scholarly journals Fingerprints of giant planets in the composition of solar twins

2020 ◽  
Vol 493 (4) ◽  
pp. 5079-5088 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A Booth ◽  
James E Owen
Keyword(s):  
Refractory Material ◽  
Planet Formation ◽  
Initial Conditions ◽  
Giant Planet ◽  
Planetary Systems ◽  
Giant Planets ◽  
The Sun ◽  
Evolutionary Models ◽  
Refractory Elements ◽  
Protoplanetary Discs

ABSTRACT The Sun shows a ∼10 per cent depletion in refractory elements relative to nearby solar twins. It has been suggested that this depletion is a signpost of planet formation. The exoplanet statistics are now good enough to show that the origin of this depletion does not arise from the sequestration of refractory material inside the planets themselves. This conclusion arises because most sun-like stars host close-in planetary systems that are on average more massive than the Sun’s. Using evolutionary models for the protoplanetary discs that surrounded the young Sun and solar twins, we demonstrate that the origin of the depletion likely arises due to the trapping of dust exterior to the orbit of a forming giant planet. In this scenario, a forming giant planet opens a gap in the gas disc, creating a pressure trap. If the planet forms early enough, while the disc is still massive, the planet can trap ≳100 M⊕ of dust exterior to its orbit, preventing the dust from accreting on to the star in contrast to the gas. Forming giant planets can create refractory depletions of $\sim 5{-}15{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$, with the larger values occurring for initial conditions that favour giant planet formation (e.g. more massive discs that live longer). The incidence of solar twins that show refractory depletion matches both the occurrence of giant planets discovered in exoplanet surveys and ‘transition’ discs that show similar depletion patterns in the material that is accreting on to the star.

scholarly journals Pebbles versus planetesimals

2020 ◽  
Vol 640 ◽  
pp. A21 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Brügger ◽  
R. Burn ◽  
G. A. L. Coleman ◽  
Y. Alibert ◽  
W. Benz
Keyword(s):  
Planet Formation ◽  
Initial Conditions ◽  
Giant Planet ◽  
Mass Range ◽  
Giant Planets ◽  
The Other ◽  
Type I ◽  
Core Mass ◽  
Accretion Model ◽  
The Impact

Context. In the core accretion scenario of giant planet formation, a massive core forms first and then accretes a gaseous envelope. In the discussion of how this core forms, some divergences appear. The first scenarios of planet formation predict the accretion of kilometre-sized bodies called planetesimals, while more recent works suggest growth by the accretion of pebbles, which are centimetre-sized objects. Aims. These two accretion models are often discussed separately and our aim here is to compare the outcomes of the two models with identical initial conditions. Methods. The comparison is done using two distinct codes, one that computes the planetesimal accretion and the other the pebble accretion. All the other components of the simulated planet growth are computed identically in the two models: the disc, the accretion of gas, and the migration. Using a population synthesis approach, we compare planet simulations and study the impact of the two solid accretion models, focusing on the formation of single planets. Results. We find that the outcomes of the populations are strongly influenced by the accretion model. The planetesimal model predicts the formation of more giant planets, while the pebble accretion model forms more super-Earth-mass planets. This is due to the pebble isolation mass (Miso) concept, which prevents planets formed by pebble accretion to accrete gas efficiently before reaching Miso. This translates into a population of planets that are not heavy enough to accrete a consequent envelope, but that are in a mass range where type I migration is very efficient. We also find higher gas mass fractions for a given core mass for the pebble model compared to the planetesimal model, caused by luminosity differences. This also implies planets with lower densities, which could be confirmed observationally. Conclusions. We conclude that the two models produce different outputs. Focusing on giant planets, the sensitivity of their formation differs: for the pebble accretion model, the time at which the embryos are formed and the period over which solids are accreted strongly impact the results, while the population of giant planets formed by planetesimal accretion depends on the planetesimal size and on the splitting in the amount of solids available to form planetesimals.

scholarly journals Metallicity and Planet Formation – Observations

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (S265) ◽  
pp. 403-407
Author(s):  
Jeff A. Valenti
Keyword(s):  
Planet Formation ◽  
Convection Zone ◽  
Giant Planet ◽  
Giant Planets ◽  
The Sun ◽  
Molecular Line ◽  
Snow Line ◽  
Parent Sample ◽  
Core Accretion ◽  
M Dwarf

AbstractEarly abundance measurements established that stars known to host giant planets are metal rich compared to the Sun. More extensive abundance measurements then showed that giant planet hosts are metal rich compared to the parent sample in planet searches. Stars spanning a range of convection zone depths all show the same metallicity effect, ruling out significant abundance enhancements due to selective accretion. Most known planets migrated inwards from the snow line, but subsamples closer to and further from the star have similar iron abundances, so the stopping point of migration does not depend on metallicity. Stars recently discovered to host Neptune mass planets may be metal poor compared to the Sun, particularly if one focusses on stars that do not also host higher mass planets. This would be consistent with core-accretion models of planet formation. Before drawing physical conclusions, it will be necessary to check for metallicity bias in the subsample of stars around which Neptune mass planets could have been found. M dwarf abundances are currently too uncertain to relate planet frequency and host star metallicity, due mainly to missing or incorrect molecular line data.

scholarly journals Forming terrestrial planets and delivering water

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (A29B) ◽  
pp. 427-430
Author(s):  
Kevin J. Walsh
Keyword(s):  
Planet Formation ◽  
Semimajor Axis ◽  
Giant Planet ◽  
Terrestrial Planet ◽  
Giant Planets ◽  
Asteroid Belt ◽  
Terrestrial Planets ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Building Models ◽  
Rich Material

AbstractBuilding models capable of successfully matching the Terrestrial Planet's basic orbital and physical properties has proven difficult. Meanwhile, improved estimates of the nature of water-rich material accreted by the Earth, along with the timing of its delivery, have added even more constraints for models to match. While the outer Asteroid Belt seemingly provides a source for water-rich planetesimals, models that delivered enough of them to the still-forming Terrestrial Planets typically failed on other basic constraints - such as the mass of Mars.Recent models of Terrestrial Planet Formation have explored how the gas-driven migration of the Giant Planets can solve long-standing issues with the Earth/Mars size ratio. This model is forced to reproduce the orbital and taxonomic distribution of bodies in the Asteroid Belt from a much wider range of semimajor axis than previously considered. In doing so, it also provides a mechanism to feed planetesimals from between and beyond the Giant Planet formation region to the still-forming Terrestrial Planets.

scholarly journals Terrestrial planet formation in extra-solar planetary systems

2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (S249) ◽  
pp. 233-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean N. Raymond
Keyword(s):  
Final Stage ◽  
Planet Formation ◽  
Giant Planet ◽  
Terrestrial Planet ◽  
Circumstellar Disks ◽  
Giant Planets ◽  
Terrestrial Planets ◽  
Low Mass Stars ◽  
Low Mass ◽  
Rocky Planets

AbstractTerrestrial planets form in a series of dynamical steps from the solid component of circumstellar disks. First, km-sized planetesimals form likely via a combination of sticky collisions, turbulent concentration of solids, and gravitational collapse from micron-sized dust grains in the thin disk midplane. Second, planetesimals coalesce to form Moon- to Mars-sized protoplanets, also called “planetary embryos”. Finally, full-sized terrestrial planets accrete from protoplanets and planetesimals. This final stage of accretion lasts about 10-100 Myr and is strongly affected by gravitational perturbations from any gas giant planets, which are constrained to form more quickly, during the 1-10 Myr lifetime of the gaseous component of the disk. It is during this final stage that the bulk compositions and volatile (e.g., water) contents of terrestrial planets are set, depending on their feeding zones and the amount of radial mixing that occurs. The main factors that influence terrestrial planet formation are the mass and surface density profile of the disk, and the perturbations from giant planets and binary companions if they exist. Simple accretion models predicts that low-mass stars should form small, dry planets in their habitable zones. The migration of a giant planet through a disk of rocky bodies does not completely impede terrestrial planet growth. Rather, “hot Jupiter” systems are likely to also contain exterior, very water-rich Earth-like planets, and also “hot Earths”, very close-in rocky planets. Roughly one third of the known systems of extra-solar (giant) planets could allow a terrestrial planet to form in the habitable zone.

scholarly journals Growth and interaction of planets

2004 ◽  
Vol 202 ◽  
pp. 149-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pawel Artymowicz
Keyword(s):  
Planetary Systems ◽  
Giant Planets ◽  
The Sun ◽  
Orbital Structure ◽  
Origin And Evolution ◽  
Elliptic Orbits ◽  
Observational Techniques

We discuss theories of origin and evolution of the newly discovered extrasolar planetary systems. As these systems failed to fulfill prior expectations concerning their orbital structure, we are challenged to extend and/or revise many preexisting theories. Important extensions include migration of bodies in disks and planetary eccentricity pumping by planet-planet interaction and primordial disk-planet interaction. Progress in observational techniques will allow us to find which of these two types of interaction is responsible for the observed variety of orbits and masses of planets. New insights into the formation of giant planets in our system can be obtained by asking why Jupiter and Saturn are not larger, closer to the sun and/or do not follow noticeably elliptic orbits.

scholarly journals Unprecedented accurate abundances: signatures of other Earths?

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (S265) ◽  
pp. 412-415
Author(s):  
Jorge Meléndez ◽  
Martin Asplund ◽  
Bengt Gustafsson ◽  
David Yong ◽  
Iván Ramírez
Keyword(s):  
Chemical Composition ◽  
Giant Planets ◽  
Elemental Abundance ◽  
The Sun ◽  
Volatile Elements ◽  
Solar Abundance ◽  
Abundance Pattern ◽  
Refractory Elements ◽  
Solar Type ◽  
Solar Analogs

AbstractFor more than 140 years the chemical composition of our Sun has been considered typical of solar-type stars. Our highly differential elemental abundance analysis of unprecedented accuracy (~0.01 dex) of the Sun relative to solar twins, shows that the Sun has a peculiar chemical composition with a ≈20% depletion of refractory elements relative to the volatile elements in comparison with solar twins. The abundance differences correlate strongly with the condensation temperatures of the elements. A similar study of solar analogs from planet surveys shows that this peculiarity also holds in comparisons with solar analogs known to have close-in giant planets while the majority of solar analogs without detected giant planets show the solar abundance pattern. The peculiarities in the solar chemical composition can be explained as signatures of the formation of terrestrial planets like our own Earth.

scholarly journals Evolutionary models of cold and low-mass planets: cooling curves, magnitudes, and detectability

2019 ◽  
Vol 623 ◽  
pp. A85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther F. Linder ◽  
Christoph Mordasini ◽  
Paul Mollière ◽  
Gabriel-Dominique Marleau ◽  
Matej Malik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Effective Temperature ◽  
Initial Conditions ◽  
Giant Planets ◽  
Evolutionary Models ◽  
Cooling Curves ◽  
Mid Infrared ◽  
The Core ◽  
Low Mass ◽  
Core Accretion ◽  
The Impact

Context. Future instruments like the Near Infrared Camera (NIRCam) and the Mid Infrared Instrument (MIRI) on the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) or the Mid-Infrared E-ELT Imager and Spectrograph (METIS) at the European Extremely Large Telescope (E-ELT) will be able to image exoplanets that are too faint (because they have a low mass, and hence a small size or low effective temperature) for current direct imaging instruments. On the theoretical side, core accretion formation models predict a significant population of low-mass and/or cool planets at orbital distances of ~10–100 au. Aims. Evolutionary models predicting the planetary intrinsic luminosity as a function of time have traditionally concentrated on gas-dominated giant planets. We extend these cooling curves to Saturnian and Neptunian planets. Methods. We simulated the cooling of isolated core-dominated and gas giant planets with masses of 5 M⊕–2 M♃. The planets consist of a core made of iron, silicates, and ices surrounded by a H/He envelope, similar to the ice giants in the solar system. The luminosity includes the contribution from the cooling and contraction of the core and of the H/He envelope, as well as radiogenic decay. For the atmosphere we used grey, AMES-Cond, petitCODE, and HELIOS models. We considered solar and non-solar metallicities as well as cloud-free and cloudy atmospheres. The most important initial conditions, namely the core-to-envelope-mass ratio and the initial (i.e. post formation) luminosity are taken from planet formation simulations based on the core accretion paradigm. Results. We first compare our cooling curves for Uranus, Neptune, Jupiter, Saturn, GJ 436b, and a 5 M⊕ planet with a 1% H/He envelope with other evolutionary models. We then present the temporal evolution of planets with masses between 5 M⊕ and 2 M♃ in terms of their luminosity, effective temperature, radius, and entropy. We discuss the impact of different post formation entropies. For the different atmosphere types and initial conditions, magnitudes in various filter bands between 0.9 and 30 micrometer wavelength are provided. Conclusions. Using blackbody fluxes and non-grey spectra, we estimate the detectability of such planets with JWST. We found that a 20 (100) M⊕ planet can be detected with JWST in the background limit up to an age of about 10 (100) Myr with NIRCam and MIRI, respectively.

scholarly journals Terrestrial planet formation in low-mass disks: dependence with initial conditions

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (S310) ◽  
pp. 218-219
Author(s):  
M. P. Ronco ◽  
G. C. de Elía ◽  
O. M. Guilera
Keyword(s):  
Gas Phase ◽  
Analytical Model ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Planet Formation ◽  
Initial Conditions ◽  
Planetary Systems ◽  
Terrestrial Planet ◽  
Initial Distribution ◽  
Protoplanetary Disk ◽  
Low Mass

AbstractIn general, most of the studies of terrestrial-type planet formation typically use ad hoc initial conditions. In this work we improved the initial conditions described in Ronco & de Elía (2014) starting with a semi-analytical model wich simulates the evolution of the protoplanetary disk during the gas phase. The results of the semi-analytical model are then used as initial conditions for the N-body simulations. We show that the planetary systems considered are not sensitive to the particular initial distribution of embryos and planetesimals and thus, the results are globally similar to those found in the previous work.

scholarly journals Planetesimal fragmentation and giant planet formation

2019 ◽  
Vol 625 ◽  
pp. A138 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. L. San Sebastián ◽  
O. M. Guilera ◽  
M. G. Parisi
Keyword(s):  
Impact Energy ◽  
Planet Formation ◽  
Giant Planet ◽  
Realistic Model ◽  
Giant Planets ◽  
Energy Threshold ◽  
Accretion Rates ◽  
The Cross ◽  
Catastrophic Impact ◽  
Massive Cores

Context. Most planet formation models that incorporate planetesimal fragmentation consider a catastrophic impact energy threshold for basalts at a constant velocity of 3 km s−1 throughout the process of the formation of the planets. However, as planets grow, the relative velocities of the surrounding planetesimals increase from velocities of the order of meters per second to a few kilometers per second. In addition, beyond the ice line where giant planets are formed, planetesimals are expected to be composed roughly of 50% ices. Aims. We aim to study the role of planetesimal fragmentation on giant planet formation considering the planetesimal catastrophic impact energy threshold as a function of the planetesimal relative velocities and compositions. Methods. We improved our model of planetesimal fragmentation incorporating a functional form of the catastrophic impact energy threshold with the planetesimal relative velocities and compositions. We also improved in our model the accretion of small fragments produced by the fragmentation of planetesimals during the collisional cascade considering specific pebble accretion rates. Results. We find that a more accurate and realistic model for the calculation of the catastrophic impact energy threshold tends to slow down the formation of massive cores. Only for reduced grain opacity values at the envelope of the planet is the cross-over mass achieved before the disk timescale dissipation. Conclusions. While planetesimal fragmentation favors the quick formation of massive cores of 5–10 M⊕ the cross-over mass could be inhibited by planetesimal fragmentation. However, grain opacity reduction or pollution by the accreted planetesimals together with planetesimal fragmentation could explain the formation of giant planets with low-mass cores.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document