8^{\circ}} and longitude of ascending node Ωm=227\Omega_m=227^{\circ}44+18^{+18^{\circ}}_{-44^{\circ}}. We estimate this deviation from the expected mean plane to be statistically significant at the 9799%\sim97-99\% confidence level. We discuss several possible explanations for this deviation, including the possibility that a relatively close-in (a100a\lesssim100~au), unseen small planetary-mass object in the outer solar system is responsible for the warping.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.1704.02444,
  title  = {The curiously warped mean plane of the Kuiper belt},
  author = {Kathryn Volk and Renu Malhotra},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.02444},
  year   = {2017}
}

Comments

This version corrects an error in Figure 7 and typographical errors in some equations in Appendix D (changes accepted as an erratum in AJ)