• No results found

EVOLUTION OF PLANETARY SYSTEMS

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "EVOLUTION OF PLANETARY SYSTEMS"

Copied!
25
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

EVOLUTION OF PLANETARY SYSTEMS

Alessandro Morbidelli

CNRS/Obs. De la Cote d’Azur, Nice, France

With inputs from: B. Bitsch, C. Cossou, A. Izidoro, A. Johansen, M. Lambrechts, S. Raymond

(2)

The Big Questions

Dichotomy of the Solar System

(Mars-size planetary embryos in the inner

system, multi-Earth-mass cores in the outer system within ~ 3 My)

Hot Super –Earth: the most abundant category of planets

Why not here?

Why there are typically no giant planets in these Super-Earth systems?

Can we place the Solar System evolution in the broad context?

(3)

Bitsch et al., 2014

Migration vs. planetary mass in a realistic disk

Migr

ation

ra

te

In

w

ar

d

O

utw

ar

d

snowlinee dM/dt=10-8M sun/y

See Bitsch’s presentation on Thursday for H/r as a function of disk properties and time

(4)

Bitsch et al., 2014

Migration vs. planetary mass in a realistic disk

Migr

ation

ra

te

In

w

ar

d

O

utw

ar

d

snowlinee dM/dt=10-8M sun/y

(5)
(6)

Bitsch et al., 2014

Migration vs. planetary mass in a realistic disk

Migr

ation

ra

te

In

w

ar

d

O

utw

ar

d

snowlinee dM/dt=10-8M sun/y

(7)

Hydro-dynamical simulations of a system of proto-planets, the innermost of which is retained on a non-migrating orbit Morbidelli et al., 2008 No-migration radius 8Me

(8)

The impact of Super-Earth migration on the local formation of terrestrial planets

(Izidoro, Morbidelli and Raymond, in press) Depends strongly on migration timescale

(9)

The impact of Super-Earth migration on the local formation of terrestrial planets

(Izidoro, Morbidelli and Raymond, in press) Depends strongly on migration timescale

(10)

The impact of Super-Earth migration on the local formation of terrestrial planets

(Izidoro, Morbidelli and Raymond, in press) Depends strongly on migration timescale

(11)

The impact of Super-Earth migration on the local formation of terrestrial planets

(Izidoro, Morbidelli and Raymond, in press) Depends strongly on migration timescale

(12)

Bitsch et al., 2014

Migration vs. planetary mass in a realistic disk

Migr

ation

ra

te

In

w

ar

d

O

utw

ar

d

snowlinee dM/dt=10-8M sun/y

Giant planet in Type II regime

(13)

Observed radial distribution of giant planets (more massive than Saturn)

(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)

Courtesy of A. Crida It tacks!

Another possible solution valid for the Solar System (Jupiter + Saturn): The Grand Tack Masset and Snellgrove, 2001; Morbidelli and Crida, 2007; Pierens and Nelson, 2008; Walsh et al., 2011

(19)

Giant planets are extremely effective in retaining Super-Earths behind them

(20)

Giant planets are extremely effective in retaining Super-Earths behind them

(21)

The Big Questions

Dichotomy of the Solar System

(Mars-size planetary embryos in the inner

system, multi-Earth-mass cores in the outer system within ~ 3 My)

Hot Super –Earth: the most abundant category of planets

Why not here?

Why there are typically no giant planets in these Super-Earth systems?

The “egg” of outward migration is key to hold a core until it becomes massive

enough to form a giant planet.

If this happens to the innermost core, and the giant planet is retained from

migrating into the inner system (e.g. grand tack) in most cases all ice-giant

planets remain in the outer disk as in our Solar System.

Without Jupiter and Saturn, Uranus and Neptune would have migrated into the

inner Solar System

(22)

The density of solid material beyond the snowline is only a factor of 2 larger, insufficient to explain the difference

The Key is pebble accretion (Ormel and Klahr, 2010; Lambrechts and Johansen, 2012) Beyond the snowline, pebbles can be dm-size objects of ice and silicates (Ros and Johansen, 2013) Once pebbles drift inside the snowline, the ice sublimates and much smaller

(chondrule-sized?) silicate grains are released

Pebble accretion is thus much less efficient in the inner System

Dichotomy of the Solar System

(Mars-size planetary embryos in the inner system, multi-Earth-mass cores in the outer system within ~ 3 My). Why?

(23)

Also, when proto-Jupiter reached a mass of ~ 20 Earth masses, it cut off the flow of pebbles towards the inner solar system

Lambrechts, Johansen and Morbidelli, submitted; Morbidelli and Nesvorny, 2012

If the growth of planetary embryos and cores occurs by pebble accretion (Lambrechts and Johansen, 2012), this explains why the inner Solar System starved in mass and could form only small planets.

(24)

The Big Questions

Dichotomy of the Solar System

(Mars-size planetary embryos in the inner

system, multi-Earth-mass cores in the outer system within ~ 3 My)

Pebble accretion explains in a natural way why the largest embryos/cores grow

beyond the snowline (pebbles are big and have a more favorable t

f

). The

retention of proto-Jupiter at the no-migration radius cut the flux of pebbles

when the latter exceeded ~20 Earth masses. The mass-starved inner Solar

System could then only form terrestrial planets

Hot Super –Earth: the most abundant category of planets

Why not here?

Why there are typically no giant planets in these Super-Earth systems?

(25)

The Big Questions

Dichotomy of the Solar System

(Mars-size planetary embryos in the inner

system, multi-Earth-mass cores in the outer system within ~ 3 My)

Hot Super –Earth: the most abundant category of planets

Why not here?

Why there are typically no giant planets in these Super-Earth systems?

Can we place the Solar System evolution in the broad context?

References

Related documents