New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Saturn's 12 New Moons May Have Started as Three

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Three researchers from France, Canada and the United States discovered 12 additional moons orbiting Saturn this past year. Having now studied them in greater depth, they conclude that three or four larger moons collided with asteroids or comets and broke apart to create the new satellites. The findings are published in this week's Nature.

Most larger moons form from an accretion disk of dust and rocks that swirls around a fledgling planet. As a result, they orbit the planet in the direction that it spins. About half of the new moons, however, travel in the opposite, or retrograde, direction, suggesting that they came about in another way. Such retrograde orbits can occur when a planet's gravitational pull captures a passing body. But because the new moons follow irregular orbits and appear in clusters, the scientists suspect that they resulted from collisions. "With asteroids that cluster, the belief is they are pieces of what once was a big asteroid that got hit by something," Carl Hergenrother of the University of Arizona says. "It's possible that we're seeing the same thing with the satellites."

The scientists are still uncertain as to when the collisions occurred¿either when the planet formed about four billion years ago or more likely, at a later date. But the search for new moons is far from over. As astronomers discover increasingly smaller moons, they will have to address the question of what exactly qualifies as a moon. "Right now, we see irregular satellites as small as three kilometers around Saturn," Hergenrother says, "but there may be many smaller than that. These may go on a continuum in size all the way down to the size of dust."

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe