The core accretion–gas capture model for gas-giant planet formation

2009 ◽  
pp. 163-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olenka Hubickyj ◽  
Wolfgang Brandner
Author(s):  
Morris Podolak

Modern observational techniques are still not powerful enough to directly view planet formation, and so it is necessary to rely on theory. However, observations do give two important clues to the formation process. The first is that the most primitive form of material in interstellar space exists as a dilute gas. Some of this gas is unstable against gravitational collapse, and begins to contract. Because the angular momentum of the gas is not zero, it contracts along the spin axis, but remains extended in the plane perpendicular to that axis, so that a disk is formed. Viscous processes in the disk carry most of the mass into the center where a star eventually forms. In the process, almost as a by-product, a planetary system is formed as well. The second clue is the time required. Young stars are indeed observed to have gas disks, composed mostly of hydrogen and helium, surrounding them, and observations tell us that these disks dissipate after about 5 to 10 million years. If planets like Jupiter and Saturn, which are very rich in hydrogen and helium, are to form in such a disk, they must accrete their gas within 5 million years of the time of the formation of the disk. Any formation scenario one proposes must produce Jupiter in that time, although the terrestrial planets, which don’t contain significant amounts of hydrogen and helium, could have taken longer to build. Modern estimates for the formation time of the Earth are of the order of 100 million years. To date there are two main candidate theories for producing Jupiter-like planets. The core accretion (CA) scenario supposes that any solid materials in the disk slowly coagulate into protoplanetary cores with progressively larger masses. If the core remains small enough it won’t have a strong enough gravitational force to attract gas from the surrounding disk, and the result will be a terrestrial planet. If the core grows large enough (of the order of ten Earth masses), and the disk has not yet dissipated, then the planetary embryo can attract gas from the surrounding disk and grow to be a gas giant. If the disk dissipates before the process is complete, the result will be an object like Uranus or Neptune, which has a small, but significant, complement of hydrogen and helium. The main question is whether the protoplanetary core can grow large enough before the disk dissipates. A second scenario is the disk instability (DI) scenario. This scenario posits that the disk itself is unstable and tends to develop regions of higher than normal density. Such regions collapse under their own gravity to form Jupiter-mass protoplanets. In the DI scenario a Jupiter-mass clump of gas can form—in several hundred years which will eventually contract into a gas giant planet. The difficulty here is to bring the disk to a condition where such instabilities will form. Now that we have discovered nearly 3000 planetary systems, there will be numerous examples against which to test these scenarios.


2018 ◽  
Vol 363 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunjian Liu ◽  
Qing Ai ◽  
Zhen Yao ◽  
Hualian Tian ◽  
Jiayun Shen ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 202 ◽  
pp. 141-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan P. Boss

The discovery of gas giant planets around nearby stars has launched a new era in our understanding of the formation and evolution of planetary systems. However, none of the over four dozen companions detected to date strongly resembles Jupiter or Saturn: their inferred masses range from sub-Saturn-mass to 10 Jupiter-masses or more, while their orbits extend from periods of a few days to a few years. Given this situation, it seems prudent to re-examine mechanisms for gas giant planet formation. The two extreme cases are top-down or bottom-up. The latter is the core accretion mechanism, long favored for our Solar System, where a roughly 10 Earth-mass solid core forms by collisional accumulation of planetesimals, followed by hydrodynamic accretion of a gaseous envelope. The former is the long-discarded disk instability mechanism, where the protoplanetary disk forms self-gravitating, gaseous protoplanets through a gravitational instability of the gas, accompanied by settling and coagulation of dust grains to form solid cores. Both of these mechanisms have a number of advantages and disadvantages, making a purely theoretical choice between them difficult at present. Observations should be able to decide the dominant mechanism by dating the epoch of gas giant planet formation: core accretion requires more than a million years to form a Jupiter-mass planet, whereas disk instability is much more rapid.


2006 ◽  
Vol 643 (1) ◽  
pp. 484-500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Robinson ◽  
Gregory Laughlin ◽  
Peter Bodenheimer ◽  
Debra Fischer

2011 ◽  
Vol 740 (2) ◽  
pp. 76 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Ramírez ◽  
J. Meléndez ◽  
D. Cornejo ◽  
I. U. Roederer ◽  
J. R. Fish

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (S332) ◽  
pp. 109-112
Author(s):  
Rafael Pinotti ◽  
Heloisa M. Boechat-Roberty ◽  
Gustavo F. Porto de Mello

AbstractIn 2005 we suggested a relation between the optimal locus of gas giant planet formation, prior to migration, and the metallicity of the host star, based on the core accretion model, and radial profiles of dust surface density and gas temperature. At that time, less than 200 extrasolar planets were known, limiting the scope of our analysis. Here, we take into account the expanded statistics allowed by new discoveries, in order to check the validity of some premises. We compare predictions with the present available data and results for different stellar mass ranges. We find that the zero age planetary orbit (ZAPO) hypothesis continues to hold after a two order of magnitude increase in discovered planets, as well as the prediction that planets around metal poor stars would have shorter orbits.


2009 ◽  
Vol 698 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thayne Currie ◽  
Charles J. Lada ◽  
Peter Plavchan ◽  
Thomas P. Robitaille ◽  
Jonathan Irwin ◽  
...  

Icarus ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 173 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
R DURISEN ◽  
K CAI ◽  
A MEJIA ◽  
M PICKETT

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document