Deconvolving the complex structure of the asteroid belt

TL;DR

This paper explores the complex dynamical evolution of the asteroid belt, emphasizing the importance of observational data over uncertain theoretical parameters to understand its structure and history.

Contribution

It highlights the limitations of current models due to parameter uncertainties and emphasizes the role of observational constraints in deconvolving asteroid belt structure.

Findings

Size-frequency distribution differs from equilibrium models

Significant correlations between asteroid sizes and orbital elements

Limitations of Hierarchical Clustering Method in family identification

Abstract

The asteroid belt is a unique source of information on some of the most important questions facing solar system science. These questions include the sizes, numbers, types and orbital distributions of the planetesimals that formed the planets, and the identification of those asteroids that are the sources of meteorites and near-Earth asteroids. Answering these questions requires an understanding of the dynamical evolution of the asteroid belt, but this evolution is governed by a complex interplay of mechanisms that include catastrophic disruption, orbital evolution driven by Yarkovsky radiation forces, and chaotic orbital evolution driven by gravitational forces. While the timescales of these loss mechanisms have been calculated using estimates of some critical parameters that include the thermal properties, strengths and mean densities of the asteroids, we argue here that the uncertainties in these parameters are so large that deconvolution of the structure of the asteroid belt must be guided primarily by observational constraints. We argue that observations of the inner asteroid belt indicate that the size-frequency distribution is not close to the equilibrium distribution postulated by Dohnanyi (1969). We also discuss the correlations observed between the sizes and the orbital elements of the asteroids. While some of these correlations are significant and informative, others are spurious and may arise from the limitations of the Hierarchical Clustering Method that is currently used to define family membership.