February 8, 2026
suggested that these extinction events are periodic, and recur every 26 Myr (Raup and Sepkoski, 1984). One way to achieve a periodic signal in the extinction events is for the Sun to have an eccentric stellar companion, which perturbs comets in the Oort cloud on the necessary time interval (Davis et al., 1984). The envisaged red/brown dwarf companion would therefore have an orbital period of about 26 Myr and hence a semi-major axis of anem 88, 000 AU. This hypothetical body became known as Nemesis, named after the Greek goddess of retribution. Although the orbital stability of the proposed companion was inconclusively analyzed by Hills (1984); Hut (1984); Torbett and Smoluchowski (1984), more recent work indicates that the probability of the ejection for Nemesis from the solar system by passing stars is of order unity over the age of the Sun (Li and Adams, 2016).
A number of searches for Nemesis have come up empty, starting with a University of California search (Perlmutter, 1986), and continuing with infrared surveys carried out by IRAS (Beichman, 1987) and 2MASS (Sykes et al., 2002). Moreover, the ev- idence for periodic extinction events itself is tenuous, meaning that the Nemesis hy- pothesis may simply be unnecessary. A more modest proposal, motivated by the dis- tribution of aphelion directions of comets, has been subsequently put forward, where the Sun has a Jovian mass companion (referred to as Tyche) on a distant orbit that perturbs comets in the Oort cloud (Matese et al., 1999; Matese and Whitmire, 2011). However, the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) has placed stringent limits on the existence of such bodies in the distant solar system. Specifically, objects with the mass of Saturn and Jupiter are ruled out to distances of 28,000 AU and 82,000 AU, respectively (Luhman, 2014). Taken together, these observational surveys leave little parameter space for any putative binary companion to the Sun.
Since the discovery of the Kuiper belt (Jewitt & Luu, 1993), the orbital architecture of this population has often been examined in hope that it can provide insight into massive astrophysical objects that may reside beyond the current observational frontier of the solar system. The first suggestion that the observed distribution of objects in the Kuiper belt pointed to the presence of a perturbing planet came from Brunini & Melita (2002), who argued that the dramatic drop-off in the numbers of Kuiper belt
objects (KBOs) with semi-major axes beyond a & 48 AU could be explained by an approximately Mars-sized body with a semi-major axis of a 60 AU. Melita et al.
(2004), however, quickly determined that such an object was incapable of reproducing the observations.
The idea of a sub-Earth-sized outer planet was revisited by Lykawka and Mukai (2008) who suggested that such a body could explain many of the detailed properties of the main region of the Kuiper belt. The next suggestions of a planetary perturber came after the discovery of objects with high eccentricities and with perihelia beyond the immediate reach of strong Neptunian perturbations. Particularly, the KBO 2000 CR105 inspired speculation that its large perihelion distance of q = 44.3 AU can most readily be attributed to the current or former presence of an external perturber, although slow chaotic diffusion driven by the known planets also constitutes a viable explanation for this seemingly unusual trajectory
(Gladman et al., 2002; Gladman & Chan, 2006). The orbit of the distant object Sedna (2003 VB12), on the other hand, which has perihelion
distance of q = 76 AU, can only be explained by perturbations from an external agent. To this end, Brown et al. (2004) suggested that even though an approximately Earth mass object at 70 AU could in principle be responsible, perturbations arising from stars within the birth cluster constitute a more plausible explanation for Sedna’s de- tachment from Neptune (Adams and Laughlin, 2003; Morbidelli and Levison, 2004). Nevertheless, Gomes et al. (2006) carried out an extensive series of numerical simu- lations showing that the orbits of both 2000 CR105 and Sedna could be explained by a Neptune-to-Jupiter mass planet with a semi-major axis of 100s to 1000s of AU.
A separate suggestion of a planetary perturber surfaced when Trujillo and Sheppard (2014) discovered an additional outer solar system object, 2012 VP113, with a perihe- lion well beyond the planetary region, and noted that all known KBOs in the outer so- lar system with perihelion distance beyond Neptune and semi-major axis greater than a > 150 AU have argument of perihelion4, v, clustered around zero. Orbits with v = 0 or v = 180 deg come to perihelion at the heavily observed ecliptic, so observational bias could naturally facilitate a clustering around both of those values, particularly for the highest eccentricity objects. However, no conceivable bias could lead to only ob- serving objects clustered around v = 0, implying that Trujillo and Sheppard (2014)’s result is both statistically robust and not a product of survey strategy.
To explain the observations, Trujillo and Sheppard (2014) speculated that a several Earth mass planet at approximately 200 AU could maintain the arguments of perihe- lion alignment through the Kozai-Lidov effect (see section 4.1 for a short discussion). In particular, Trujillo and Sheppard (2014) demonstrated that a 5 M⊕ body on a circu- lar orbit at a = 210 AU could cause Kozai-Lidov oscillations of 2012 VP113, thereby maintaining its argument of perihelion in libration around zero. Nevertheless, they also
pointed out two difficulties with this scenario. First, in their simulations, they failed to find a single planet that can cause all of the KBOs – which have semi-major axes between 150 and 500 AU – to undergo Kozai-Lidov oscillations. This difficultly is not surprising; objects librate about v = 0 or 180 deg only for an interior perturber with a semi-major axis relatively close to the semi-major axis of the object being per- turbed (Thomas and Morbidelli, 1996). Thus, Kozai-Lidov libration of all objects with semi-major axes between 150 and 500 AU would likely require a special configuration of several carefully placed planets (see de la Fuente Marcos and de la Fuente Marcos 2016 for further discussion). Second, internal perturbers can cause affected objects to have Kozai-Lidov oscillations about either v = 0 or v = 180 deg, and as already stated above, the evidence for clustering about only v = 0 is robust. Trujillo and Sheppard (2014) suggested that this dilemma might be overcome if a close stellar en- counter had previously aligned the arguments of perihelia, a process demonstrated by Feng and Bailer-Jones (2015). The Trujillo and Sheppard (2014) planetary proposal thus requires multiple external planets and a close stellar flyby to explain the argument of perihelion clustering, along with some additional mechanism to explain the high perihelia of many of the distant objects.
Even more recently, Volk and Malhotra (2017) examined the observational census
4Not to be confused with the longitude of perihelion, the argument of perihelion is an angle made by the vectors pointing to the perihelion and the ascending node (see Figure 3).
of long-period KBOs, and argued that the mean orbital plane of the Kuiper belt in the a 50 80 AU domain is inclined with respect to the ecliptic in an unexpected man- ner. This led the authors to suggest that the observed warping may be facilitated by a small (e.g. Mars-mass) planet, residing in the solar system on an appreciably inclined orbit with a 65 80 AU. The possibility that a body of this type may indeed exist in the solar system is bolstered by the recent simulations of Silsbee and Tremaine (2018), who find a significant probability that sub-Earth-mass planetary embryos can become
trapped on orbits with a . 200 AU and q 40 70 AU early in the solar system’s lifetime. Given that the expected visual magnitude of such an object would be of order
17 or less, the most likely location on the sky where this body could have avoided being discovered to date is the galactic plane, which remains relatively unexplored by solar system surveys.
This brief overview of gravitationally motivated planetary proposals illuminates the fact that over the course of the last 170 years, numerous variants of trans-Neptunian perturbers have been considered (and subsequently abandoned), with the aim to ex- plain a broad range of dynamical phenomena at the outskirts of the solar system. In light of this multiplicity, a natural question emerges: what distinguishes the different planetary proposals and the models that accompany them? A simple answer may be that each proposition of a trans-Neptunian planet is characterized by the unique combi- nation of the anomalous data it seeks to explain, and the specific dynamical mechanism through which the putative planet generates its observational signatures. With an eye towards characterizing the Planet Nine hypothesis specifically within this framework, in the text below we will present an up-to-date account of the orbital architecture of the trans-Neptunian region of the solar system, and outline a theoretical description of the dynamical mechanisms through which Planet Nine sculpts the small body population of the distant solar system.
The remainder of this review is structured as follows. In the following section, we sketch out the various sub-categories of objects residing in the trans-Neptunian solar system, and summarize the relevant nomenclature. In section 3, we provide a detailed account of the anomalous structure of the distant solar system, including a brief discus- sion of the characteristic timescales and observational biases. Section 4 outlines a the- oretical description of the dynamical mechanisms through which Planet Nine sculpts the population of small bodies in the distant solar system and thereby accounts for these anomalies. In section 5 we present results from a large ensemble of numerical simulations that fully capture the non-linear and chaotic nature of Planet Nine-induced dynamics. These integrations conform to the expectations of the analytical theory from the previous section and constrain the allowed properties of Planet Nine. The prospects for detecting this as-yet-unseen planet are described in section 6. Given its requisite large distance from the Sun, the formation of Planet Nine poses a challenging problem, and various scenarios are discussed in section 7. The review concludes in section 8 with a summary of results, possible alternative explanations, and a brief outline of questions that remain open within the broader framework of the Planet Nine hypothesis.
Inventory and Structure of the Trans-Neptunian Solar System
As astronomical surveys have continued to push to ever greater depth and unveil the population of small bodies beyond Neptune, it has become progressively evident that the trans-Neptunian region of the solar system encompasses a rich diversity of objects that exhibit distinct modes of gravitational coupling with Neptune. Much of this orbital structure is a frozen-in relic of the solar system’s violent dynamical past (Levison et al., 2008; Nesvorny´, 2015a), and plays virtually no role in the formulation of the Planet Nine hypothesis. Meanwhile, other aspects of the distant solar system’s architecture are ceaselessly being sculpted by both known and inferred long-period planets, and are therefore of key importance. Thus, in order to better understand any lines of evidence for external gravitational perturbations, it is of considerable use to first outline the various dynamical classes that make up the Kuiper belt and their respective significance for the analysis that will follow.
The current census of trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs) is comprised of a few thou- sand bodies, the vast majority of which are considerably smaller than 1000 km in di- ameter. The outer solar system also contains a relatively large number of dwarf planets – bodies large enough for gravitational forces to render them quasi-spherical, yet too small to appreciably influence their orbital neighborhoods. In particular, the inventory of currently known objects includes 10 bodies larger than D > 900 km and another 17 bodies with estimated sizes in the range D = 600 – 900 km (see Brown 2008 for a re- view). The number of such objects will continue to grow as the trans-Neptunian region is surveyed to greater depth. Nevertheless, the total mass of the present-day Kuiper belt is estimated to be a small fraction of an Earth-mass (Pitjeva & Pitjev, 2018), meaning that Kuiper belt objects can be essentially thought of as tracers of dynamical evolution facilitated by the outer planets. Accordingly, typical classification of KBOs is based upon their orbital, rather than physical properties (Figure 3), and we will follow this convention here (Figure 4). For more comprehensive discussion of specific attributes of the trans-Neptunian solar system, we direct the reader to reviews of the observational characteristics of the Kuiper belt (Luu and Jewitt 2002; Gladman et al. 2008), planet formation (Armitage, 2010), early dynamical evolution (Nesvorny´, 2018), and the birth environment of the solar system (Adams, 2010), as well as the references therein.
Resonant Kuiper Belt
An emblematic sub-population of Kuiper belt objects (that includes Pluto itself) is composed of objects entrained in mean motion resonances with Neptune. Simply put, resonant orbits have periods that can be expressed as rational multiples of Neptune’s orbital period, although we note that having a nearly rational period ratio is a necessary but insufficient condition for resonance. In addition to period commensurability, the angular orbital elements must have the proper form so that the relevant resonance an- gle (a Fourier harmonic of the gravitational potential, also called a “critical argument”) oscillates (or “librates”) around a particular value, instead of steadily increasing or de- creasing its value (a regime known as “circulation”). KBOs residing on resonant orbits generally experience coherent exchange of orbital energy and angular momentum with Neptune, and can be longterm stable even at high eccentricities, thanks to a phase- protection mechanism that allows KBO orbits to overlap the orbit of Neptune without
Figure 3: Definition of Keplerian orbital elements, illustrated by a schematic of an inclined, eccentric orbit in the solar system. The size and ellipticity of the orbit are parameterized by the semi-major axis, a, and the eccentricity, e, as shown in the inset. The longitude of ascending node (denoted Ω) informs the direction into which the orbit is tilted, and is measured by location at which the orbit intersects the ecliptic plane from below. The argument of perihelion (denoted v) describes the angle between the line of nodes and the direction of the planet’s closest approach to the sun (also referred to as the apsidal line). The combined angle, a = v+Ω, defines the overall direction of the apsidal line and is called the longitude of the perihelion. Finally, the tilt of the orbit with respect to the ecliptic is informed by the inclination, i.
being rapidly destabilized by close encounters (Peale, 1976; Nesvorny´ & Roig, 2000, 2001).
The most prominent orbital commensurabilities in the Kuiper belt correspond to the 3:2 and 2:1 mean motion resonances. Drawing on the fact that these resonances are densely populated, Malhotra (1995) demonstrated that Neptune likely formed much closer to the sun, and must have experienced long-range outward migration, capturing resonant KBOs along the way. Subsequent characterization of resonant dynamics in the Kuiper belt further revealed that Neptune’s migration must have had a stochastic component, and likely occurred during a transient period of dynamical instability ex- perienced by the outer solar system (Tsiganis et al. 2005; Levison et al. 2008; see also Nesvorny´ 2015a for a recent study). Despite the constraints that the structure of the resonant Kuiper belt places on the early evolution of the solar system, it plays no role within the context of the Planet Nine hypothesis, and its existence can be safely ignored for the purpose of the calculations that will follow.
Classical Kuiper Belt
The Classical Kuiper Belt is primarily comprised of icy bodies that have semi- major axes in between the 3:2 and 2:1 mean motion resonances, correspondingto a 42 48 AU. By virtue of not being locked into resonances with Neptune, clas- sical KBOs dominantly experience phase-averaged (so-called “secular”) interactions that are considerably more subdued than their resonant counterparts. The broader class of classical KBOs is often divided into dynamically ‘cold’ and ‘hot’ sub-populations,
No comments:
Post a Comment