The Scientific Questions Posed by Comet C/1999 S4 (LINEAR)

Comet LINEAR (C/1999 S4) surprised astronomers during the summer of 2000 by pulling a disappearance act: its nucleus completely disrupted into a trail of debris on or about July 22nd. The principal scientific results are published in the 18 May 2001 issue of Science magazine. For your convenience, we provide here a listing of those papers, their authors, and a brief description of the observations presented by each.

Below we discuss some of the principal scientific questions posed by the demise of C/LINEAR.

  1. Did C/LINEAR completely disintegrate?
    Yes, the nucleus, which was originally a single object about a kilometer (0.62 miles) across, was reduced to a shower of fine dust particles (micrometers in size) and to some football field sized fragments (roughly 100 meters or 100 yards across) that were picked up by the Earth-orbiting Hubble Space Telescope (HST) and the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile. But the amount of material in the dust and large fragments is about 100 times less massive than the original nucleus, which creates a missing mass problem. Apparently, much of the material in the original nucleus ended up in debris that was between about 1 cm and 50 meters in size, which we could not see directly with telescopes because the objects in that size range didn't have very much surface area to scatter sunlight. The tiny dust particles from C/LINEAR outshined everything else because they have so much surface area (think about shattering something to bits and comparing the surface area of the bits to the surface area of the original object; the bits win hands down), but they contain very little of the mass.

  2. Are the fragments created by the breakup of C/LINEAR the primordial planetesimals that came together to form its nucleus?
    Possibly, but it's difficult to say for sure. The evidence from the breakup suggests that C/LINEAR fell apart rather gently, thereby preserving the signature of its original ``rubble pile'' structure. In other words, it's not as if someone stuck a piece of dynamite in the nucleus and blew it to bits, which would have wiped out any evidence of the formation process. In the case of C/LINEAR, we think that observing the unraveling of its nucleus is similar to watching its formation 4.6 billion years ago in reverse. Understanding how cometary nuclei formed is critical for understanding how the rest of the Solar System formed because comets are the basic building blocks for the cores of the Giant Planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune). The results on the breakup of C/LINEAR will help to refine the models being developed to explain the formation of the Solar System.

  3. What triggered the comet's fragmentation?
    We don't know for sure. We do know that tidal disruption, which was the mechanism responsible for tearing apart Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 when it passed close to Jupiter in 1992, was not responsible for the demise of C/LINEAR because C/LINEAR didn't pass close enough to any planet. Also, C/LINEAR's nucleus had very little supervolatile carbon monoxide (CO) ice, so pressure buildup from the vigorous sublimation (going directly from the solid to vapor phase) of CO ice in the interior of the nucleus was probably not responsible for the demise either. Some contributing factors to C/LINEAR's breakup may have included:

    • centrifugal forces due to fast rotation (if the comet's rotational period was as fast as 2 to 3 hours, as suggested by some unpublished observations),

    • lack of icy ``glue'' (icy material sticks together better than rocky material and C/LINEAR seems to have been depleted in icy material compared to other comets),

    • a combination of increased heating as the comet got closer to the Sun, a sunward-pointing rotational axis (which concentrates the heating at the pole), and internal pressure buildup from the sublimation of supervolatiles (even though carbon monoxide was depleted, maybe carbon dioxide was not).

  4. What are the implications for the physical structure of cometary nuclei?
    Since the forces that disrupted C/LINEAR were apparently very weak (you could easily pull the nucleus of C/LINEAR apart with your bare hands), the observations of C/LINEAR have reinforced the idea that at least some comets are ``rubble piles'' having high porosity and held together by little more than the mutual gravity of the individual pieces comprising the nucleus. Some detailed models for rubble pile nuclei, for example that of Stuart Weidenschilling of the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, Arizona, suggest that the largest components of the rubble pile should be about 100 meters across, i.e., similar in size to the largest C/LINEAR fragments detected by the HST and VLT observations. However, unlike the model, the observations of C/LINEAR suggest that most of the mass in the debris created after the breakup ended up in objects between about 1 cm and 50 meters in size. So the principal building blocks of cometary nuclei might be somewhat smaller than originally envisaged and there may have to be some fine-tuning of the current models for cometary formation.

  5. Where did C/LINEAR form?
    There are two pieces of evidence suggesting that C/LINEAR formed relatively close to the Sun, compared to other comets, possibly near the orbit of Jupiter. First, infrared observations by a team led by Mike Mumma showed that C/LINEAR was strongly depleted of ``supervolatiles'', such as carbon monoxide, methane, and ethane. Secondly, by comparing the total amount of ice measured by the SWAN/SOHO instrument (by Teemu Makinen and his team) to the mass estimated for the original nucleus (by Tony Farnham and his team), one concludes that C/LINEAR had much more meteoritic material than icy material (which makes C/LINEAR more akin to a ``snowy dirtball'' than a ``dirty snowball''). Both pieces of evidence point towards a formation of C/LINEAR's nucleus relatively close to the Sun. Since most of the mass in the dust disk from which the planets formed 4.6 billion years ago was near Jupiter, and since the temperatures in that region were warm enough to prevent supervolatile retention, while cold enough to allow some ice accumulation, a formation site near Jupiter seems reasonable.

  6. Was C/LINEAR homogeneous in composition?
    One of the nice things about having a comet breakup completely is that we get a rare opportunity to examine the innards of the nucleus. Radio observations (by Dominique Bockelee-Morvan and her team) of the gases evolved from the debris after the breakup show that the chemical composition of the interior of C/LINEAR is essentially identical to the composition of its surface, which is what we were sampling prior to breakup. So it appears, at least for ``new'' comets like C/LINEAR that are making their first passage through the inner Solar System, that cometary nuclei do not show strong differentiation with depth.


Go to the top of this webpage

Back to the main C/LINEAR page.

Direct questions to: Hal Weaver
Last updated: 18 May 2001