List of possible dwarf planets

The number of dwarf planets in the Solar System is unknown. Estimates have run as high as 200 in the Kuiper belt[1] and over 10,000 in the region beyond.[2] However, consideration of the surprisingly low densities of many dwarf-planet candidates suggests that the numbers may be much lower (e.g. at most 10 among bodies known so far).[3] The International Astronomical Union (IAU) notes five in particular: Ceres in the inner Solar System and four in the trans-Neptunian region: Pluto, Eris, Haumea, and Makemake, the last two of which were accepted as dwarf planets for naming purposes.

IAU naming procedures

In 2008, the IAU modified its naming procedures such that objects considered most likely to be dwarf planets receive differing treatment than others. Objects that have an absolute magnitude (H) less than +1, and hence a minimum diameter of 838 kilometres (521 mi) if the albedo is below 100%,[4] are overseen by two naming committees, one for minor planets and one for planets. Once named, the objects are declared to be dwarf planets. Makemake and Haumea are the only objects to have proceeded through the naming process as presumed dwarf planets; currently there are no other bodies that meet this criterion. All other bodies are named by the minor-planet naming committee alone, and the IAU has not stated how or if they will be accepted as dwarf planets.

Limiting values

Calculation of the diameter of Ixion depends on the albedo (the fraction of light that it reflects), which is currently unknown.

Beside directly orbiting the Sun, the qualifying feature of a dwarf planet is that it have "sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid-body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape".[5][6][7] Current observations are generally insufficient for a direct determination as to whether a body meets this definition. Often the only clues for trans-Neptunian objects is a crude estimate of their diameters and albedos. Icy satellites as large as 1500 km in diameter have proven to not be in equilibrium, whereas dark objects in the outer solar system often have low densities that imply they are not even solid bodies, much less gravitationally controlled dwarf planets.

Ceres is currently the only known dwarf planet in the asteroid belt, though 10 Hygeia may also be a gravitationally collapsed spheroid and 704 Interamnia likely was so in the past; all three of these bodies appear to have a significant amount of water ice in their composition.[8][9] 4 Vesta, the second-most-massive asteroid and one that is basaltic in composition, appears to have a fully differentiated interior and was therefore in equilibrium at some point in its history, but no longer is today.[10] The third-most massive object, 2 Pallas, has a somewhat irregular surface and is thought to have only a partially differentiated interior. Michael Brown has estimated that, because rocky objects such as Vesta and Pallas are more rigid than icy objects, rocky objects below 900 kilometres (560 mi) in diameter may not be in hydrostatic equilibrium and thus not dwarf planets.[1]

Based on a comparison with the icy moons that have been visited by spacecraft, such as Mimas (round at 400 km in diameter) and Proteus (irregular at 410440 km in diameter), Brown estimated that an icy body relaxes into hydrostatic equilibrium at a diameter somewhere between 200 and 400 km.[1] However, after Brown and Tancredi made their calculations, better determination of their shapes showed that Mimas and the other mid-sized ellipsoidal moons of Saturn up to at least Iapetus (which is of the approximate size of Haumea and Makemake) are no longer in hydrostatic equilibrium. They have equilibrium shapes that froze in place some time ago, and do not match the shapes that equilibrium bodies would have at their current rotation rates.[11] Thus Ceres, at 950 km in diameter, is the smallest body for which gravitational measurements indicate current hydrostatic equilibrium.[12] Much larger objects, such as Earth's moon, are not near hydrostatic equilibrium today,[13][14][15] though they are primarily composed of silicate rock and iron respectively (in contrast to most dwarf planet candidates, which are ice and rock). Saturn's moons may have been subject to a thermal history that would have produced equilibrium-like shapes in bodies too small for gravity alone to do so. Thus, at present it is unknown whether any trans-Neptunian objects smaller than Pluto and Eris are in hydrostatic equilibrium.[3] The IAU has not addressed this issue since these findings.

The majority of mid-sized TNOs up to about 900–1000 km in diameter have significantly lower densities (~ 1.0–1.2 g/ml) than larger bodies such as Pluto (1.86 g/ml). Brown had speculated that this was due to their composition, that they were almost entirely icy. However, Grundy et al.[3] point out that there is no known mechanism or evolutionary pathway for mid-sized bodies to be icy while both larger and smaller objects are partially rocky. They demonstrated that at the prevailing temperatures of the Kuiper Belt, water ice is quite brittle and is thus strong enough to support open interior spaces (interstices) in objects of this size; they thus concluded that they have low densities for the same reason that smaller objects do—because they have not compacted under self-gravity into fully solid objects, and thus the typical object smaller than 900–1000 km in diameter is (pending some other formative mechanism) unlikely to be a dwarf planet.

Tancredi's assessment

In 2010, Gonzalo Tancredi presented a report to the IAU evaluating a list of 46 candidates for dwarf planet status based on light-curve-amplitude analysis and the assumption that the object was more than 450 kilometres (280 mi) in diameter. Some diameters are measured, some are best-fit estimates, and others use an assumed albedo of 0.10. Of these, he identified 15 as dwarf planets by his criteria (including the 4 accepted by the IAU), with another 9 being considered possible. To be cautious, he advised the IAU to "officially" accept as dwarf planets the top three not yet accepted: Sedna, Orcus, and Quaoar.[16] Although the IAU had anticipated Tancredi's recommendations; as of 13 September 2019, the IAU has not responded.

Brown's assessment

EarthMoonCharonCharonNixNixKerberosStyxHydraHydraPlutoPlutoDysnomiaDysnomiaErisErisNamakaNamakaHaumeaHaumeaMakemakeMakemakeMK2MK2XiangliuXiangliuGonggongGonggongWeywotWeywotQuaoarQuaoarSednaSednaVanthVanthOrcusOrcusActaeaActaeaSalaciaSalacia2002 MS42002 MS4
Artistic comparison of Pluto, Eris, Haumea, Makemake, Gonggong, Quaoar, Sedna, Orcus, Salacia, 2002 MS4, and Earth along with the Moon.
Brown's categories Min. Number of objects
nearly certainly >900 km 10
highly likely 600–900 km 27
likely 500–600 km 68
probably 400–500 km 130
possibly 200–400 km 741
Source: Mike Brown,[17] as of 13 September 2019

Mike Brown considers a large number of trans-Neptunian bodies, ranked by estimated size, to be "probably" dwarf planets.[17] He did not consider asteroids, stating "In the asteroid belt Ceres, with a diameter of 900 km, is the only object large enough to be round".[17]

The terms for varying degrees of likelihood he split these into:

  • Near certainty: diameter estimated/measured to be over 900 kilometres (560 mi). Sufficient confidence to say these must be in hydrostatic equilibrium, even if predominantly rocky.
  • Highly likely: diameter estimated/measured to be over 600 kilometres (370 mi). The size would have to be "grossly in error" or they would have to be primarily rocky to not be dwarf planets.
  • Likely: diameter estimated/measured to be over 500 kilometres (310 mi). Uncertainties in measurement mean that some of these will be significantly smaller and thus doubtful.
  • Probably: diameter estimated/measured to be over 400 kilometres (250 mi). Expected to be dwarf planets, if they are icy, and that figure is correct.
  • Possibly: diameter estimated/measured to be over 200 kilometres (120 mi). Icy moons transition from a round to irregular shape in the 200–400 km range, suggesting that the same figure holds true for KBOs. Thus, some of these objects could be dwarf planets.
  • Probably not: diameter estimated/measured to be under 200 km. No icy moon under 200 km is round, suggesting that the same is true for KBOs. The estimated size of these objects would have to be in error for them to be dwarf planets.

Beside the five accepted by the IAU, the 'nearly certain' category includes Gonggong, Quaoar, Sedna, Orcus, 2002 MS4 and Salacia.

Grundy et al.’s assessment

Grundy et al. propose that dark, low-density TNOs in the size range of approximately 400–1000 km are transitional between smaller, porous (and thus low-density) bodies and larger, denser, brighter and geologically differentiated planetary bodies (such as dwarf planets). Bodies in this size range should have begun to collapse the interstitial spaces left over from their formation, but not fully, leaving some residual porosity.[3]

Many TNOs in the size range of about 400–1000 km have oddly low densities, in the range of about 1.0–1.2 g/cm3, that are substantially less than dwarf planets such as Pluto, Eris and Ceres, which have densities closer to 2. Brown has suggested that large low-density bodies must be composed almost entirely of water ice, since he presumed that bodies of this size would necessarily be solid. However, this leaves unexplained why TNOs both larger than 1000 km and smaller than 400 km, and indeed comets, are composed of a substantial fraction of rock, leaving only this size range to be primarily icy. Experiments with water ice at the relevant pressures and temperatures suggest that substantial porosity could remain in this size range, and it is possible that adding rock to the mix would further increase resistance to collapsing into a solid body. Bodies with internal porosity remaining from their formation could be at best only partially differentiated, in their deep interiors. (If a body had begun to collapse into a solid body, there should be evidence in the form of fault systems from when its surface contracted.) The higher albedos of larger bodies is also evidence of full differentiation, as such bodies were presumably resurfaced with ice from their interiors. Grundy et al.[3] propose therefore that mid-size (< 1000 km), low-density (< 1.4 g/ml) and low-albedo (< ~0.2) bodies such as Salacia, Varda, Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà and (55637) 2002 UX25 are not differentiated planetary bodies like Orcus, Quaoar and Charon. The boundary between the two populations would appear to be in the range of about 900–1000 km.[3]

If Grundy et al.[3] are correct, then among known bodies in the outer Solar System only Pluto–Charon, Eris, Haumea, Gonggong, Makemake, Quaoar, Orcus, Sedna, and perhaps Salacia (which was determined to have a higher density of 1.5 g/cm3 a few months after Grundy's assessment)[18] are likely to have achieved hydrostatic equilibrium at some point in their histories, and thus to possibly still be dwarf planets at present.

Likeliest dwarf planets

The assessments of the IAU, Tancredi et al., Brown and Grundy et al. for the dozen largest potential dwarf planets are as follows. For the IAU, the acceptance criteria were for naming purposes. Several of these objects had not yet been discovered when Tancredi et al. did their analysis. Brown's sole criterion is diameter; he accepts a great many more as highly likely to be dwarf planets (see below). Grundy et al. did not determine which bodies were dwarf planets, but rather which could not be. A red marks objects too dark or not dense enough to be solid bodies, a question mark the smaller bodies consistent with being differentiated (the question of current equilibrium was not addressed).

Iapetus, Earth's Moon, and Mimas are included for comparison, as none of these objects are in equilibrium today. Triton and Charon (which formed as TNO's and are likely in equilibrium) are also added for comparison.

Designation Measured mean
diameter (km)
Density
(g/cm3)
Albedo Per IAU Per Tancredi
et al.[16]
Per Brown[17] Per Grundy
et al.[3]
Category
The Moon 34753.3440.136(measured, not in equilibrium for its current rotation)[19][20](moon of Earth)
N I Triton 2707±22.060.76(measured, likely in equilibrium)[21](moon of Neptune)
134340 Pluto 2376±31.854±0.0060.49 to 0.662:3 resonant
136199 Eris 2326±122.52±0.070.96SDO
136108 Haumea  1560 2.0180.51±0.02
(naming rules)
cubewano
S VIII Iapetus 1469±61.09±0.010.05 to 0.5(measured, not in equilibrium)[22](moon of Saturn)
136472 Makemake 1430+38
−22
1.9±0.20.81+0.03
−0.05

(naming rules)
cubewano
225088 Gonggong 1230±501.74±0.160.14NA3:10 resonant
P I Charon 1212±11.70±0.020.2 to 0.5(measured, likely in equilibrium)[23](moon of Pluto)
50000 Quaoar 1121±1.22.0±0.50.11cubewano
90377 Sedna 995±80?0.32±0.06detached
1 Ceres 946±22.16±0.010.09(measured, close to equilibrium)[24]asteroid
90482 Orcus 910+50
−40
1.53±0.140.23±0.022:3 resonant
120347 Salacia 846±211.5±0.120.04cubewano
(307261) 2002 MS4 765±47?0.05+0.04
−0.02
NAcubewano
(532037) 2013 FY27 740+90
−85
?0.17+0.05
−0.03
NA?SDO
(208996) 2003 AZ84 727+62
−67
0.87±0.01?0.10?2:3 resonant
S I Mimas 396±11.145±0.0070.962±0.004(gravitationally rounded, but not in hydrostatic equilibrium for its current rotation)[25](moon of Saturn)

Observations in 2019 showed that the asteroid 10 Hygiea was close to spherical, so it is possible that it may be in hydrostatic equilibrium (and thus a dwarf planet) as well.[26][27]

Largest candidates

The following trans-Neptunian objects have estimated diameters at least 400 kilometres (250 mi) and so are considered "probable" dwarf planets by Brown's assessment. Not all bodies estimated to be this size are included. The list is complicated by bodies such as 47171 Lempo that were at first assumed to be large single objects but later discovered to be binary or triple systems of smaller bodies.[28] The dwarf planet Ceres is added for comparison. Explanations and sources for the measured masses and diameters can be found in the corresponding articles linked in column "Designation" of the table.

The Best diameter column uses a measured diameter if one exists, otherwise it uses Brown's assumed-albedo diameter. If Brown does not list the body, the size is calculated from an assumed-albedo of 9% per Johnston.[29]

Designation Best[lower-alpha 1]
diameter
km
Measured per
measured
Per Brown[17] Diameter
per assumed albedo
Result
per Tancredi[16]
Category
Mass[lower-alpha 2]
(1018 kg)
H

[30][31]

Diameter
(km)
Geometric
albedo[lower-alpha 3]
(%)
H
Diameter[lower-alpha 4]
(km)
Geometric
albedo

(%)
Small
albedo=100%
(km)
Large
albedo=4%
(km)
134340 Pluto237613030−0.762376±3.263−0.723296418869430accepted (measured)2:3 resonant
136199 Eris232616600−1.12326±1290−1.1233099220611028accepted (measured)SDO
136108 Haumea156040060.21560±12580.412528012126060acceptedcubewano
136472 Makemake14303100−0.21430±141040.114268114577286acceptedcubewano
225088 Gonggong123017502.341230±5014212901963631803:10 resonant
50000 Quaoar112114002.741121±1.2112.71092133631813accepted (and recommended)cubewano
90377 Sedna9951.83995±80331.81041325722861accepted (and recommended)detached
1 Ceres9399393.36939±292831414asteroid belt
90482 Orcus9176412.31917±25252.3983234592293accepted (and recommended)2:3 resonant
120347 Salacia8464924.25846±2154.29214188939possiblecubewano
(55565) 2002 AW1977683.3768+39
−38
143.8754122911454acceptedcubewano
174567 Varda7672663.61767+14
−15
123.7689132521260possiblecubewano
(307261) 2002 MS47653.6765±477496052531266cubewano
(532037) 2013 FY277403.15740+90
−85
183.5721143121558SDO
(208996) 2003 AZ847323.74732±26113.7747112371187accepted2:3 resonant
(90568) 2004 GV96804.25680±3484.27038188939acceptedcubewano
(145452) 2005 RN436793.89679+55
−73
113.9697112221108possiblecubewano
(55637) 2002 UX256651253.87665±29113.9704112241118cubewano
2018 VG186563.63.6656122531266SDO
229762 Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà6551363.7655±14153.7612172421209SDO
20000 Varuna6543.76654+154
−102
124.175692351176acceptedcubewano
(455502) 2003 UZ4136504.38650+1
−175
74.75368964812:3 resonant
2014 UZ2246353.4635+65
−72
134688112781388SDO
(523794) 2015 RR2456263.84.2626102311155SDO
(523692) 2014 EZ516263.84.2626102311155detached
28978 Ixion6173.83617+19
−20
143.8674122281139accepted2:3 resonant
2010 RF436153.94.2615102211103SDO
19521 Chaos6004.8600+140
−130
656125146729cubewano
2015 KH1625874.14.4587102011006detached
(303775) 2005 QU1825843.8584+155
−144
133.8415332311155cubewano
2010 JO17957444.557492111053SDO
2010 KZ3957444.557492111053detached
(523759) 2014 WK5095744.44.55749175876detached
2012 VP11357444.557492111053detached
(78799) 2002 XW935655.5565+71
−73
45.45844106528SDO
(523671) 2013 FZ275614.44.656191758761:2 resonant
(523639) 2010 RE645614.44.65619175876SDO
(543354) 2014 AN555614.14.656192011006SDO
2004 XR1905614.34.65619183917detached
2002 XV935495.42549+22
−23
45.456441105482:3 resonant
2010 FX865494.74.65499153763cubewano
(528381) 2008 ST2915494.44.65499175876detached
(84922) 2003 VS25484.1548+30
−45
154.1537152011006not accepted2:3 resonant
2006 QH1815364.34.75368183917SDO
2014 YA505364.64.75368160799cubewano
2017 OF695334.61607992:3 resonant
(145451) 2005 RM435244.4524+96
−103
4.85248175876possibleSDO
2015 BP5195244.54.85248167837SDO
(482824) 2013 XC265244.44.85248175876cubewano
(470443) 2007 XV505244.44.85248175876cubewano
(470308) 2007 JH435134.54.951381678372:3 resonant
(278361) 2007 JJ435134.54.95138167837cubewano
(523681) 2014 BV645134.74.95138153763cubewano
2014 HA2005134.74.95138153763SDO
2014 FC725134.74.95138153763detached
2015 BZ5185134.74.95138153763cubewano
2014 WP5095134.54.95138167837cubewano
(120348) 2004 TY3645124.52512+37
−40
104.75368166829not accepted2:3 resonant
(472271) 2010 TQ1825094.7153763cubewano
(145480) 2005 TB1905074.4507+127
−116
144.446915175876detached
(84522) 2002 TC3025043.9504±12144.25911222111032:5 resonant
(523645) 2010 VK201501555017133665cubewano
2013 AT1835014.655017160799SDO
(523742) 2014 TZ855014.8550171467294:7 resonant
2014 FC695014.655017160799detached
(499514) 2010 OO1275014.655017160799cubewano
(202421) 2005 UQ5134983.6498+63
−75
264643112531266cubewano
(315530) 2008 AP1294904.75.14907153763cubewano
(470599) 2008 OG194904.75.14907153763SDO
(523635) 2010 DN934904.85.14907146729detached
2003 QX1134905.15.14907127635SDO
2003 UA41449055.14907133665SDO
(472271) 2014 UM334904.75.14907153763cubewano
(523693) 2014 FT7149055.149071336654:7 resonant
2014 HZ19947955.24797133665cubewano
2014 BZ5747955.24797133665cubewano
(523752) 2014 VU374795.15.24797127635cubewano
(495603) 2015 AM2814794.85.24797146729detached
(48639) 1995 TL84794.85.24797146729SDO
(175113) 2004 PF1154684.54468+39
−41
124.5482121648212:3 resonant
2015 AJ28146855.346871336654:7 resonant
(523757) 2014 WH5094685.25.34687121606cubewano
2014 JP8046855.346871336652:3 resonant
2014 JR804685.15.346871276352:3 resonant
(523750) 2014 US22446855.34687133665cubewano
2013 FS284684.95.34687139696SDO
2010 RF1884685.25.34687121606SDO
2011 WJ15746855.34687133665SDO
(120132) 2003 FY1284604.6460±21125.14678160799SDO
2010 ER654575.25.44576121606detached
(445473) 2010 VZ984574.85.44576146729SDO
2010 RF644575.75.4457696481cubewano
(523640) 2010 RO644575.25.44576121606cubewano
2010 TJ4575.75.4457696481SDO
2014 OJ3944575.15.44576127635detached
2014 QW4414575.25.44576121606cubewano
2014 AM554575.25.44576121606cubewano
(523772) 2014 XR404575.25.44576121606cubewano
(523653) 2011 OA604575.15.44576127635cubewano
(26181) 1996 GQ214564.9456+89
−105
65.34687139696SDO
(119951) 2002 KX144554.86455±27104.946810142709cubewano
(84719) 2002 VR1284495.58449+42
−43
55.645951025092:3 resonant
(471137) 2010 ET654475.15.54476127635SDO
(471165) 2010 HE794475.15.544761276352:3 resonant
2010 EL1394475.65.544761015042:3 resonant
(523773) 2014 XS404475.45.54476111553cubewano
2014 XY404475.15.54476127635cubewano
2015 AH2814475.15.54476127635cubewano
2014 CO234475.35.54476116579cubewano
(523690) 2014 DN1434475.35.54476116579cubewano
(523738) 2014 SH3494475.45.54476111553cubewano
2014 FY714475.45.544761115534:7 resonant
(471288) 2011 GM274475.15.54476127635cubewano
(532093) 2013 HV1564475.25.544761216061:2 resonant
2013 SF1064435.0133665SDO
(82075) 2000 YW1344374.74437+118
−137
134.95138167837detached
471143 Dziewanna4333.8433+63
−64
303.8475252311155SDO
(471165) 2002 JR1464235.11276352:3 resonant
(444030) 2004 NT334234.8423+87
−80
125.149071467294:7 resonant
(182934) 2002 GJ324166.16416+81
−73
36.12351278390SDO
(469372) 2001 QF2984085.43408+40
−45
75.442171095452:3 resonant
38628 Huya4065.04406±161054668130652accepted2:3 resonant
2012 VB1164045.2121606cubewano
(307616) 2003 QW904015401+63
−48
85.44576133665cubewano
(469615) 2004 PT1074006.33400+45
−51
36302872360cubewano
  1. The measured diameter, else Brown's estimated diameter, else the diameter calculated from H using an assumed albedo of 9%.
  2. This is the total system mass (including moons), except for Pluto and Ceres.
  3. The geometric albedo is calculated from the measured absolute magnitude and measured diameter via the formula:
  4. Diameters with the text in red indicate that Brown's bot derived them from heuristically expected albedo.

See also

References

  1. Mike Brown. "The Dwarf Planets". Retrieved 20 January 2008.
  2. Stern, Alan (24 August 2012). "The Kuiper Belt at 20: Paradigm Changes in Our Knowledge of the Solar System". Applied Physics Laboratory. Today we know of more than a dozen dwarf planets in the solar system [and] it is estimated that the ultimate number of dwarf planets we will discover in the Kuiper Belt and beyond may well exceed 10,000.
  3. Grundy, W.M.; Noll, K.S.; Buie, M.W.; Benecchi, S.D.; Ragozzine, D.; Roe, H.G. (December 2019). "The mutual orbit, mass, and density of transneptunian binary Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà ((229762) 2007 UK126)" (PDF). Icarus. 334: 30–38. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2018.12.037. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 April 2019.
  4. Bruton, Dan. "Conversion of Absolute Magnitude to Diameter for Minor Planets". Department of Physics & Astronomy (Stephen F. Austin State University). Archived from the original on 23 March 2010. Retrieved 13 June 2008.
  5. "IAU 2006 General Assembly: Result of the IAU Resolution votes". International Astronomical Union. 24 August 2006. Archived from the original on 3 January 2007. Retrieved 26 January 2008.
  6. "Dwarf Planets". NASA. Archived from the original on 4 July 2012. Retrieved 22 January 2008.
  7. "Plutoid chosen as name for Solar System objects like Pluto" (Press release). 11 June 2008. Archived from the original on 2 July 2011. Retrieved 15 June 2008.
  8. "ESO science paper 1918a" (PDF).
  9. Hanuš, J.; Vernazza, P.; Viikinkoski, M.; Ferrais, M.; Rambaux, N.; Podlewska-Gaca, E.; Drouard, A.; Jorda, L.; Jehin, E.; Carry, B.; Marsset, M.; Marchis, F.; Warner, B.; Behrend, R.; Asenjo, V.; Berger, N.; Bronikowska, M.; Brothers, T.; Charbonnel, S.; Colazo, C.; Coliac, J-F.; Duffard, R.; Jones, A.; Leroy, A.; Marciniak, A.; Melia, R.; Molina, D.; Nadolny, J.; Person, M.; et al. (2020). "arXiv paper 1911.13049". Astronomy & Astrophysics. A65: 633. arXiv:1911.13049. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936639.
  10. Savage, Don; Jones, Tammy; Villard, Ray (19 April 1995). "Asteroid or mini-planet? Hubble maps the ancient surface of Vesta". HubbleSite (Press release). News Release STScI-1995-20. Retrieved 17 October 2006.
  11. "Iapetus' peerless equatorial ridge". www.planetary.org. Retrieved 2 April 2018.
  12. "DPS 2015: First reconnaissance of Ceres by Dawn". www.planetary.org. Retrieved 2 April 2018.
  13. Garrick; Bethell; et al. (2014). "The tidal-rotational shape of the Moon and evidence for polar wander". Nature. 512 (7513): 181–184. Bibcode:2014Natur.512..181G. doi:10.1038/nature13639. PMID 25079322.
  14. Balogh, A.; Ksanfomality, Leonid; Steiger, Rudolf von (23 February 2008). Hydrostatic equilibrium of Mercury. ISBN 9780387775395 via Google Books.
  15. "[no title cited]". doi:10.1002/2015GL065101. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  16. Tancredi, G. (2010). "Physical and dynamical characteristics of icy "dwarf planets" (plutoids)". Icy Bodies of the Solar System: Proceedings IAU Symposium No. 263, 2009. 263: 173–185. Bibcode:2010IAUS..263..173T. doi:10.1017/S1743921310001717.
  17. Michael E. Brown (13 September 2019). "How many dwarf planets are there in the outer solar system? (updates daily)". California Institute of Technology. Archived from the original on 13 October 2019. Retrieved 24 November 2019.
  18. Grundy, W.M.; Noll, K.S.; Roe, H.G.; Buie, M.W.; Porter, S.B.; Parker, A.H.; et al. (December 2019). "Mutual orbit orientations of transneptunian binaries" (PDF). Icarus. 334: 62–78. Bibcode:2019Icar..334...62G. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2019.03.035. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 April 2019.
  19. Matsuyama, Isamu (January 2013). "Fossil figure contribution to the lunar figure". Icarus. 222 (1): 411–414. Bibcode:2013Icar..222..411M. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2012.10.025.
  20. Bursa, M. (October 1984). "Secular Love Numbers and Hydrostatic Equilibrium of Planets". Earth, Moon, and Planets. 31 (2): 135–140. Bibcode:1984EM&P...31..135B. doi:10.1007/BF00055525.
  21. Thomas, P.C. (December 2000). "The Shape of Triton from Limb Profiles". Icarus. 148 (2): 587–588. Bibcode:2000Icar..148..587T. doi:10.1006/icar.2000.6511.
  22. Thomas, P.C. (July 2010). "Sizes, shapes, and derived properties of the saturnian satellites after the Cassini nominal mission" (PDF). Icarus. 208 (1): 395–401. Bibcode:2010Icar..208..395T. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2010.01.025.
  23. Kholshevnikovab, K.V.; Borukhaa, M.A.; Eskina, B.B.; Mikryukov, D.V. (23 October 2019). "On the asphericity of the figures of Pluto and Charon". Icarus. 181: 104777. doi:10.1016/j.pss.2019.104777.
  24. Raymond, C.; Castillo-Rogez, J.C.; Park, R.S.; Ermakov, A.; et al. (September 2018). "Dawn Data Reveal Ceres' Complex Crustal Evolution" (PDF). European Planetary Science Congress. 12.
  25. Tajeddine, R.; Rambaux, N.; Lainey, V.; Charnoz, S.; et al. (17 October 2014). "Constraints on Mimas' interior from Cassini ISS libration measurements". Science. 346 (6207): 322–324. Bibcode:2014Sci...346..322T. doi:10.1126/science.1255299. PMID 25324382.
  26. Vernazza, P.; Jorda, L.; Ševeček, P.; Brož, M.; Viikinkoski, M.; Hanuš, J.; et al. (28 October 2019). "A basin-free spherical shape as an outcome of a giant impact on asteroid Hygiea" (PDF). Nature Astronomy. 273 (2): 136–141. doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0915-8. hdl:10045/103308. Retrieved 28 October 2019.
  27. Strickland, Ashley; Woodyatt, Amy (28 October 2019). "It's an asteroid! No, it's the new smallest dwarf planet in our solar system". CNN. Retrieved 28 October 2019.
  28. "AstDys (47171) 1999TC36 Ephemerides". Department of Mathematics, University of Pisa, Italy. Retrieved 7 December 2009.
  29. Johnston, Wm. Robert (24 May 2019). "List of Known Trans-Neptunian Objects". Johnston's Archive. Retrieved 11 August 2019.
  30. "List Of Trans-Neptunian Objects". Minor Planet Center.
  31. "List Of Centaurs and Scattered-Disk Objects". Minor Planet Center.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.