The young long-period comet family of Saturn

Abstract

The distributions of long‐period comets with respect to the minimum distance Δ between their orbits and the orbit of Saturn or Jupiter, constructed by Konopleva using data up to 1972, exhibit a sharp peak at Δ<0.5 au for the Saturnian family, while being fairly monotonic for Jupiter. Hence, in view of the appreciable eccentricity of Saturn's orbit and the rotation of its perihelion longitude with a period of 47 kyr, the conclusion was drawn by Drobyshevski that the objects belonging to this peak are young (10 kyr). Similar distributions constructed using more recent data show less pronounced differences between one another. Analysis of the distributions for various epochs shows that the initially noted difference is due to observational selection, being inherent to brighter comets. Since on average the cometary activity fades with age, the conclusion that the Saturnian family comets, forming the peak at Δ<0.5 au, are young is all the more substantiated. The question concerning the origin of these comets, which in all likelihood were ejected over a period of a decade from deep inside the Saturnian sphere of influence, is still open. The only self‐consistent hypothesis that we see now is that of their appearance as a result of an explosion of the electrolysed ice envelope of Titan. We encourage the development of other explanations.

I.S.Astapovich and a cometary nature of Tunguska meteorite of 1908

“…В системе Галилеевых спутников за 4.5 млрд. лет произошло 5-6 взрывов, что объясняет их свойства и различия (Каллисто пока не взрывалась), льды Титана взорвались всего ∼ 10 4 лет назад [31,35], а взрыв плутоноподобного Фаэтона со спутником породил главный пояс астероидов и, возможно, вызвал 3.9 аеонов назад тяжёлую Имбрийскую бомбардировку Луны [29]. Двумерные газодинамические расчёты взрыва Фаэтона выполненные высококвалифицированным коллективом из Федерального ядерного центра (Челябинск-70) показывают, что взрыв не разрушил его скальное ядро [38].…”

Stardust findings favor not only the planetary origin of comets but the underlying close-binary cosmogony of the Solar System as well

“…Callisto's ices have not exploded thus far. The ices on Titan seem to have exploded only ~10 4 years ago (the dating was done based on an analysis of the specific features in the orbits of young LP comets of Saturn's family (Drobyshevski, 1981(Drobyshevski, , 2000), an event that created its atmosphere, Saturn's rings etc. and has prompted a number of predictions many of which have already found confirmation (for more details on this, see Drobyshevski, 2000).…”

“…The ices on Titan seem to have exploded only ~10 4 years ago (the dating was done based on an analysis of the specific features in the orbits of young LP comets of Saturn's family (Drobyshevski, 1981(Drobyshevski, , 2000), an event that created its atmosphere, Saturn's rings etc. and has prompted a number of predictions many of which have already found confirmation (for more details on this, see Drobyshevski, 2000). The kilometer-sized chunks of the outer layers ejected in the explosions become nuclei of SP comets which replenish their reservoirs in the giant planets' zones (with a part of them entering the LP orbits, which are naturally crossing orbits of the parent giant planets, Jupiter or Saturn).…”

Deep Impactmission to Tempel 1 favours New Explosive Cosmogony of comets

“…This traditional concept, however, comes in contradiction with practically all observational evidence. Consider here only a few, most obvious of them (Drobyshevski 1988b(Drobyshevski , 1997a(Drobyshevski , 2000): (i) each comet has its own specific signature distinguishing it from others (A'Hearn et al 2005b); (ii) ions and radicals were observed in the coma, in the immediate vicinity of the nucleus, much closer, in fact, than it would follow from the assumption of their photolytic formation from some hypothetical "parent" molecules (particularly remarkable in this respect is the detection of atomic and ionic carbon, C and C + ); (iii) the origin of CHON dust is unclear; (iv) the laws of conservation appear to be violated; indeed, an extremely small fraction of the surface area of the nucleus (≤5-10%) receiving an as small a part of incident solar energy releases large amounts of gases and dust in the form of jets, some of the jets being active on the night side of the nucleus as well; (v) origin of the comet outbursts is unclear; moreover, in about 5% of cometary apparitions their nucleus splits into fragments flying away with velocities of up to 1-10 m/s (Sekanina 1982), and so on. This list could be continued further; suffice it to recall the anomalous long-lasting (for weeks!)…”