Where did the interstellar object 'Oumuamua come from? Its speed could tell us

a flat rock backlit by the distant sun
An artist's depiction of the interstellar object 'Oumuamua. (Image credit: ESA/Hubble, NASA, ESO, M. Kornmesser)

Astronomers will be able to figure out what kind of stars interstellar objects such as 'Oumuamua come from, and therefore something about their compositions, based on their velocity as they enter our solar system, new research suggests.

So far, astronomers have discovered only two confirmed interstellar objects (ISOs) in our solar system, 'Oumuamua and 2I/Borisov. They couldn't have been more different from one another: 'Oumuamua lacked any kind of cometary tail, whereas Borisov looked like a typical comet.

However, the properties of their home planetary systems are imprinted on both of them, said grad student Matthew Hopkins of the University of Oxford in England, who conducted the new research and presented it at the U.K.'s National Astronomy Meeting in early July.

Related: 'Oumuamua: The solar system's 1st interstellar visitor explained in photos

"Because they come from other stars, their properties are going to correlate with those stars," Hopkins told Space.com.

Though we've only spotted two ISOs to date, it's expected that thousands of them are passing through our solar system at any given time, most too far away from us to be detected. However, most or all of those ISOs likely began life as comets around other stars, before an encounter with a Jupiter-sized planet, or perhaps a fly-by star, ejected them into interstellar space.

In our solar system, "for every one comet that Jupiter [and Neptune] pushed into the Oort Cloud, it completely ejected 10, and there are a trillion objects in the Oort Cloud," said Hopkins. Doing the math, it is easy to come to the conclusion that ISOs "are the most numerous objects in the Milky Way galaxy."

Moving groups of interstellar objects

Each star is moving around the galaxy at its own pace, and together they form moving groups that are related to their point of origin, which, in turn, corresponds with their intrinsic chemistry.

The stars with the most heavy elements, such as our sun, live in the "thin disk" of the galaxy, a plane in the spiral arms about 400 light-years thick. Surrounding it is the "thick disk," which can stretch as high as 1,000 light-years above the plane of the galaxy and contains mostly older stars with fewer heavy elements. 

The populations of stars belonging to each disk have different velocity distributions. Because the ISOs that they eject share a similar velocity as their parent star relative to the sun, they tend to stick to the same moving groups, but these moving groups criss-cross the sun's path all the time.

"The sun is essentially running into them," said Hopkins. This means that we should preferentially expect to see ISOs coming from the "solar apex," which is the direction of the sun's motion relative to other nearby stars. 

"'Oumuamua was very close to the solar apex," Hopkins said. "Borisov was slightly farther away but still quite near [to the solar apex], and that's where we expect most of them to come from."

Coming from this direction means that they'll make their closest approach to the sun, where they are easiest to detect, while they are in the Southern Hemisphere sky — the same sky that the new Vera Rubin Observatory will be surveying. It is expected that Vera Rubin will discover hundreds of new ISOs.

Related: Vera Rubin: The astronomer who brought dark matter to light

Slower ISOs contain less water

The lower an ISO's relative velocity compared to the sun, the more likely it is that it will fall into the inner solar system where we can detect it; the fast ones will just speed through without necessarily being attracted much by the sun's gravity. An ISO's relative velocity is related to the relative velocity of its parent star, which depends significantly on whether that star hails from the thin disk with more heavy elements, or from the thick disk with fewer heavy elements. 

"My results show that the velocity of an ISO correlates with its composition, and because of this we can get a handle on the types of star they may have come from," said Hopkins. 

The lower-velocity ISOs (relative to the sun) are expected to come from the thin disk, where stars and their accompanying planetary systems form from gas and dust that contain more heavy elements. The more heavy elements there are in the disk of gas and dust that forms planets and comets, the smaller the fraction of water an ISO will have. 

This is because a protoplanetary disk rich in heavier elements contains a lot of carbon, and carbon (as well as iron, magnesium, silicon and sulfur) is adept at plucking up all the free oxygen atoms, two at a time, to form molecules of carbon dioxide. Water can only form from any oxygen atoms that are left over, meaning that ISOs forming within these disks generally possess a lower fraction of water.

Could this lack of water explain why 'Oumuamua did not display a cometary tail?

"Because it had a lower velocity relative to the sun, it probably did come from a thin disk star with more heavy elements," said Hopkins. However, he is keen to point out the caveat that we don't know 'Oumuamua's history — it could have lost its water and other volatile elements some other way. Perhaps they were eradicated by cosmic rays while traveling through interstellar space, for example, or by too many close passes to its parent star before it was ejected.

Borisov, on the other hand, was in the middle range for water content based on spectral observations of its tail.

With currently only two examples of ISO, it is difficult to draw too many conclusions. However, once the Vera Rubin Observatory is up and running later this decade, the hundreds of ISOs that it should find will be able to provide a fuller picture of where they are coming from and what their chemical properties are.

"If there's a bias towards ISOs moving similarly to the sun falling into the inner solar system, then we would expect to see more ISOs from the thin disk," said Hopkins.

That might mean we'll see more objects similar to 'Oumuamua rather than Borisov. Only time will tell how correct that prediction is.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Keith Cooper
Contributing writer

Keith Cooper is a freelance science journalist and editor in the United Kingdom, and has a degree in physics and astrophysics from the University of Manchester. He's the author of "The Contact Paradox: Challenging Our Assumptions in the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence" (Bloomsbury Sigma, 2020) and has written articles on astronomy, space, physics and astrobiology for a multitude of magazines and websites.

  • Dave
    Oumuamua does not look like a comet in any way shape or form. There is nothing like it anywhere, so let us stop pretending that we know. There is nothing like it anywhere. It is contrary to the ordinary course of nature, so let's not pretend that it is. We are clueless as to knowing anything about it and it entered our star system. We need to investigate thoroughly this unnatural phenomenon to know exactly what it is.
    Reply
  • Brad
    Dave said:
    Oumuamua does not look like a comet in any way shape or form. There is nothing like it anywhere, so let us stop pretending that we know. There is nothing like it anywhere. It is contrary to the ordinary course of nature, so let's not pretend that it is. We are clueless as to knowing anything about it and it entered our star system. We need to investigate thoroughly this unnatural phenomenon to know exactly what it is.
    What do you mean "unnatural"? Nothing could be more natural. There are no hard definitions of comets, only observations of those within our own solar system (and very few of those). Comets most likely come in many shapes and configurations depending on their particular path through space and time.
    Reply
  • jamestmallow
    Brad said:
    What do you mean "unnatural"? Nothing could be more natural. There are no hard definitions of comets, only observations of those within our own solar system (and very few of those). Comets most likely come in many shapes and configurations depending on their particular path through space and time.
    He is probably a fan of Avi Loeb and thinks it is an alien space craft.
    Reply
  • Brad
    jamestmallow said:
    He is probably a fan of Avi Loeb and thinks it is an alien space craft.
    Ah good point!
    Reply
  • billslugg
    Brad said:
    What do you mean "unnatural"? Nothing could be more natural. There are no hard definitions of comets, only observations of those within our own solar system (and very few of those). Comets most likely come in many shapes and configurations depending on their particular path through space and time.
    The "unnatural" part is two seemingly incompatible facts:
    - Acceleration as it moved away from the Solar System
    - No visible gases to account for the source of the thrust

    The current best explanation is that the thrust was from hydrogen gas and oxygen gas and thus invisible. The source of the hydrogen and oxygen is presumed to be solid hydrogen and solid oxygen inside Oumuamua deposited there over millions of years from vapor originating with the dissociation of water molecules by impacting cosmic rays.
    Reply
  • Dave
    Interesting logic. The (it could only be a) comet that does not look or behave like a comet, is a comet. How did this very unnatural phenomenon form? How did it develop this very successful means of acceleration? Perhaps the answer lies with earth's second moon. You know, the one that orbits the earth every 90 minutes.
    Reply
  • jamestmallow
    billslugg said:
    The "unnatural" part is two seemingly incompatible facts:
    - Acceleration as it moved away from the Solar System
    - No visible gases to account for the source of the thrust

    The current best explanation is that the thrust was from hydrogen gas and oxygen gas and thus invisible. The source of the hydrogen and oxygen is presumed to be solid hydrogen and solid oxygen inside Oumuamua deposited there over millions of years from vapor originating with the dissociation of water molecules by impacting cosmic rays.
    Sublimation of Nitrogen ice is what I read. The issue is calling it unnatural or alien. We had a very brief window to observe it. The default should be that we don't understand it and have very little data. Instead, Loeb inserts the alien of the gaps explanation and profits off of the UAP mania.
    Reply
  • Dave
    Of course, intelligent lifeforms observing the earth would see the ISS for what it is. They would observe the unusual shape, as well as the increased acceleration. They would not see it as a second moon or any other natural phenomenon. They will make the correct analysis. It is a large alien spacecraft created by an alien race.
    Reply