Letter | Published:

Catastrophic disruptions as the origin of bilobate comets

Nature Astronomyvolume 2pages379382 (2018) | Download Citation

Abstract

Several comets observed at close range have bilobate shapes1, including comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko (67P/C–G), which was imaged by the European Space Agency’s Rosetta mission2,3. Bilobate comets are thought to be primordial because they are rich in supervolatiles (for example, N2 and CO) and have a low bulk density, which implies that their formation requires a very low-speed accretion of two bodies. However, slow accretion does not only occur during the primordial phase of the Solar System; it can also occur at later epochs as part of the reaccumulation process resulting from the collisional disruption of a larger body4, so this cannot directly constrain the age of bilobate comets. Here, we show by numerical simulation that 67P/C–G and other elongated or bilobate comets can be formed in the wake of catastrophic collisional disruptions of larger bodies while maintaining their volatiles and low density throughout the process. Since this process can occur at any epoch of our Solar System’s history, from early on through to the present day5, there is no need for these objects to be formed primordially. These findings indicate that observed prominent geological features, such as pits and stratified surface layers4,5, may not be primordial.

  • Subscribe to Nature Astronomy for full access:

    $99

    Subscribe

Additional access options:

Already a subscriber?  Log in  now or  Register  for online access.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  1. 1.

    Sunshine, J. M., Thomas, N., El-Maarry, M. R. & Farnham, T. L. Evidence for geologic processes on comets. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 121, 2194–2210 (2016).

  2. 2.

    Sierks, H. et al. On the nucleus structure and activity of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko. Science 347, aaa1044 (2015).

  3. 3.

    Massironi, M. et al. Two independent and primitive envelopes of the bilobate nucleus of comet 67P. Nature 526, 402–405 (2015).

  4. 4.

    Michel, P. & Richardson, D. C. Collision and gravitational reaccumulation: possible formation mechanism of the asteroid Itokawa. Astron. Astrophys. 554, L1 (2013).

  5. 5.

    Rickman, H. et al. Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko: constraints on its origin from OSIRIS observations. Astron. Astrophys. 583, A44 (2015).

  6. 6.

    Jutzi, M., Benz, W. & Michel, P. Numerical simulations of impacts involving porous bodies. I. Implementing sub-resolution porosity in a 3D SPH hydrocode. Icarus 198, 242–255 (2008).

  7. 7.

    Benz, W. & Asphaug, E. Impact simulations with fracture. I. Method and tests. Icarus 107, 98–116 (1994).

  8. 8.

    Hirabayashi, M. et al. Fission and reconfiguration of bilobate comets as revealed by 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko. Nature 534, 352–355 (2016).

  9. 9.

    Jutzi, M., Benz, W., Toliou, A., Morbidelli, A. & Brasser, R. How primordial is the structure of comet 67P/C–G? Combined collisional and dynamical models suggest a late formation. Astron. Astrophys. 597, A61 (2017).

  10. 10.

    Stadel, J. G. Cosmological N-body Simulations and Their Analysis. PhD thesis, Univ. Washington (2001).

  11. 11.

    Richardson, D. C., Quinn, T., Stadel, J. & Lake, G. Direct large-scale N-body simulations of planetesimal dynamics. Icarus 143, 45–59 (2000).

  12. 12.

    Schwartz, S. R., Richardson, D. C. & Michel, P. An implementation of the soft-sphere discrete element method in a high-performance parallel gravity tree-code. Granul. Matter 14, 363–380 (2012).

  13. 13.

    Schwartz, S. R., Yu, Y., Michel, P. & Jutzi, M. Small-body deflection techniques using spacecraft: techniques in simulating the fate of ejecta. Adv. Space Res. 57, 1832–1846 (2016).

  14. 14.

    Zhang, Y. et al. Creep stability of the proposed AIDA mission target 65803 Didymos: I. Discrete cohesionless granular physics model. Icarus 294, 98–123 (2017).

  15. 15.

    Groussin, O. et al. Gravitational slopes, geomorphology, and material strengths of the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko from OSIRIS observations. Astron. Astrophys. 583, A32 (2015).

  16. 16.

    Jutzi, M. & Benz, W. Formation of bi-lobed shapes by sub-catastrophic collisions. A late origin of comet 67P’s structure. Astron. Astrophys. 597, A62 (2017).

  17. 17.

    Collins, G. S. Numerical simulations of impact crater formation with dilatancy. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 119, 2600–2619 (2014).

  18. 18.

    Jutzi, M. & Asphaug, E. The shape and structure of cometary nuclei as a result of low-velocity accretion. Science 348, 1355–1358 (2015).

  19. 19.

    Davidsson, B. J. R. et al. The primordial nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko. Astron. Astrophys. 592, A63 (2016).

  20. 20.

    Morbidelli, A. & Rickman, H. Comets as collisional fragments of a primordial planetesimal disk. Astron. Astrophys. 583, A43 (2015).

  21. 21.

    Singer, K. N. et al. Impact craters on Pluto and Charon indicate a deficit of small Kuiper belt objects. Am. Astron. Soc. Div. Planetary Sci. Conf. 48, 213.12 (2016).

  22. 22.

    El-Maarry, M. R. et al. Regional surface morphology of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko from Rosetta/OSIRIS images. Astron. Astrophys. 583, A26 (2015).

  23. 23.

    Vincent, J.-B. et al. Large heterogeneities in comet 67P as revealed by active pits from sinkhole collapse. Nature 523, 63–66 (2015).

  24. 24.

    Libourel, G. et al. Search for primitive matter in the Solar System. Icarus 282, 375–379 (2017).

  25. 25.

    Michel, P., Benz, W., Tanga, P. & Richardson, D. C. Collisions and gravitational reaccumulation: forming asteroid families and satellites. Science 294, 1696–1700 (2001).

  26. 26.

    Richardson, D. C., Michel, P., Walsh, K. J. & Flynn, K. W. Numerical simulations of asteroids modelled as gravitational aggregates with cohesion. Planet. Space Sci. 57, 183–192 (2009).

  27. 27.

    Jutzi, M. SPH calculations of asteroid disruptions: the role of pressure dependent failure models. Planet. Space Sci. 107, 3–9 (2015).

  28. 28.

    Cundall, P. A. & Strack, O. D. L. A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies. Geotechnique 29, 47–65 (1979).

  29. 29.

    Rickman, H. The nucleus of comet Halley: surface structure, mean density, gas and dust production. Adv. Space Res. 9, 59–71 (1989).

  30. 30.

    A’Hearn, M. F. et al. Deep impact: excavating comet Tempel 1. Science 310, 258–264 (2005).

  31. 31.

    A’Hearn, M. F. et al. EPOXI at comet Hartley 2. Science 332, 1396–1400 (2011).

  32. 32.

    Duxbury, T. C., Newburn, R. L. & Brownlee, D. E. Comet 81P/Wild 2 size, shape, and orientation. J. Geophys. Res. 109, E12S02 (2004).

  33. 33.

    Lamy, P. L., Toth, I. & Weaver, H. A. Hubble Space Telescope observations of the nucleus and inner coma of comet 19P/1904 Y2 (Borrelly). Astron. Astrophys. 337, 945–954 (1998).

  34. 34.

    Soderblom, L. A. et al. Observations of comet 19P/Borrelly by the Miniature Integrated Camera and Spectrometer aboard Deep Space 1. Science 296, 1087–1091 (2002).

Download references

Acknowledgements

S.R.S. and P.M. acknowledge support from the Centre National d’Études Spatiales, as well as the Academies of Excellence on Complex Systems and Space, Environment, Risk and Resilience of the Initiative d’EXcellence ‘Joint, Excellent, and Dynamic Initiative’ (IDEX JEDI) of the Université Côte d’Azur. M.J. acknowledges support from the Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research PlanetS, and S.M. acknowledges support from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Computation was performed using the YORP computing cluster run by the Center for Theory and Computation at the University of Maryland’s Department of Astronomy and the Mésocentre de Calcul Intensif ‘Simulations Intensives en Géophysique, Astronomie, Mécanique, et Mathématiques’ hosted by the Côte d’Azur Observatory in Nice. For data visualization, the authors made use of the freeware, multi-platform, ray-tracing package, Persistence of Vision Raytracer.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Université Côte d’Azur, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Laboratoire Lagrange, Nice, France

    • Stephen R. Schwartz
    •  & Patrick Michel
  2. Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA

    • Stephen R. Schwartz
  3. Physics Institute, University of Bern, National Centre of Competence in Research PlanetS, Bern, Switzerland

    • Martin Jutzi
  4. Southwest Research Institute, Boulder, CO, USA

    • Simone Marchi
  5. School of Aerospace Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

    • Yun Zhang
  6. Department of Astronomy, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

    • Yun Zhang
    •  & Derek C. Richardson

Authors

  1. Search for Stephen R. Schwartz in:

  2. Search for Patrick Michel in:

  3. Search for Martin Jutzi in:

  4. Search for Simone Marchi in:

  5. Search for Yun Zhang in:

  6. Search for Derek C. Richardson in:

Contributions

S.R.S. performed the soft-sphere/N-body numerical simulations, analysed the numerical results and led the research. M.J. performed the SPH numerical simulations and contributed to the analyses. P.M. initiated the collaboration between the institutions to investigate catastrophic impacts as an origin story, and helped steer the study to address questions in the context of Solar System origins. S.M. provided essential and detailed context for the Rosetta findings and outstanding questions regarding comet 67P/G–C. Y.Z. analysed the friction angles and implemented the rolling friction subroutine used. D.C.R. guided the development of all N-body-related code. All authors contributed to interpretation of the results and preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen R. Schwartz.

Supplementary information

  1. Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Figures 1–4, captions for Supplementary Videos 1–4.

Videos

  1. Supplementary Video 1

    Animation showing the formation of the largest remnant after a 150 m s–1 catastrophic impact (18° friction angle).

  2. Supplementary Video 2

    Animation showing the formation of the largest remnant after a 150 m s–1 catastrophic impact (29° friction angle).

  3. Supplementary Video 3

    One example of gravitational reaccumulation of marginally bound impact fragments.

  4. Supplementary Video 4

    One example of the formation of a bilobate body from a catastrophic disruption simulation.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-018-0395-2

Rights and permissions

To obtain permission to re-use content from this article visit RightsLink.