Search

We describe recent results on the CO/CO2/H2O composition of comets together with a survey of older literature (primarily for CO/H2O) and compare these with models of the protoplanetary disk. Even with the currently small sample, there is a wide dispersion in abundance ratios and little if any systematic difference between Jupiter-family comets (JFCs) and long-period and Halley-type comets (LPCs and HTCs). We argue that the cometary observations require reactions on grain surfaces to convert CO to CO2 and also require formation of all types of comets in largely, but not entirely, overlapping regions, probably between the CO and CO2 snow lines. Any difference in the regions of formation is in the opposite direction from the classical picture with the JFCs having formed closer to the Sun than the LPCs. In the classical picture, the LPCs formed in the region of the giant planets and the JFCs formed in the Kuiper Belt. However, these data suggest, consistent with suggestions on dynamical grounds, that the JFCs and LPCs formed in largely overlapping regions where the giant planets are today and with JFCs on average forming slightly closer to the Sun than did the LPCs. Presumably at least the JFCs passed through the scattered disk on their way to their present dynamical family. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: We consider the hypothesis that the layering observed on the surface of Comet 9P/Tempel 1 from the Deep Impact spacecraft and identified on other comet nuclei imaged by spacecraft (i.e., 19P/Borrelly and 81P/Wild 2) is ubiquitous on Jupiter family cometary nuclei and is an essential element of their internal structure. The observational characteristics of the layers on 9P/Tempel 1 are detailed and considered in the context of current theories of the accumulation and dynamical evolution of cometary nuclei. The works of Donn [Donn, B.D., 1990. Astron. Astrophys. 235, 441–446], Sirono and Greenberg [Sirono, S.-I., Greenberg, J.M., 2000. Icarus 145, 230–238] and the experiments of Wurm et al. [Wurm, G., Paraskov, G., Krauss, O., 2005. Icarus 178, 253–263] on the collision physics of porous aggregate bodies are used as basis for a conceptual model of the formation of layers. Our hypothesis is found to have implications for the place of origin of the JFCs and their subsequent dynamical history. Models of fragmentation and rubble pile building in the Kuiper belt in a period of collisional activity (e.g., [Kenyon, S.J., Luu, J.X., 1998. Astron. J. 115, 2136–2160; 1999a. Astron. J. 118, 1101–1119; 1999b. Astrophys. J. 526, 465–470; Farinella, P., Davis, D.R., Stern, S.A., 2000. In: Mannings, V., Boss, A.P., Russell, S.S. (Eds.), Protostars and Planets IV. Univ. of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 1255–1282; Durda, D.D., Stern, S.J., 2000. Icarus 145, 220–229]) following the formation of Neptune appear to be in conflict with the observed properties of the layers and irreconcilable with the hypothesis. Long-term residence in the scattered disk [Duncan, M.J., Levison, H.F., 1997. Science 276, 1670–1672; Duncan, M., Levison, H., Dones, L., 2004. In: Festou, M., Keller, H.U., Weaver, H.A. (Eds.), Comets II. Univ. of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 193–204] and/or a change in fragmentation outcome modeling may explain the long-term persistence of primordial layers. In any event, the existence of layers places constraints on the environment seen by the population of objects from which the Jupiter family comets originated. If correct, our hypothesis implies that the nuclei of Jupiter family comets are primordial remnants of the early agglomeration phase and that the physical structure of their interiors, except for the possible effects of compositional phase changes, is largely as it was when they were formed. We propose a new model for the interiors of Jupiter family cometary nuclei, called the talps or “layered pile” model, in which the interior consists of a core overlain by a pile of randomly stacked layers. We discuss how several cometary characteristics—layers, surface texture, indications of flow, compositional inhomogeneity, low bulk density low strength, propensity to split, etc., might be explained in terms of this model. Finally, we make some observational predictions and suggest goals for future space observations of these objects. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]