New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Traces of Gravity

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.


Astronomers seem to invoke collisions, however improbable, when they cannot explain odd features of the solar system. Triton circles Neptune in reverse of its sister moons, for example, and the prior best guess was that Triton flew in from afar and knocked another moon out, like a well-struck cue ball. But if a pair of objects orbiting each other waltzed past Neptune, the one moving slower relative to the planet could have been snared by its gravity and begun orbiting the planet, and the other would have continued on its way, argue researchers in the May 11 Nature. Many such binary pairs have been spotted on the solar system's periphery over the past few years. Similarly, gravity, rather than a glancing blow from a protoplanet, might also account for Uranus and its moons' 98-degree axial tilt relative to the planet's orbital plane. Based on accepted trajectories for the young gas giants, a simulation reported in the April 27 issue of Nature indicates that the wobbling spin of Saturn could have nudged Uranus on its side during close encounters between the pair.

JR Minkel was a news reporter for Scientific American.

More by JR Minkel
Scientific American Magazine Vol 295 Issue 1This article was published with the title “Traces of Gravity” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 295 No. 1 (), p. 33
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0706-33c

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