Talk:Nice model

Copied intro
Copied the intro from Iridia's article. Should probably do a page move so the article history is preserved. kwami (talk) 19:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I 2nd the page move. -- Kheider (talk) 05:45, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, done. This is a really nice subject, and certainly deserves some attention. I've been adding in my pathetic tidbits here and there about the evolution of the planets, but can't get very far without this. (If you click 'what links here' from the article, you'll be led to several references to the Nice model, some rather elaborate. The more detailed ones should probably be merged here.) I added the ASU link back to External, as it's a nice accessible summary and I think should be made more visible than just a ref. kwami (talk) 06:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, good - I did wonder what you'd done there with the ASU link. Right, I'll go a looking for some nice tidbits to merge in. Iridia (talk) 06:55, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * All merging done. Bit untidy right now - will tidy it properly tomorrow. Iridia (talk) 11:06, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

outer satellites
I can't access the 2007 paper on the capture of irregulars. (Adobe tells my the file is damaged.) I found what appears to be an earlier version, but it doesn't seem to go into as much detail, and Triton is barely mentioned, much less explained. Can s.o. else access it and fill in what I may have missed? (Okay, found a later paper specifically on Triton, but can only access the abstract.) kwami (talk) 22:02, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The link's fine, may just be behind a firewall - but you can get the paper here. Iridia (talk) 06:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Actually, a different one caught my eye, and I used it to rewrite the stub at asteroid formation. The more I read about this stuff, the more I hope Dawn gets extended to a Pallas flyby. kwami (talk) 08:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Nice++
"Our "New, Improved" Solar System" by Kelly Beatty on Sky and Telescope refers to an enhancement of the model claiming that Jup/Sat first migrated inwards to compact the inner protoplanetary disk to inside 1 a.u., thereby explaining the tinyness of Mars. There are more details of the theory that claims to explain everything: why there's an inner asteroid belt, why it's subdivided into S asteroids and C asteroids and why earth has water. Either to enhance the article, or to make a new one, whoever comes first. Rursus dixit. ( m bork3 !) 21:05, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it's best kept to this article. A summary of the latest developments can also be found in the appendix of Morbidelli's latest paper. AstroMark (talk) 01:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Rursus dixit. ( m bork3 !) 06:54, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Ehhm... I got it wrong: the link I provided was confusing, so that my first impression was that the "Nice++" was an enhancement of Nice. I think it is a complementary model. The Nice model describes a sudden "phase shift" abt 4.0 Gyr before present, where an AU sequence of ♃♄♆♅ = (5.5,8.1,11.5,14.2) goes (5.5,9.6,30.1,19.2). The new model describes a successive migration scenario of ♃ and ♄, where the AU of ♃ (♄ not specifically mentioned) goes 3.5 (0Myr) → 1.5 (100Myr) → 5.2 (500Myr) 3.5 (0kyr) → 1.5 (100kyr) → 5.2 (500kyr), before the inner solar system had accreted to the four terrestrial planets. That means that the new additional scenario occurs somewhen before the 30 Myr completion of the accretion of the solar system, that is in the range 4.6-4.3 Gyr. Thus not simultaneous with the Nice scenario, and not causing the Late Heavy Bombardment (if existed). Rursus dixit. ( m bork3 !) 10:55, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * This Jupiter/Saturn sub-1 AU migration has only been presented at DPS, last I looked. The effects on cosmochemistry etc haven't been given yet.
 * (This article needs a lot of work: things have changed quite a bit since it was put together. I wouldn't pretend to think it comprehensive; there's so many variant models at the moment. Probably Dynamical modelling of the Solar System needs to be written...) Iridia (talk) 23:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Such an article would prob be a very profitable reading for myself, but it is just beyond the combination of my competence and available time. Physics have a lot of unwritten heuristic rules of applicability that requires regular education and training. Rursus dixit. ( m bork3 !) 19:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nice model. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303173218/http://www.saturnaftercassini.org/files/2_Turrini_Diego_A.pdf to http://www.saturnaftercassini.org/files/2_Turrini_Diego_A.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:11, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Editorializing
This section is almost pure editorializing with many unsubstantiated claims. I have deleted it. A key missing response is that there is no known alternative explanation for the eccentricity and inclination of the giant planets outside of dynamical instability. There is confusion in the scientific literature in how the term "Nice model" is often used. Some use it to refer to the specific model in the 2005 papers, others use it describe the primary hypothesis that there was a dynamical instability between the giant planets because the Nice authors continued to develop this idea. Regardless, a connection to the late heavy bombardment can be estimated to be as much as 1/3 of the Nice model (1 of the 3 initial papers) or much less if one includes the many follow-up works.

"Although the model successfully reproduces many of the observed features of the Solar System, it has not yet successfully made any qualitative or quantitative predictions. With serious doubts over the existence of the late heavy bombardment, its scientific acceptance is declining. Since the fundamental dynamics of planetary orbits is intrinsically chaotic, the model depends on the statistical interpretation of repeated simulations, which also weakens its credibility. Further problems were revealed when subsequent research identified a number of differences between the Nice model's original predictions versus observations of the current Solar System—such as the orbits of the terrestrial planets and the asteroids—leading to its modification." Seth (talk) 14:06, 13 December 2022 (UTC)