DOCSLIB.ORG

Planet Migration in Planetesimal Disks

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Planet Migration in Planetesimal Disks PLANET MIGRATION IN PLANETESIMAL DISKS Harold F. Levison Southwest Research Institute, Boulder Alessandro Morbidelli Observatoire de la Coteˆ d'Azur Rodney Gomes Observatorio´ Nacional, Rio de Janeiro Dana Backman USRA & SETI Institute, Moffett Field Planets embedded in a planetesimal disk will migrate as a result of angular momentum and energy conservation as the planets scatter the planetesimals that they encounter. A surprising variety of interesting and complex dynamics can arise from this apparently simple process. In this Chapter, we review the basic characteristics of planetesimal-driven migration. We discuss how the structure of a planetary system controls migration. We describe how this type of migration can cause planetary systems to become dynamically unstable and how a massive planetesimal disk can save planets from being ejected from the planetary system during this instability. We examine how the Solar System's small body reservoirs, particularly the Kuiper belt and Jupiter's Trojan asteroids, constrain what happened here. We also review a new model for the early dynamical evolution of the outer Solar System that quantitatively reproduces much of what we see. And finally, we briefly discuss how planetesimal driven migration could have affected some of the extra-solar systems that have recently been discovered. 1. INTRODUCTION planet, tend to lie on one side of the planet in question or another, there will be a net flux of material inward or out- Our understanding of the origin and evolution of planets ward. The planet must move in the opposite direction in has drastically transformed in the last decade. Perhaps the order to conserve energy and angular momentum. In the ab- most fundamental change was the realization that planets, in sence of strong gravitational perturbations from other plan- general, may not have formed in the orbits in which we see ets, the semi-major axis of planet in question will smoothly them. Indeed, planets may have migrated huge distances af- change with time. In the remainder of this chapter, we refer ter they were born, as many of the extra-solar planetary sys- to this type of migration as simple migration. Third, plan- tems show (Moorhead and Adams, 2005; Papaloizou and etary systems can suffer a dynamical instability (Levison et Terquem, 2006), al: 1998) that can lead to a short, but violent period of or- There are three main dynamical mechanisms that can bital evolution during which the planetary eccentricities are cause such a wholesale evolution in planetary orbits. First, increased to large values (Rasio and Ford, 1996). If the in- at early times when the natal proto-planetary gas disk is still stability can be damped by some process (like dynamical in existence, gravitational interactions between the disk and friction with a disk), the planets can once again evolve onto a planet could cause a significant amount of orbital evo- nearly circular orbits, but in very different locations from lution (see the chapter by Papaloizou et al: for a discus- where they formed. It has been suggested that this kind of sion). Second, after the gas disk is gone, if there still is instability occurred in the outer parts of our planetary sys- a significant number of planetesimals in the system, the tem (Thommes et al:, 1999; Levison et al:, 2001; Tsiganis planets can migrate as a result of gravitational encounters et al:, 2005). with these objects. In particular, if a planet is immersed in The primary foci of this chapter are the second and the a sea of small bodies, it will recoil every time it gravita- third mechanisms described above; namely migration in tionally scatters one of these objects. In general, since the planetesimal disks. Although we claimed at the opening of small objects can come in from any direction, this will force this chapter that the role that planetesimal-driven migration the planets to undergo a small random walk in semi-major played in the evolution of planetary systems was only ac- axis. However, since the sinks for these objects, for exam- knowledged within the last decade, the idea itself is over 20 ple ejection from the system or encountering a neighboring years old. The first discussion of this process was presented 1 by Fernandez´ and Ip, (1984). Their paper describes the re- 2.1. A Simple Model sponse of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune to a rem- IBLT00 shows that the rate of change of a planet's semi- nant disk of planetesimals. Although much of the details major axis, a is have changed as our ability to perform orbital integrations has improved, these authors found the basic result which is da 2 = paH_ ×; (1) still held true today. dt −Mp The importance of the work by Fernandez´ and Ip was not really appreciated until the discovery of the Kuiper belt where Mp is the mass of the planet, and H_ × is the rate nearly a decade later, with its numerous objects on eccen- of transfer of angular momentum from the planetesimals tric orbits in mean motion resonances with Neptune. Mal- to the planet. This equation assumes that the eccentric- hotra (1993, 1995) first showed that these orbits could be ity of the planet is small and G 1. Using the particle- ≡ the natural result of Neptune's outward migration and con- in-a-box approximation, it is possible to show that H_ × = cluded that Neptune must have migrated about 7 AU in or- k¯M(t)a−1, where is a quantity that contains funda- der to explain the eccentricities that we see (c.f: Section 3). mental constants and information about the geometry of Much work as been done on this topic since Fernandez´ the planet-encountering region, M(t) is the total mass in and Ip's and Malhotra's groundbreaking papers. This liter- planet-encountering orbits, and k¯ is the average change of ature is the topic of the remainder of the chapter, although angular momentum per encounter, per unit mass planetesi- it should be noted that this chapter is intended more as dis- mal. Thus, cussion of the current state-of-the-art than a review paper. da M(t) 1 = 2k¯ : (2) In Section 2 and Section 3 we describe some of the basic dt − Mp pa physics that governs planet migration and resonant capture, The evolution of M(t) can be approximated by the equa- respectively. In Section 4, we examine simple planetesimal- tion driven migration in the Solar System. In Section 5 we look M_ (t) = M(t)/τ + 2πa a_ Σ(a) ; (3) at how instabilities in the orbits of the planets, coupled with − j j gravitational interactions with a massive planetesimal disk, where the first term in the r.h.s. represents the decay of the could lead to significant changes in the orbits of the plan- planetesimal population due to the planetesimal's finite dy- ets. We review a new model for the early dynamical evo- namical lifetime, and the second term stands for the plan- lution of the giant planets of the Solar System in Section 6, etesimals that, because of the change in the planet's posi- and planetesimal-driven migration in extra-solar systems in tion, enter the region where they can be scattered by the Section 7. In Section 8 we discuss some caveats and lim- planet for the first time. In (3) Σ(a) is the surface density itations of the N-body simulations on which most of the of the `virgin' (i.e. not yet scattered) planetesimal disk at content of this chapter is based. We present our concluding heliocentric distance a. Substituting (2) into (3) we get remarks in Section 9. −1 M_ (t) = τ + 4π k¯ paΣ(a)=Mp M(t) : (4) − j j 2. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF SIMPLE MIGRATION Let's assume for simplicity that the term α τ −1 + ≡ − The migration history for each individual planet is com- 4π k¯ paΣ(a)=Mp does not significantly change with time j j plicated because it is dependent on the details of how an- — an approximation that is clearly not true, but it allows us gular momentum flows through the system, namely on the to get the essence of the planet's behavior. Under this as- distribution and the evolution of the mass and the angular sumption, Eq. (4) becomes an exponential equation, which momentum of the planet crossing objects. These quantities, is solvable and thus will allow us to get some insight into in turn, are determined by the sources and sinks for these how the planet migrates. particles. As a result, attempts to develop analytic theories If α is negative, then M(t) decays exponentially to 0 for migration have studied very simple systems consisting and the planet (from Eq. 1) stops migrating. In this case, of a single planet in a dynamically cold disk (Murray et the loss of planetesimals due to their finite dynamical life- al:, 1998; Ida et al:, 2000, hereafter IBLT00). So, the goal time is not compensated by the acquisition of new planetes- of this section is not to develop a comprehensive analyti- imals into the scattering region. Therefore, the planet runs cal model, but to develop a toy model to help a qualitative `out of fuel'. GML04 called this migration mode damped understanding of some of the important physical processes migration. Conversely, if α is positive, M(t) grows expo- involved. Much of what we present is based on the work nentially and the planet's migration accelerates. In this case in Gomes et al:, (2004), hereafter GML04. We start with a the acquisition of new planetesimals due to the migration very simple model.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Setting the Stage: Planet Formation and Volatile Delivery
    Noname manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Setting the Stage: Planet formation and Volatile Delivery Julia Venturini1 · Maria Paula Ronco2;3 · Octavio Miguel Guilera4;2;3 Received: date / Accepted: date Abstract The diversity in mass and composition of planetary atmospheres stems from the different building blocks present in protoplanetary discs and from the different physical and chemical processes that these experience during the planetary assembly and evolution. This review aims to summarise, in a nutshell, the key concepts and processes operating during planet formation, with a focus on the delivery of volatiles to the inner regions of the planetary system. 1 Protoplanetary discs: the birthplaces of planets Planets are formed as a byproduct of star formation. In star forming regions like the Orion Nebula or the Taurus Molecular Cloud, many discs are observed around young stars (Isella et al, 2009; Andrews et al, 2010, 2018a; Cieza et al, 2019). Discs form around new born stars as a natural consequence of the collapse of the molecular cloud, to conserve angular momentum. As in the interstellar medium, it is generally assumed that they contain typically 1% of their mass in the form of rocky or icy grains, known as dust; and 99% in the form of gas, which is basically H2 and He (see, e.g., Armitage, 2010). However, the dust-to-gas ratios are usually higher in discs (Ansdell et al, 2016). There is strong observational evidence supporting the fact that planets form within those discs (Bae et al, 2017; Dong et al, 2018; Teague et al, 2018; Pérez et al, 2019), which are accordingly called protoplanetary discs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Multifaceted Planetesimal Formation Process
    The Multifaceted Planetesimal Formation Process Anders Johansen Lund University Jurgen¨ Blum Technische Universitat¨ Braunschweig Hidekazu Tanaka Hokkaido University Chris Ormel University of California, Berkeley Martin Bizzarro Copenhagen University Hans Rickman Uppsala University Polish Academy of Sciences Space Research Center, Warsaw Accumulation of dust and ice particles into planetesimals is an important step in the planet formation process. Planetesimals are the seeds of both terrestrial planets and the solid cores of gas and ice giants forming by core accretion. Left-over planetesimals in the form of asteroids, trans-Neptunian objects and comets provide a unique record of the physical conditions in the solar nebula. Debris from planetesimal collisions around other stars signposts that the planetesimal formation process, and hence planet formation, is ubiquitous in the Galaxy. The planetesimal formation stage extends from micrometer-sized dust and ice to bodies which can undergo run-away accretion. The latter ranges in size from 1 km to 1000 km, dependent on the planetesimal eccentricity excited by turbulent gas density fluctuations. Particles face many barriers during this growth, arising mainly from inefficient sticking, fragmentation and radial drift. Two promising growth pathways are mass transfer, where small aggregates transfer up to 50% of their mass in high-speed collisions with much larger targets, and fluffy growth, where aggregate cross sections and sticking probabilities are enhanced by a low internal density. A wide range of particle sizes, from mm to 10 m, concentrate in the turbulent gas flow. Overdense filaments fragment gravitationally into bound particle clumps, with most mass entering planetesimals of contracted radii from 100 to 500 km, depending on local disc properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Formation of the Solar System (Chapter 8)
    Formation of the Solar System (Chapter 8) Based on Chapter 8 • This material will be useful for understanding Chapters 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 on “Formation of the solar system”, “Planetary geology”, “Planetary atmospheres”, “Jovian planet systems”, “Remnants of ice and rock”, “Extrasolar planets” and “The Sun: Our Star” • Chapters 2, 3, 4, and 7 on “The orbits of the planets”, “Why does Earth go around the Sun?”, “Momentum, energy, and matter”, and “Our planetary system” will be useful for understanding this chapter Goals for Learning • Where did the solar system come from? • How did planetesimals form? • How did planets form? Patterns in the Solar System • Patterns of motion (orbits and rotations) • Two types of planets: Small, rocky inner planets and large, gas outer planets • Many small asteroids and comets whose orbits and compositions are similar • Exceptions to these patterns, such as Earth’s large moon and Uranus’s sideways tilt Help from Other Stars • Use observations of the formation of other stars to improve our theory for the formation of our solar system • Use this theory to make predictions about the formation of other planetary systems Nebular Theory of Solar System Formation • A cloud of gas, the “solar nebula”, collapses inwards under its own weight • Cloud heats up, spins faster, gets flatter (disk) as a central star forms • Gas cools and some materials condense as solid particles that collide, stick together, and grow larger Where does a cloud of gas come from? • Big Bang -> Hydrogen and Helium • First stars use this
    [Show full text]
  • The Subsurface Habitability of Small, Icy Exomoons J
    A&A 636, A50 (2020) Astronomy https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201937035 & © ESO 2020 Astrophysics The subsurface habitability of small, icy exomoons J. N. K. Y. Tjoa1,?, M. Mueller1,2,3, and F. F. S. van der Tak1,2 1 Kapteyn Astronomical Institute, University of Groningen, Landleven 12, 9747 AD Groningen, The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] 2 SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Landleven 12, 9747 AD Groningen, The Netherlands 3 Leiden Observatory, Leiden University, Niels Bohrweg 2, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands Received 1 November 2019 / Accepted 8 March 2020 ABSTRACT Context. Assuming our Solar System as typical, exomoons may outnumber exoplanets. If their habitability fraction is similar, they would thus constitute the largest portion of habitable real estate in the Universe. Icy moons in our Solar System, such as Europa and Enceladus, have already been shown to possess liquid water, a prerequisite for life on Earth. Aims. We intend to investigate under what thermal and orbital circumstances small, icy moons may sustain subsurface oceans and thus be “subsurface habitable”. We pay specific attention to tidal heating, which may keep a moon liquid far beyond the conservative habitable zone. Methods. We made use of a phenomenological approach to tidal heating. We computed the orbit averaged flux from both stellar and planetary (both thermal and reflected stellar) illumination. We then calculated subsurface temperatures depending on illumination and thermal conduction to the surface through the ice shell and an insulating layer of regolith. We adopted a conduction only model, ignoring volcanism and ice shell convection as an outlet for internal heat.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 9: the Origin and Evolution of the Moon and Planets
    Chapter 9 THE ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF THE MOON AND PLANETS 9.1 In the Beginning The age of the universe, as it is perceived at present, is perhaps as old as 20 aeons so that the formation of the solar system at about 4.5 aeons is a comparatively youthful event in this stupendous extent of time [I]. Thevisible portion of the universe consists principally of about 10" galaxies, which show local marked irregularities in distribution (e.g., Virgo cluster). The expansion rate (Hubble Constant) has values currently estimated to lie between 50 and 75 km/sec/MPC [2]. The reciprocal of the constant gives ages ranging between 13 and 20 aeons but there is uncertainty due to the local perturbing effects of the Virgo cluster of galaxies on our measurement of the Hubble parameter [I]. The age of the solar system (4.56 aeons), the ages of old star clusters (>10" years) and the production rates of elements all suggest ages for the galaxy and the observable universe well in excess of 10" years (10 aeons). The origin of the presently observable universe is usually ascribed, in current cosmologies, to a "big bang," and the 3OK background radiation is often accepted as proof of the correctness of the hypothesis. Nevertheless, there are some discrepancies. The observed ratio of hydrogen to helium which should be about 0.25 in a "big-bang" scenario may be too high. The distribution of galaxies shows much clumping, which would indicate an initial chaotic state [3], and there are variations in the spectrum of the 3OK radiation which are not predicted by the theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Planets of the Solar System
    Chapter Planets of the 27 Solar System Chapter OutlineOutline 1 ● Formation of the Solar System The Nebular Hypothesis Formation of the Planets Formation of Solid Earth Formation of Earth’s Atmosphere Formation of Earth’s Oceans 2 ● Models of the Solar System Early Models Kepler’s Laws Newton’s Explanation of Kepler’s Laws 3 ● The Inner Planets Mercury Venus Earth Mars 4 ● The Outer Planets Gas Giants Jupiter Saturn Uranus Neptune Objects Beyond Neptune Why It Matters Exoplanets UnderstandingU d t di theth formationf ti and the characteristics of our solar system and its planets can help scientists plan missions to study planets and solar systems around other stars in the universe. 746 Chapter 27 hhq10sena_psscho.inddq10sena_psscho.indd 774646 PDF 88/15/08/15/08 88:43:46:43:46 AAMM Inquiry Lab Planetary Distances 20 min Turn to Appendix E and find the table entitled Question to Get You Started “Solar System Data.” Use the data from the How would the distance of a planet from the sun “semimajor axis” row of planetary distances to affect the time it takes for the planet to complete devise an appropriate scale to model the distances one orbit? between planets. Then find an indoor or outdoor space that will accommodate the farthest distance. Mark some index cards with the name of each planet, use a measuring tape to measure the distances according to your scale, and place each index card at its correct location. 747 hhq10sena_psscho.inddq10sena_psscho.indd 774747 22/26/09/26/09 111:42:301:42:30 AAMM These reading tools will help you learn the material in this chapter.
    [Show full text]
  • Monday, November 13, 2017 WHAT DOES IT MEAN to BE HABITABLE? 8:15 A.M. MHRGC Salons ABCD 8:15 A.M. Jang-Condell H. * Welcome C
    Monday, November 13, 2017 WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HABITABLE? 8:15 a.m. MHRGC Salons ABCD 8:15 a.m. Jang-Condell H. * Welcome Chair: Stephen Kane 8:30 a.m. Forget F. * Turbet M. Selsis F. Leconte J. Definition and Characterization of the Habitable Zone [#4057] We review the concept of habitable zone (HZ), why it is useful, and how to characterize it. The HZ could be nicknamed the “Hunting Zone” because its primary objective is now to help astronomers plan observations. This has interesting consequences. 9:00 a.m. Rushby A. J. Johnson M. Mills B. J. W. Watson A. J. Claire M. W. Long Term Planetary Habitability and the Carbonate-Silicate Cycle [#4026] We develop a coupled carbonate-silicate and stellar evolution model to investigate the effect of planet size on the operation of the long-term carbon cycle, and determine that larger planets are generally warmer for a given incident flux. 9:20 a.m. Dong C. F. * Huang Z. G. Jin M. Lingam M. Ma Y. J. Toth G. van der Holst B. Airapetian V. Cohen O. Gombosi T. Are “Habitable” Exoplanets Really Habitable? A Perspective from Atmospheric Loss [#4021] We will discuss the impact of exoplanetary space weather on the climate and habitability, which offers fresh insights concerning the habitability of exoplanets, especially those orbiting M-dwarfs, such as Proxima b and the TRAPPIST-1 system. 9:40 a.m. Fisher T. M. * Walker S. I. Desch S. J. Hartnett H. E. Glaser S. Limitations of Primary Productivity on “Aqua Planets:” Implications for Detectability [#4109] While ocean-covered planets have been considered a strong candidate for the search for life, the lack of surface weathering may lead to phosphorus scarcity and low primary productivity, making aqua planet biospheres difficult to detect.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2012.11628V3 [Astro-Ph.EP] 26 Jan 2021
    manuscript submitted to JGR: Planets The Fundamental Connections Between the Solar System and Exoplanetary Science Stephen R. Kane1, Giada N. Arney2, Paul K. Byrne3, Paul A. Dalba1∗, Steven J. Desch4, Jonti Horner5, Noam R. Izenberg6, Kathleen E. Mandt6, Victoria S. Meadows7, Lynnae C. Quick8 1Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA 2Planetary Systems Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA 3Planetary Research Group, Department of Marine, Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA 4School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA 5Centre for Astrophysics, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia 6Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, MD 20723, USA 7Department of Astronomy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA 8Planetary Geology, Geophysics and Geochemistry Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA Key Points: • Exoplanetary science is rapidly expanding towards characterization of atmospheres and interiors. • Planetary science has similarly undergone rapid expansion of understanding plan- etary processes and evolution. • Effective studies of exoplanets require models and in-situ data derived from plan- etary science observations and exploration. arXiv:2012.11628v4 [astro-ph.EP] 8 Aug 2021 ∗NSF Astronomy and Astrophysics Postdoctoral Fellow Corresponding author: Stephen R. Kane, [email protected] {1{ manuscript submitted to JGR: Planets Abstract Over the past several decades, thousands of planets have been discovered outside of our Solar System. These planets exhibit enormous diversity, and their large numbers provide a statistical opportunity to place our Solar System within the broader context of planetary structure, atmospheres, architectures, formation, and evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Discovering the Growth Histories of Exoplanets: the Saturn Analog HD 149026B
    Discovering the Growth Histories of Exoplanets: The Saturn Analog HD 149026b Short title: The growth of HD 149026b Sarah E. Dodson-Robinson1 NASA Exoplanet Science Institute, California Institute of Technology 770 S. Wilson Ave, Pasadena, CA 91125 [email protected] Peter Bodenheimer UCO/Lick Observatory, University of California at Santa Cruz 1156 High St., Santa Cruz, CA 95064 1 Formerly Sarah E. Robinson ABSTRACT The transiting “hot Saturn” HD 149026b, which has the highest mean density of any confirmed planet in the Neptune-Jupiter mass range, has challenged theories of planet formation since its discovery in 2005. Previous investigations could not explain the origin of the planet’s 45-110 Earth-mass solid core without invoking catastrophes such as gas giant collisions or heavy planetesimal bombardment launched by neighboring planets. Here we show that HD 149026b’s large core can be successfully explained by the standard core accretion theory of planet formation. The keys to our reconstruction of HD 149026b are (1) applying a model of the solar nebula to describe the protoplanet nursery; (2) placing the planet initially on a long-period orbit at Saturn’s heliocentric distance of 9.5 AU; and (3) adjusting the solid mass in the HD 149026 disk to twice that of the solar nebula in accordance with the star’s heavy element enrichment. We show that the planet’s migration into its current orbit at 0.042 AU is consistent with our formation model. Our study of HD 149026b demonstrates that it is possible to discover the growth history of any planet with a well-defined core mass that orbits a solar-type star.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamical Evolution of Planetary Systems
    Dynamical Evolution of Planetary Systems Alessandro Morbidelli Abstract Planetary systems can evolve dynamically even after the full growth of the planets themselves. There is actually circumstantial evidence that most plane- tary systems become unstable after the disappearance of gas from the protoplanetary disk. These instabilities can be due to the original system being too crowded and too closely packed or to external perturbations such as tides, planetesimal scattering, or torques from distant stellar companions. The Solar System was not exceptional in this sense. In its inner part, a crowded system of planetary embryos became un- stable, leading to a series of mutual impacts that built the terrestrial planets on a timescale of ∼ 100My. In its outer part, the giant planets became temporarily unsta- ble and their orbital configuration expanded under the effect of mutual encounters. A planet might have been ejected in this phase. Thus, the orbital distributions of planetary systems that we observe today, both solar and extrasolar ones, can be dif- ferent from the those emerging from the formation process and it is important to consider possible long-term evolutionary effects to connect the two. Introduction This chapter concerns the dynamical evolution of planetary systems after the re- moval of gas from the proto-planetary disk. Most massive planets are expected to form within the lifetime of the gas component of protoplanetary disks (see chapters by D’Angelo and Lissauer for the giant planets and by Schlichting for Super-Earths) and, while they form, they are expected to evolve dynamically due to gravitational interactions with the gas (see chapter by Nelson on planet migration).
    [Show full text]
  • Download This Article in PDF Format
    A&A 631, A7 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201935922 Astronomy & © ESO 2019 Astrophysics Pebbles versus planetesimals: the case of Trappist-1 G. A. L. Coleman, A. Leleu?, Y. Alibert, and W. Benz Physikalisches Institut, Universität Bern, Gesellschaftsstr. 6, 3012 Bern, Switzerland e-mail: [email protected] Received 20 May 2019 / Accepted 11 August 2019 ABSTRACT We present a study into the formation of planetary systems around low mass stars similar to Trappist-1, through the accretion of either planetesimals or pebbles. The aim is to determine if the currently observed systems around low mass stars could favour one scenario over the other. To determine these differences, we ran numerous N-body simulations, coupled to a thermally evolving viscous 1D disc model, and including prescriptions for planet migration, photoevaporation, and pebble and planetesimal dynamics. We mainly examine the differences between the pebble and planetesimal accretion scenarios, but we also look at the influences of disc mass, size of planetesimals, and the percentage of solids locked up within pebbles. When comparing the resulting planetary systems to Trappist-1, we find that a wide range of initial conditions for both the pebble and planetesimal accretion scenarios can form planetary systems similar to Trappist-1, in terms of planet mass, periods, and resonant configurations. Typically these planets formed exterior to the water iceline and migrated in resonant convoys into the inner region close to the central star. When comparing the planetary systems formed through pebble accretion to those formed through planetesimal accretion, we find a large number of similarities, including average planet masses, eccentricities, inclinations, and period ratios.
    [Show full text]
  • Simon Porter , Will Grundy
    Post-Capture Evolution of Potentially Habitable Exomoons Simon Porter1,2, Will Grundy1 1Lowell Observatory, Flagstaff, Arizona 2School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University [email protected] and spin vector were initially pointed at random di- Table 1: Relative fraction of end states for fully Abstract !"# $%& " '(" !"# $%& # '(# rections on the sky. The exoplanets had a ran- evolved exomoon systems dom obliquity < 5 deg and was at a stellarcentric The satellites of extrasolar planets (exomoons) Star Planet Moon Survived Retrograde Separated Impacted distance such that the equilibrium temperature was have been recently proposed as astrobiological tar- Earth 43% 52% 21% 35% equal to Earth. The simulations were run until they Jupiter Mars 44% 45% 18% 37% gets. Triton has been proposed to have been cap- 5 either reached an eccentricity below 10 or the pe- Titan 42% 47% 21% 36% tured through a momentum-exchange reaction [1], − Sun Earth 52% 44% 17% 30% riapse went below the Roche limit (impact) or the and it is possible that a similar event could allow Neptune Mars 44% 45% 18% 36% apoapse exceeded the Hill radius. Stars used were Titan 45% 47% 19% 35% a giant planet to capture a formerly binary terres- Earth 65% 47% 3% 31% the Sun (G2), a main-sequence F0 (1.7 MSun), trial planet or planetesimal. We therefore attempt to Jupiter Mars 59% 46% 4% 35% and a main-sequence M0 (0.47 MSun). Exoplan- Titan 61% 48% 3% 34% model the dynamical evolution of a terrestrial planet !"# $%& " !"# $%& " ' F0 ets used had the mass of either Jupiter or Neptune, Earth 77% 44% 4% 18% captured into orbit around a giant planet in the hab- and exomoons with the mass of Earth, Mars, and Neptune Mars 67% 44% 4% 28% itable zone of a star.
    [Show full text]