The obliquity of a planet is the tilt between its equator and its orbital plane. Giant planets are expected to form with near-zero obliquities1,2. After the formation of Saturn, some dynamical mechanism must therefore have tilted Saturn up to its current obliquity of 26.7°. This event is traditionally thought to have happened more than 4 Gyr ago during the late planetary migration3,4,5 because of the crossing of a resonance between the spin-axis precession of Saturn and the nodal orbital precession mode of Neptune6. Here, we show that the fast tidal migration of Titan for which the measurement is reported in ref. 7 is incompatible with this scenario, and that it offers a new explanation for Saturn’s current obliquity. A substantial migration of Titan would prevent any early resonance, which would invalidate previous constraints on the late planetary migration that were set by the tilting of Saturn8,9,10. We propose instead that the resonance was encountered more recently, about 1 Gyr ago, and forced Saturn’s obliquity to increase from a small value (possibly less than 3°) to its current state. This scenario suggests that Saturn’s normalized polar moment of inertia lies between 0.224 and 0.237. Our findings bring out a new paradigm for the spin-axis evolution of Saturn, Jupiter11 and possibly giant exoplanets in multiple systems, whereby obliquities are not settled once for all but evolve continuously as a result of the migration of their satellites.
This is a preview of subscription content
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to the entire Nature family of 50+ journals
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $8.25 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Source Data for the figures are provided with this paper. The data supporting other findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
The parameters and equations of motion are fully described within the paper. All data can be reproduced using any standard implementation. The numerical integration scheme used is fully available from ref. 29.
Ward, W. R. & Hamilton, D. P. Tilting Saturn. I. Analytic model. Astron. J. 128, 2501–2509 (2004).
Rogoszinski, Z. & Hamilton, D. P. Tilting ice giants with a spin–orbit resonance. Astrophys. J. 888, 60 (2020).
Malhotra, R. The origin of Pluto’s peculiar orbit. Nature 365, 819–821 (1993).
Tsiganis, K., Gomes, R., Morbidelli, A. & Levison, H. F. Origin of the orbital architecture of the giant planets of the Solar System. Nature 435, 459–461 (2005).
Nesvorný, D. & Morbidelli, A. Statistical study of the early Solar System’s instability with four, five, and six giant planets. Astron. J. 144, 117 (2012).
Hamilton, D. P. & Ward, W. R. Tilting Saturn. II. Numerical model. Astron. J. 128, 2510–2517 (2004).
Lainey, V. et al. New tidal paradigm in giant planets supported by rapid orbital expansion of Titan. Nat. Astron. 4, 1053–1058 (2020).
Boué, G., Laskar, J. & Kuchynka, P. Speed limit on Neptune migration imposed by Saturn tilting. Astrophys. J. 702, L19–L22 (2009).
Brasser, R. & Lee, M. H. Tilting Saturn without tilting Jupiter: constraints on giant planet migration. Astron. J. 150, 157 (2015).
Vokrouhlický, D. & Nesvorný, D. Tilting Jupiter (a bit) and Saturn (a lot) during planetary migration. Astrophys. J. 806, 143 (2015).
Saillenfest, M., Lari, G. & Courtot, A. The future large obliquity of Jupiter. Astron. Astrophys. 640, A11 (2020).
Laskar, J. & Robutel, P. The chaotic obliquity of the planets. Nature 361, 608–612 (1993).
Ward, W. R. Tidal friction and generalized Cassini’s laws in the solar system. Astron. J. 80, 64–70 (1975).
Fuller, J., Luan, J. & Quataert, E. Resonance locking as the source of rapid tidal migration in the Jupiter and Saturn moon systems. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 458, 3867–3879 (2016).
Millholland, S. & Laughlin, G. Obliquity-driven sculpting of exoplanetary systems. Nat. Astron. 3, 424–433 (2019).
Saillenfest, M., Laskar, J. & Boué, G. Secular spin-axis dynamics of exoplanets. Astron. Astrophys. 623, A4 (2019).
Laskar, J. The chaotic motion of the solar system: a numerical estimate of the size of the chaotic zones. Icarus 88, 266–291 (1990).
Charnoz, S., Canup, R. M., Crida, A. & Dones, L. in Planetary Ring Systems: Properties, Structure, and Evolution (eds Tiscareno, M. S. & Murray, C. D.) 517–538 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2018).
Millholland, S. & Batygin, K. Excitation of planetary obliquities through planet–disk interactions. Astrophys. J. 876, 119 (2019).
Safronov, V. S. Sizes of the largest bodies falling onto the planets during their formation. Sov. Astron. 9, 987–991 (1966).
Kipping, D. M. In search of exomoons. In Proc. Frank N. Bash Symposium 2013: New Horizons in Astronomy, 012 (PoS, 2014).
Kreyche, S. M. et al. Retrograde-rotating exoplanets experience obliquity excitations in an eccentricity-enabled resonance. Planet. Sci. J. 1, 8 (2020).
Archinal, B. A. et al. Report of the IAU Working Group on Cartographic Coordinates and Rotational Elements: 2015. Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astron. 130, 22 (2018).
Iess, L. et al. Measurement and implications of Saturn’s gravity field and ring mass. Science 364, aat2965 (2019).
Hubbard, W. B. & Marley, M. S. Optimized Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus interior models. Icarus 78, 102–118 (1989).
French, R. G. et al. Geometry of the Saturn system from the 3 July 1989 occultation of 28 Sgr and Voyager observations. Icarus 103, 163–214 (1993).
Fortney, J. J. et al. in Saturn in the 21st Century (eds Baines, K. H. et al.) 44–68 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2018).
Hesselbrock, A. J. & Minton, D. A. An ongoing satellite–ring cycle of Mars and the origins of Phobos and Deimos. Nat. Geosci. 10, 266–269 (2017).
Rein, H. & Spiegel, D. S. IAS15: a fast, adaptive, high-order integrator for gravitational dynamics, accurate to machine precision over a billion orbits. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 446, 1424–1437 (2015).
We thank L. Gomez Casajus for fruitful discussions and S. Renner for his suggestions during the writing of our manuscript. G.L. acknowledges financial support from the Italian Space Agency (ASI) through agreement no. 2017-40-H.0.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information Nature Astronomy thanks David Nesvorny and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Saillenfest, M., Lari, G. & Boué, G. The large obliquity of Saturn explained by the fast migration of Titan. Nat Astron 5, 345–349 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-020-01284-x