CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 242Astro and Planetary ScienceStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesSpace Satellite Systems and Control

Discovery of a Candidate Inner Oort Cloud Planetoid

Open access
Brown, Michael E., Trujillo, Chadwick, Rabinowitz, David·2004·The Astrophysical Journal
DOI 10.1086/422095
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We report the discovery of the minor planet (90377) Sedna, the most distant object ever seen in the solar system. Prediscovery images from 2001, 2002, and 2003 have allowed us to refine the orbit sufficiently to conclude that Sedna is on a highly eccentric orbit that permanently resides well beyond the Kuiper Belt with a semimajor axis of 480 ± 40 AU and a perihelion of 76 ± 4 AU. Such an orbit is unexpected in our current understanding of the solar system but could be the result of scattering by a yet-to-be-discovered planet, perturbation by an anomalously close stellar encounter, or formation of the solar system within a cluster of stars. In all of these cases a significant additional population is likely present, and in the two most likely cases Sedna is best considered a member of the inner Oort Cloud, which then extends to much smaller semimajor axes than previously expected. Continued discovery and orbital characterization of objects in this inner Oort Cloud will verify the genesis of this unexpected population.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/422095

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The long-term modulation of scattered KBO eccentricities provides a natural explanation for the existence of distant detached objects such as Sedna and 2012 VP113.

    “the long-term modulation of scattered KBO eccentricities provides a natural explanation for the existence of the so-called distant detached objects such as Sedna and 2012 VP113 (Brown et al. 2004; Trujillo & Sheppard 2014).”

    From Evidence for a Distant Giant Planet in the Solar System (2016) · cites this paper as Brown et al. 2004

    Section 4.1 says scattering by the major planets cannot place Sedna on its 76 AU perihelion orbit; it considers an unseen planet but deems that possibility unlikely. Section 4.2 likewise says ordinary long-term external perturbations are too weak for an orbit like Sedna’s. The paper therefore does not present long-term modulation of scattered KBO eccentricities as a natural explanation for Sedna, and it does not discuss 2012 VP113. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • A large perturbing mass either is or was present in the outer solar system at some time.

    “Since the time of the discovery of Sedna, it has been clear that a large perturbing mass either is or was present in the outer solar system at some time (Brown et al. 2004).”

    From Observational constraints on the orbit and location of Planet Nine in the outer solar system (2016) · cites this paper as Brown et al. 2004

    Section 4 (Origin) says Sedna’s orbit requires perturbation by an unseen planet or forces beyond the solar system. Section 4.1 describes an Earth-mass planet as a possibility but deems it unlikely, while section 4.3 favors early stellar-cluster encounters. The paper therefore supports the need for a perturbation, but not the assertion that a large perturbing mass was necessarily present in the outer solar system. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The orbit of the distant object Sedna (2003 VB12), with perihelion distance q = 76 AU, can only be explained by perturbations from an external agent.

    “The orbit of the distant object Sedna (2003 VB12), on the other hand, which has perihelion distance of q = 76 AU, can only be explained by perturbations from an external agent.”

    From The planet nine hypothesis (2019) · cites this paper as Brown et al. (2004)

  • Sedna, 2012 VP113, and 2015 TG387 have perihelion distances q = 76, 80, and 65 AU respectively.

    “Notable exceptions to this rule of thumb include Sedna (Brown et al., 2004), 2012 VP113 (Trujillo and Sheppard, 2014), 2015 TG387 (Sheppard et al., 2018) which have q = 76 ; 80 ; and 65 AU respectively.”

    From The planet nine hypothesis (2019) · cites this paper as Brown et al., 2004

  • The most extreme trans-Neptunian objects display a common tilt of the orbital planes.

    “These anomalies include the striking alignment in the orientations of eccentric orbits in physical space, a common tilt of the orbital planes, perihelion distances that stretch far beyond the gravitational reach of Neptune, as well as excursions of trans-Neptunian objects into highly inclined, and even retrograde orbits.”

    From The planet nine hypothesis (2019) · cites this paper as Brown et al. 2004

    The Orbital Solution section reports Sedna’s inclination, but does not compare the orbital planes of multiple trans-Neptunian objects. The Discussion says that only a single object was available for assessing this proposed population. A search for a shared tilt or orbital-plane alignment found no supporting passage in our copy; page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [3]3. Clarke, C. J., Bonnell, I. A., & Hillenbrand, L. A. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, ed. V. Mannings, A. P. Boss, & S. S. Russell (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 151
  2. [9]9. Goswami, J. N., & Vanhala, H. A. T. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, ed. V. Mannings, A. P. Boss, & S. S. Russell (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 963
  3. [15]15. Tombaugh, C. W. 1961, in Planets and Satellites, ed. G. P. Kuiper & B. M. Middlehurst (Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press), 12

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Brown, M. E., Trujillo, C., & Rabinowitz, D.
Affiliations
  • California Institute of Technology (US)
  • International Gemini Observatory (US)
  • Yale University (US)
ORCID
Trujillo, Chadwick
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Publisher
American Astronomical Society
Published
2004-12-10
Volume
617
Issue
1
Pages
645-649
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
DOI
10.1086/422095
OpenAlex
W2102529734
Cited by
242
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
7.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Astrophysical Journal (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astro and Planetary Science
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Space Satellite Systems and Control
Keywords
Sedna, trans-Neptunian objects, highly eccentric orbits, orbital elements, Kuiper belt

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review