Cited by 13Astro and Planetary ScienceStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesHistory and Developments in Astronomy

The Orbits of Uranus, Its Satellites and Rings, the Gravity Field of the Uranian System, and the Orientation of the Poles of Uranus and Its Satellites*

Open access
Jacobson, Robert A., Park, Ryan S.·2025·The Astronomical Journal

Abstract

R. A. Jacobson determined the orbits of the Uranian satellites, the masses of Uranus and its satellites, and the orientation of the pole of Uranus from Earth-based astrometry, Earth-based ring occultations, and observations acquired with the Voyager 2 spacecraft. Subsequent to that publication, several observers obtained new astrometry, and some of the original astrometry was rereduced against the Gaia star catalog. Moreover, R. G. French et al. made a new determination of the orbits of the Uranian rings, the orientation of the Uranian pole, and the gravity harmonics of Uranus from the entire set of Uranian ring occultations. Here we report the results of an analysis that redetermined the Uranus and satellite masses, satellite orbits, and the orbit of Uranus. In addition, we obtained a value for the Uranus tidal dissipation factor and produced an independent determination of the Uranian ring orbits, Uranus pole direction, and Uranus gravity harmonics. We also developed new expressions for the orientations of the satellites. We processed all of the data from our previous work plus the new and rereduced astrometry and the ring occultations. We extended our data arc forward to 2016 and backward to 1847. Our new orbit for Uranus is an update of that in ephemeris DE440 incorporating the occultation data and Gaia astrometry.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3847/1538-3881/ad99d1

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • If conservatively rescaled by a factor of ten, σr ≲ 320 km, in substantial agreement with the latest evaluations of Uranus's orbit uncertainty obtained by reducing astrometry data against the Gaia star catalogue.

    “If conservatively rescaled by a factor of ten, it yields σ r ≲ 320 km, in substantial agreement with the latest evaluations of the Uranus' orbit uncertainty [38] obtained by reducing astrometry data against the Gaia star catalogue.”

    From Has Kronos Devoured Planet Nine and Its Epigones? (2026) · cites this paper as [38]

Cited by

Authors
Jacobson, R. A., & Park, R. S.
Venue
The Astronomical Journal
Published
2025-01-13
Volume
169
Issue
2
Pages
65
ISSN
  • 0004-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-3881
OpenAlex
W4406365973
Cited by
13
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7
FWCI
5.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Astronomical Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
NASA (80NM0018D0004)
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 › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › History and Developments in Astronomy
Keywords
Uranus, Uranian satellites, Uranian rings, satellite orbits, gravity field, pole orientation, satellite orientation, astrometry, ring occultation, Voyager 2, Gaia astrometry

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