Solar System’s Moons May Have Emerged from Long-Gone Rings

The solar system's moons may have emerged from long-gone planetary baubles

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

As Carl Sagan once said, “If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.” And if you wish to make a moon from scratch, according to new research, you must first create planets with rings (after inventing the universe, of course).

Earth's moon may have emerged from a long-vanished ring system, much like the rings still encircling Saturn—and the same goes for many of the satellites orbiting the other planets. The bulk of the solar system's regular satellites—those moons that stick close to their planets in roughly equatorial orbits—formed this way, rather than taking shape simultaneously with the planets as a direct result of planet formation, French astrophysicists have concluded. The researchers reported their findings in a November 2012 issue of Science.

Through theoretical modeling, Aurélien Crida of the University of Nice Sophia-Antipolis and Sébastien Charnoz of the University of Paris Diderot found that the moon-formation action begins at the edge of a planetary ring, where a satellite can take shape without being shredded by the gravitational pull of the planet. There moonlets coagulate from the ring material before migrating outward. As the ring system spits out moonlet after moonlet, the small objects merge to form larger moons, which may merge in turn as they spiral outward from the planet.


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.


The new hypothesis seems to explain a key commonality among the regular satellites of Saturn, Uranus and Neptune—namely, that moons farther from their respective planet tend to have larger masses than their closer-in neighbors. Like a snowball rolling downhill, the coalescing moons grow larger and larger as they drift farther from the planet and its rings and undergo progressively more mergers along the way. The end result is a neatly ordered satellite system, with small moons on the inside built from few moonlets and large moons farther out built from numerous moonlets.

Planetary scientists generally accept that a giant impact into the newly formed Earth ejected a huge cloud of material that became our moon. In Crida and Charnoz's conception, that ejecta first flattened into a ring around the planet, which then spread out and coagulated into the moon.

The new hypothesis is not without its problems. For example, if extensive, Saturn-like ring systems once adorned Neptune and Uranus, where are they now? “We have a few ideas, but nothing too convincing,” Crida says. “But I think we can find good reasons for the disappearance of the rings, and the satellites remain as the smoking gun.”

John Matson is a former reporter and editor for Scientific American who has written extensively about astronomy and physics.

More by John Matson
Scientific American Magazine Vol 308 Issue 2This article was published with the title “Ring Theory” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 308 No. 2 (), p. 15
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0213-15a

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe