With respect to Brown's claims about Pluto ....
So far as I can tell, the claimed size of the "swarm that became Pluto" is completely arbitrary and without justification.
Of course it is...it is a hypothetical. He says in effect, "IF Pluto was formed by one or more of these swarms, THEN..."
>>In footnote 176, Brown claims, again without justification, that the Pluto "swarm" would have had a temperature difference similar to Earth's moon.>>
Again, a hypothetical, but less so. It depends on what the rotation rate would be and how much of the solar energy would be collected as heat (vs. reflected away). It would be most likely that the spin rate would be SLOWER than the Moon, and the albedo would be LESS than the Moon. So Brown may have UNDERestimated the Carnot Effect. But remember, using the same efficiency as the Moon (70%) gives enough acceleration in just a few DAYS. Here is what I wrote on Jan 10th (#286)
>>The solar energy at 1 AU is 1360 watts/m2. This is 139 kg-m/s. This means (I believe) that this is enough force to move 139 kg a distance of 1 meter in 1 second. (Or 1 kg a distance of 139 meters). I haven't done the calculation, but if there is a density of 1kg/m3 (1/1000th the density of water), then I would guess that if you figure how many kg would be in the portion of the sphere which is defined by 1 square meter (going through the entire sphere) would be perhaps close to 139x for a smaller size cloud. I could be off some**, but let's use this. This means that the sphere would be accelerated by 1 meter/s/s...at 100% solar efficiency. So in one day, the speed would be (3600 x 24) 86.4 km/s. And each day thereafter it would increase by that amount. Then you can adjust this by a 70% efficiency or 20% or whatever. Since the speed of Earth's orbit around the Sun is about 30 km/s, then at 100%, in ONE DAY you would have enough acceleration to get the object to the a-belt. Or I am guessing that is enough. Jellison said the angular momentum has to be increased by 70% so I would think that adding that much speed would do it...EASILY.>>
(BTW, you expressed doubt about the result, but never said WHAT PART I got wrong. Let's hear it).
So let's suppose that you need to double the orbital speed at 1 AU (30km/s) to get to the a-belt. I am guessing that's about right since the angular momentum is 70% larger. So if you have 1000 years, even if you only got an efficiency of ONE PERCENT...do you suppose it would be enough? Well, in ONE DAY at only 1%, the acceleration is .86km/s...and that is increased by that same amount EVERY DAY. In about 100 DAYS you would have 86 km/s, more than double the speed at 1 AU. Of course this would need to be adjusted A BIT because the solar energy is less as you get further away.
>>Brown claims 27,600 times some measurement that is "too small to be detected (and for most purposes is insignificant), it is some small number greater than zero" is sufficient to propel the Plutonian swarm beyond the orbit of Neptune.>>
I would take issue with Brown saying the size (diameter) of Pluto's swarm was only 2x the diameter of Earth. I think this would mean the density was 5.5 / (4x 460) or about .002 (100% MORE than the guess we've been using). He says "early in its outward spiral" so I suppose this could be after some compaction. This means that it could have gained much added speed while it was less dense. Another major factor is that which became Pluto could have come from many (thousands?) of smaller swarms which became consolidated later. If the swarm is smaller, then the area/mass ratio increases massively...meaning much more acceleration. They could have gained most of their speed early, before they became a single swarm. Comparing the acceleration of Earth to the acceleration of one of these early swarms is not a fair comparison at all.