Giant Planet Formation and Migration Scenarios Christophe - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
R. Dawson, OHP, 10/09/15 Giant Planet Formation and Migration Scenarios Christophe Carreau/ESA Rebekah (Bekki) Dawson (University of California, Berkeley Miller Fellow; > Penn State) Center for Exoplanets and Habitable Worlds R.
Rebekah (Bekki) Dawson
(University of California, Berkeley Miller Fellow; —> Penn State)
Christophe Carreau/ESA
Center for Exoplanets and Habitable Worlds
Rebekah (Bekki) Dawson
(University of California, Berkeley Miller Fellow; —> Penn State)
Christophe Carreau/ESA
Center for Exoplanets and Habitable Worlds
Pollack+ 93, 96
(adapted for clarity)
0.1 1.0 10.0 t (Myr) 1 10 100
Malhotra 93, 95
(adapted for clarity) solid surface density 10 gcm-2
Formation of Jupiter by core accretion
Migration of Neptune
solid surface density 7 gcm-2
t=0
Neptune Neptune Pluto 3/2 2/1
t=present Sun
formation of giant planets?
history on smaller bodies?
PPV
Youdin 10, AREPS
+ 14, PPVI
& Fabrycky 15, ARAA
formation of giant planets?
history on smaller bodies?
dN a (AU)
incomplete inferred, direct imaging, Brandt+14
RV, msini > 0.3 MJup
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.
(b) t =1.0
core accretion
Ormel+ 14
gravitational instability
Boley 09
(disk and/or tidal)
Malik+ 15
e.g., Pollack+ 96, Hubickyj+05 e.g., Boss+ 97, Mayer+02 e.g., Lin+96, Alibert+05, Rasio & Ford 96, Wu & Murray 03 FORMATION MIGRATION
(b) t =1.0
core accretion
Ormel+ 14
gravitational instability
Boley 09
(disk and/or tidal)
Malik+ 15
e.g., Pollack+ 96, Hubickyj+05 e.g., Boss+ 97, Mayer+02 e.g., Lin+96, Alibert+05, Rasio & Ford 96, Wu & Murray 03 FORMATION MIGRATION
0.1 1.0 5.0 a (AU) 5 10 15 20 trun (Myr) Z = 20Z Z = 16Z Z = 2Z
tdisk,slow
Z = Z Z-gradient
Inner disk, 10 Earth mass core Outer disk, 4 Earth mass core
Piso, Youdin, & Murray-Clay 2015 Lee, Chiang, & Ormel 2014
a (AU)
10-4 10-2 100 102 104
Isolation Mass (Earth) Formation Timescale (Myr)
timescale
Core too small
c
e m a s s
High solid surface density
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Timescale too long
surface density profile power law -3/2
a (AU)
10-4 10-2 100 102 104
Isolation Mass (Earth) Formation Timescale (Myr) Timescale too long
timescale
Core too small
c
e m a s s
0.01 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Low solid surface density
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.01
surface density profile power law -3/2
a (AU)
10-4 10-2 100 102 104
Isolation Mass (Earth) Formation Timescale (Myr)
timescale
Core too small
c
e m a s s
High solid surface density
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Timescale too long
Giant-planet metallicity correlation, e.g. Santos+01,04, Fischer & Valenti 05
surface density profile power law -3/2
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.
dN a (AU)
msini > 0.3 MJup
Timescale too long Core too small
dN a (AU)
incomplete inferred, direct imaging, Brandt+14 msini > 0.3 MJup
50 AU
Timescale too long Core too small
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.
Marois+ 08
70 AU 0.05 AU
(b) t =1.0
core accretion
Ormel+ 14
gravitational instability
Boley 09
(disk and/or tidal)
Malik+ 15
e.g., Pollack+ 96, Hubickyj+05 e.g., Boss+ 97, Mayer+02 e.g., Lin+96, Alibert+05, Rasio & Ford 96, Wu & Murray 03 FORMATION MIGRATION
Solutions for forming/placing planets at wide separations tell us about disk properties
Solution Disk requirements Pebble accretion: enhance growth cross section
(e.g., Lambrechts & Johansen 12)
cm particles concentrated in the midplane
(b) t =1.0Formation via gravitational instability (e.g., Kratter,
Murray-Clay, & Youdin 10)
Cold disk, fragmentation at end of disk lifetime
Outward migration with 2+ giant planets in resonance
(e.g., Crida+ 09)
Low viscosity, small scale height
Solutions for forming/placing hot Jupiters tell us about disk properties
Solution Disk requirements Enhance solid surface density by 10-100
Delivery of solids/ planetesimals/cores to inner disk
(b) t =1.0Formation via gravitational instability Unbound disk (Unlikely;
Rafikov 2006)
Inward migration (e.g. Lin+ 96)
(Discussion for super-E*rths: Lee+14, Schlichting 14)
Disk properties for fast migration (viscosity, thermal/ entropy profile, etc.) (or tides); see Papaloizou+ 06 review
formation of giant planets?
history on other bodies?
Open questions B.b.
formation of giant planets?
history on other bodies?
Open questions B.b.
e.g. Goldreich & Tremaine 1980
e.g. Hut 1981 applied to 51 Peg b by Lin+ 96 applied to 51 Peg b by Rasio & Ford 96 high eccentricity excited by planetary or binary companion
gas
e.g. Rasio & Ford 96, Chatterjee+ 08, Ford & Rasio 08, Matsumura+ 12, Beauge and Nesvory 12, Boley+ 12 e.g. Wu and Murray 03, Fabrycky & Tremaine 07, Naoz+11, 12 Wu and Lithwick 11
e.g. Goldreich & Tremaine 1980
e.g. Hut 1981 applied to 51 Peg b by Lin+ 96 applied to 51 Peg b by Rasio & Ford 96 high eccentricity excited by planetary or binary companion
gas
Johnson 10, Naoz+ 12)
Aligned Misaligned
Aligned Misaligned
Misalignment of entire system: e.g., Rogers+ 12 (star), Batygin 12, Fielding+ 15 (disk), Mazeh+ 15 (flat systems)
Aligned Misaligned
Coplanar high-eccentricity migration (e.g., Li+14, Petrovich 15) Tidal realignment (e.g., Winn+ 10, Albrecht+12; many theory papers
Misalignment of entire system: e.g., Rogers+ 12 (star), Batygin 12, Fielding+ 15 (disk), Mazeh+ 15 (flat systems)
Schlaufman 10; Winn, Fabrycky, Albrecht, & Johnson 10:
Hot (massive?) stars have misaligned planets Evidence for tidal realignment of originally misaligned orbits?
RID 14
Albrecht+ 12 measurements and compilation of literature; temperature/stellar mass trend: Schlaufman 10, Winn+ 10; planet mass trend: e.g., Hebrard+ 11)
P < 7days
Observed
4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 Teff (K) 50 100 150 |lambda| (deg)
0.5 < Mjup < 1 1 < Mjup < 2.5 2.5 < Mjup < 15 15 < MJup < 25
Schlaufman 10; Winn, Fabrycky, Albrecht, & Johnson 10:
Hot (massive?) stars have misaligned planets Evidence for tidal realignment of originally misaligned orbits?
Observed
4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 Teff (K) 50 100 150 |lambda| (deg)
0.5 < Mjup < 1 1 < Mjup < 2.5 2.5 < Mjup < 15 15 < MJup < 25
Simulated
4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 Teff 50 100 150 |lambda| (deg) RID 14
P < 7days
Albrecht+ 12 measurements and compilation of literature; temperature/stellar mass trend: Schlaufman 10, Winn+ 10; planet mass trend: e.g., Hebrard+ 11)
Observed
4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 Teff (K) 50 100 150 |lambda| (deg)
0.5 < Mjup < 1 1 < Mjup < 2.5 2.5 < Mjup < 15 15 < MJup < 25
RID 14
Albrecht+ 12 measurements and compilation of literature; temperature/stellar mass trend: Schlaufman 10, Winn+ 10; planet mass trend: e.g., Hebrard+ 11)
Observed
4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 Teff (K) 50 100 150 |lambda| (deg)
0.5 < Mjup < 1 1 < Mjup < 2.5 2.5 < Mjup < 15 15 < MJup < 25
RID 14
Albrecht+ 12 measurements and compilation of literature; temperature/stellar mass trend: Schlaufman 10, Winn+ 10; planet mass trend: e.g., Hebrard+ 11)
Johnson 10, Naoz+ 12)
Schlaufman, Mustill; Knutson+ 14; Ngo, Knutson+ 15; Lissauer+ 10, Steffen+11, Lissauer+11)
f
m s h e r e
perturber
f
m s h e r e
f
m s h e r e
perturber
f
m s h e r e
timescale/location of planetesimal formation Formation location; launch location; ejection of perturber; capacity of perturber; post-migration evolution Complications:
WASP-47 Ups And 0.1 1 10 0.01 a (AU) 2:1
Friends: M. Neveu-VanMalle+ 15, Becker+ 15
100 1000 HAT-P-7
Friend: Ngo+ 15
Johnson 10, Naoz+ 12)
Schlaufman, Mustill; Knutson+ 14; Ngo, Knutson+ 15; Lissauer+ 10, Steffen+11, Lissauer+11)
eccentricity
0.1 1.0 a (AU) 0.1 1.0 0.00 0.45 0.63 0.77 0.89 1.00 e 0.1 1.0
Giant planets, exoplanets.org
eccentricity
0.1 1.0 a (AU) 0.1 1.0 0.00 0.45 0.63 0.77 0.89 1.00 e 0.1 1.0
disk migration
Giant planets, exoplanets.org
eccentricity
0.1 1.0 a (AU) 0.1 1.0 0.00 0.45 0.63 0.77 0.89 1.00 e 0.1 1.0
t i d a l m i g r a t i
disk migration
Giant planets, exoplanets.org
eccentricity
0.1 1.0 a (AU) 0.1 1.0 0.00 0.45 0.63 0.77 0.89 1.00 e 0.1 1.0
t i d a l m i g r a t i
disk migration
Giant planets, exoplanets.org
eccentricity
Giant planets, exoplanets.org
Should be ~6 the Kepler sample: Socrates, Katz, Dong, & Tremaine 2012
0.1 1.0 a (AU) 0.1 1.0 0.00 0.45 0.63 0.77 0.89 1.00 e 0.1 1.0
Flux Time Flux Time
RID & Johnson 12
See also Burke 2007, Ford, Quinn, Veras 2008, Barnes 2008, Moorhead+ 2011, Kipping+ 2012, Kane+ 2012, Plavchan+ 2012
HD 17146b Kepler-419b KOI-686b
RID & Johnson 12 RID+ 12
ρ 0.00.3 Relative N − ω 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 e
Photoeccentric RV
e = 0.83 +0.03/-0.02
e = 0.67 +/- 0.08
RID+ 14 Fischer+ 07
ρ ρ ρ ω 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 e
e = 0.71+0.16
−0.09
e = 0.5560 ± 0.0037
Diaz+ 14
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 e
e = 0.62 +0.18/-0.14
RID, Murray-Clay, & Johnson 2015
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 ρcirc/ρ* 36 50 100 200 400 P (day)
transit speed^3 Orbital period (days) Expect 5 Includes: Poisson uncertainties Incompleteness Some false positive vetting 17 quarters
Expect 5
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 ρcirc/ρ* 36 50 100 200 400 P (day)
Missing from the Kepler sample!
RID, Murray-Clay, & Johnson 2015
Includes: Poisson uncertainties Incompleteness Some false positive vetting 17 quarters transit speed^3 Orbital period (days)
eccentricity
Giant planets, exoplanets.org
Should be ~6 the Kepler sample: Socrates, Katz, Dong, & Tremaine 2012
0.1 1.0 a (AU) 0.1 1.0 0.00 0.45 0.63 0.77 0.89 1.00 e 0.1 1.0
Missing from Kepler!
Our search: RID & Johnson 12, RID+ 12, 14, 15
eccentricity
Giant planets, exoplanets.org
0.1 1.0 a (AU) 0.1 1.0 0.00 0.45 0.63 0.77 0.89 1.00 e 0.1 1.0
Eccentricities can’t have been excited in situ Petrovich+ 14
1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 1-e2 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 a (AU) e = 0.2 Fe/H < 0 Fe/H > 0 Fe/H < 0 Fe/H > 0 XO-3-b
metal rich, eccentric hot Jupiters, both
0.63 0.55 0.45 0.32 0.00
RID & Murray-Clay 13
eccentricity
a (AU)
10-4 10-2 100 102 104
Isolation Mass (Earth) Formation Timescale (Myr) Timescale too long
timescale
Core too small
c
e m a s s
0.01 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Low solid surface density
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.01
surface density profile power law -3/2
a (AU)
10-4 10-2 100 102 104
Isolation Mass (Earth) Formation Timescale (Myr) Timescale too long
timescale
Core too small
c
e m a s s
0.01 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Low solid surface density
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.01
surface density profile power law -3/2
a (AU)
10-4 10-2 100 102 104
Isolation Mass (Earth) Formation Timescale (Myr)
timescale
Core too small
c
e m a s s
High solid surface density
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Timescale too long
Giant-planet metallicity correlation, e.g. Santos+01,04, Fischer & Valenti 05
surface density profile power law -3/2
multiple giant planets
disk migration channel high eccentricity channel
1 (if any) giant planet e.g. Fischer & Valenti 05
Host star metallicity (as a proxy for solid surface density) may determine the migration channel
gas
RV normalized using Fischer & Valenti 2005 sample
RV Kepler
1 10 100 P (days) 50 100 150 N transit Full Sample
RID & Murray-Clay 13
RV 1.2% (Wright et al. 2012) Kepler 0.4% (Fressin et al. 2013)
5 10 15 20 N transit
Full sample
2 4 6 8 10 12 N transit
[Fe/H] > 0
2 4 6 8 10 12 N transit
[Fe/H] < 0
1 10 100 P (days)
Broken up, hot Jupiter
consistent with RV sample within uncertainties
(comparison to Fischer & Valenti sample) RID & Murray-Clay 13
Warm Jupiters orbiting metal-rich stars have a range of eccentricities; those orbiting metal-poor stars are confined to lower eccentricities.
RID & Murray-Clay,2013
a (AU) 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 1-e2 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 Fe/H < 0 Fe/H > 0 Fe/H < 0 Fe/H > 0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 e 2 4 6 8 10 12 N
0.45 0.00 0.63 0.78 1.00 0.89
eccentricity
RID & Murray-Clay 13
Possible origin through planet-planet interactions tidal migration: RID & Chiang 2014
formation of giant planets?
history on other bodies?
Open questions B.b.
formation of giant planets?
history on other bodies?
Open questions B.b.
timescale to form in situ too long, e.g. Thommes+ 1999
30 AU
Neptune
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 semi major axis (AU) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 eccentricity
Resonance: Kuiper belt objects (KBOs) captured into mean motion resonance with Neptune due to Neptune’s migration
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 semi major axis (AU) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 eccentricity
Mixed origins, e.g. Morbidelli+ 08 Batygin+ 11 Dawson & Murray-Clay 12
Compositional Mixing: KBO dynamical classes have different sizes, albedos, colors, binarity
resonance compositional mixing
rock/H/He + ices resonance
rock/H/He + ices
compositional mixing
rock/H/He + ices
compositional mixing
0.1 1 10 0.01 a (AU) Mean motion resonance: Warm Jupiters (near 3:1)
0.1 1 10 0.01 a (AU) e
P=0.74d (RID & Fabrycky 10)
Compositional Mixing: 55 Cnc e
Sanchis-Ojeda survey of ultra-short period planets (USP)
Sanchis-Ojeda+ 14
See also Lopez & Fortney 14, Weiss & Marcy 14, Wolfgang & Lopez 15, Dressing+ 15
Rogers 2015
55 Cnc e
rocky stripped cores
55 Cnc e has a different composition than typical USPs
Sanchis-Ojeda+ 14 Compositional Mixing
0.1 1 10 0.01 a (AU) 55 Cnc WASP-47 GJ-876 Kepler-9 Kepler-30 non-transiting
formation of giant planets?
history on other bodies?
Open questions B.b.
Solids + other conditions for hot Jupiters & wide planets Both disk and tidal migration Habitable Super-E*arths
initial conditions = disk properties (+binary, galactic forces)
Blueprint for the Assembly of Planetary Systems
initial conditions = disk properties (+binary, galactic forces) trigger physical processes
Blueprint for the Assembly of Planetary Systems
Blueprint for the Assembly of Planetary Systems
initial conditions = disk properties (+binary, galactic forces) trigger physical processes diversity of orbits/compositions
information about the earliest evolution: GPI and SPHERE (ongoing), WFIRST
found by K2, TESS and PLATO with RV follow-up by next generation instrument and outer planets from GAIA
and next generation ground-based, giant telescopes)