Viewing Solar System Architecture Through an Extrasolar Lens - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

viewing solar system architecture through an extrasolar
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Viewing Solar System Architecture Through an Extrasolar Lens - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Viewing Solar System Architecture Through an Extrasolar Lens Konstantin Batygin (Caltech) Greg Laughlin (UC Santa Cruz) Planets with known masses Jupiters ! (10% of Sun-like stars) Hot Jupiters ! (1% of Sun-like stars) Planets with known


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Viewing Solar System Architecture Through an Extrasolar Lens

Konstantin Batygin (Caltech) Greg Laughlin (UC Santa Cruz)

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Planets with known masses

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Hot Jupiters ! (1% of Sun-like stars) Jupiters ! (10% of Sun-like stars)

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Planets with known radii

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Hot Jupiters (1% of Sun-like stars) Close-in sub-Jovian planets (50% of Sun-like stars)

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Jupiter Saturn Neptune Earth Mercury

1 R

  • Kepler Planet Candidates (sub-Jovian)

100R

r = log10 ✓ a R ◆

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Jupiter Mars Earth Venus Mercury

single planet systems 2 planet systems 3 planet systems 4+ planet systems

Saturn Neptune Earth Mercury

1 R

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Minimum Mass Solar Nebula

(Hayashi 1981)

Σ = 1700 ⇣ a 1AU ⌘−1.5 g/cm2

fdust ∼ 1.5% fdust ∼ 0.5%

a < 2.7AU a > 2.7AU

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Minimum Mass Solar Nebula

(Hayashi 1981)

Minimum Mass Extrasolar Nebula

(Chiang & Laughlin 2013)

Σ = 1700 ⇣ a 1AU ⌘−1.5 g/cm2

Σ ∼ 104 ⇣ a 1AU ⌘−1.6 g/cm2 fdust ∼ 0.5% fdust ∼ 1.5% fdust ∼ 0.5%

a < 2.7AU a > 2.7AU

gas solid

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Relative to other Sun-like, planet-bearing stars, the Solar system’s terrestrial region is severely depleted in mass.

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Relative to other Sun-like, planet-bearing stars, the Solar systems’ terrestrial region is severely depleted in mass.

Our proposition: Long-range (a few AU) migration of Jupiter in the Solar nebula Orbital excitation of planetesimals by resonant sweeping Destructive collisional cascade and removal by aerodynamic drift Resonant shepherding of close-in planets by drifting debris

slide-12
SLIDE 12
slide-13
SLIDE 13
slide-14
SLIDE 14
slide-15
SLIDE 15

3:2 resonant lock established

slide-16
SLIDE 16
slide-17
SLIDE 17
slide-18
SLIDE 18
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Jupiter’s inward trek resonantly sweeps up planetesimals

planetesimals + gas

Jupiter

2:1 MMR

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Jupiter’s inward trek resonantly sweeps up planetesimals

planetesimals + gas

Jupiter

2:1 MMR

√a h 1 − p 1 − e2 i = const.

Adiabatic invariance dictates excitation of orbital eccentricity

slide-21
SLIDE 21

time (years) planetesimal - Jupiter period ratio B

2:1 MMR 3:2 1:1

  • utward scattering

resonant capture and transport

slide-22
SLIDE 22

semi-major axis (AU)

  • rbital eccentricity

Jupiter’s orbital migration

A

100 km planetesimals

resonant transport

  • u

t w a r d s c a t t e r i n g unswept disk 2:1 resonance

slide-23
SLIDE 23

semi-major axis (AU)

  • rbital eccentricity

Jupiter’s orbital migration

A

10 km planetesimals

resonant transport

  • utward scattering

unswept disk 2:1 resonance

slide-24
SLIDE 24

semi-major axis (AU)

  • rbital eccentricity

Jupiter’s orbital migration

A

1000 km planetesimals

r e s

  • n

a n t t r a n s p

  • r

t

  • u

t w a r d s c a t t e r i n g unswept disk 2:1 resonance

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Jupiter

2:1 MMR

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Jupiter

2:1 MMR planetesimals

slide-27
SLIDE 27

ν ⇠ n σ v = Mtot/m 2πhei tanhiia3 πs2vKhei ~ a collision every ~20 orbits

Jupiter

2:1 MMR planetesimals

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Collisions can lead to fragmentation accretion

  • r
slide-29
SLIDE 29

Collisions are catastrophic if:

✓m0 M ◆ ✓v2

enc

2 ◆ > 1 2ρ ✓ R 1 cm ◆1.36

(Leinhardt & Stewart 2009)

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Collisions are catastrophic if:

✓m0 M ◆ ✓v2

enc

2 ◆ > 1 2ρ ✓ R 1 cm ◆1.36

3 g/cm3 (rock) 10,100,1000 km

∼ e vkep impactor-target mass ratio of ~10% yields fragmentation!

(Leinhardt & Stewart 2009)

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Jupiter’s migration shepherds planetesimals inwards and grinds them down to smaller sizes

slide-32
SLIDE 32

vgas = vK s 1 − 3 c2

s

v2

K

ˆ ϕ = vK(1 − η) ˆ ϕ adrag = −π CD 2m s2ρgasvrelvrel.

~0.005

Gas is sub-Keplerian small (<1km) planetesimals feel a head-wind Aerodynamics

slide-33
SLIDE 33
slide-34
SLIDE 34
slide-35
SLIDE 35

time (years)

  • rbital radius (AU)
  • rbital decay of a putative Kepler-11 system under the

influence of a drifting population of 100m planetesimals

b c d e g f

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Jupiter’s current orbit is a consequence of inward-outward migration, facilitated by a resonance with Saturn

Summary

The inward phase of Jupiter’s migration entrained planetesimals into interior resonances and led to orbital excitation The resulting collisional avalanche generated a debris disk that would have aerodynamically driven any pre-existing short planets into the Sun

Jupiter’s orbital migration resonant transport
  • u
t w a r unswept 2:1 resonance
slide-37
SLIDE 37

A strong anti-correlation between the existence of multiple close-in planets and giant planets at orbital periods exceeding ~100 days within the same system.

Links with observations

The morphology of the collisional heating should be strongly a-symmetrical. The spectral energy distributions of protoplanetary disks hosting gap-opening planets should exhibit infra-red enhancements.