1 / 16

Mass Distribution and Planet Formation in the Solar Nebula

Mass Distribution and Planet Formation in the Solar Nebula. Steve Desch School of Earth and Space Exploration Arizona State University Lunar and Planetary Science Conference March 12, 2008. Outline. Minimum Mass Solar Nebula Nice Model of Planet Migration

irina
Download Presentation

Mass Distribution and Planet Formation in the Solar Nebula

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mass Distribution and Planet Formation in the Solar Nebula Steve Desch School of Earth and Space Exploration Arizona State University Lunar and Planetary Science Conference March 12, 2008

  2. Outline • Minimum Mass Solar Nebula • Nice Model of Planet Migration • Updated MMSN Model of Desch (2007) • Implications for Disk Evolution, Particle Transport, and Planetary Growth • Summary

  3. Minimum Mass Solar Nebula It is essential to constrain the distribution of mass in the solar nebula. Pressures in region where meteoritic components formed (e.g., conditions of chondrule formation) Densities of solids and gas in outer solar system (e.g., formation of giant planets) Distribution of transport of mass (what caused the disk to evolve?) Many authors developed Minimum Mass Solar Nebula (Edgeworth 1949; Kuiper 1956; Safronov 1967; Alfven & Arrhenius 1970; Weidenschilling 1977; Hayashi 1981; Hayashi et al. 1985) Model of Weidenschilling (1977) is well developed...

  4. MMSN: H and He are added to planet masses until they have solar composition, The augmented mass then spread out over the annuli in which they orbit. Surface density roughly (r) ~ r-1.5 Hayashi et al. (1985) widely used: (r) = 1700 (r / 1AU)-1.5 g cm-2 = 54 (r / 10 AU)-1.5 g cm-2 Weidenschilling (1977)

  5. A Few Problems with the MMSN Densities in MMSN model are not consistent with pressures expected for chondrule formation (Desch & Connolly 2002) Models of formation of Jupiter’s core routinely have to increase solids densities from canonical value (1 - 2 g cm-2) to ~ 10 g cm-2(e.g., Pollack et al. 1996) Not possible to explain formation of Uranus and Neptune cores within lifetime of disk, while H and He gas are available to accrete (Lissauer & Stewart 1993). Underlying assumption of MMSN - that planets’ current orbits reflect where mass was in the solar nebula - is wrong! Planets migrated! (Fernandez & Ip 1984; Malhotra 1993). Turns out, planets migrated a lot!! (Tsiganis et al. 2005)

  6. Planetary Migration • The ‘Nice’ Model (Tsiganis et al. 2005; Gomes et al. 2005; Morbidelli et al. 2005; Levison et al. 2007, 2008) explains: • The timing and magnitude of Late Heavy Bombardment • Giant planets' semi-major axes, eccentricities and inclinations • Numbers of Trojan asteroids and irregular satellites • Structure of Kuiper Belt, etc. • IF • Planets formed at 5.45 AU (Jupiter), 8.18 AU (Saturn), 11.5 AU (Neptune / Uranus) and 14.2 AU (Uranus / Neptune) • A 35 M Disk of Planetesimals extended from 15 - 30 AU • Best fits involve encounter between Uranus and Neptune; in 50% of simulations they switch places

  7. Planetary Migration 2:1 resonance crossing occurs about 650 Myr after solar system formation r (AU) 5 10 15 20 25 30

  8. New Minimum Mass Solar Nebula Disk much denser! Disk much more massive: 0.092 M from 1-30 AU; vs. 0.011 M Density falls steeply (as r-2.2) but very smoothly and monotonically! Matches to < 10%!! Consistent with many new constraints Desch (2007)

  9. New Minimum Mass Solar Nebula Mass distribution is not smooth and monotonic if Uranus and Neptune did not switch orbits. Very strong circumstantial evidence that Neptune formed closer to the Sun Desch (2007)

  10. New Minimum Mass Solar Nebula Steep profile (r) = 343 (r / 10 AU)-2.17 g cm-2 is not consistent with steady-state alpha accretion disk (Lynden-Bell & Pringle 1974) In fact, if  ~ r-p and T ~r-q and p+q > 2, mass must flow outwards (Takeuchi & Lin 2002) Desch (2007) solved steady-state equations for alpha disk (Lynden-Bell & Pringle 1974) with an outer boundary condition due to photoevaporation. Found a steady-state alpha disk solution if solar nebula was a decretion disk Two parameters:  (~ 3 x 10-4), and disk outer edge rd (~ 50 AU)

  11. New Minimum Mass Solar Nebula Steady-state alpha decretion disk fits even better. Applies in outer solar system (> few AU) Applies when large planetesimals formed and dynamically decoupled from gas (a few x 105 yrs) Small particles will trace the gas and move outward in a few Myr

  12. Explains presence of CAIs in comets! Comet 81P/Wild 2Scattered into present orbit in 1974; was previously a member of the Kuiper Belt Scattered Disk Probably formed at 10-30 AU Zolensky et al (2006) Stardust Sample Track 25 called ‘Inti’. It’s a CAI, formed (by condensation) at > 1700 K.

  13. New Model Explains Rapid Growth of Planet Cores • Planets form closer to Sun in Nice model: orbital timescales faster • Density of solids higher than in traditional MMSN • Higher gas densities damp eccentricities of planetesimals, facilitating accretion • Desch (2007) calculated growth rate of planetary cores using formulism of Kokubo & Ida (2002). • Tidal disruption considered; assumed mass of planetesimals ~ 3 x 1012 g (R = 0.1 km, i.e., comets).

  14. Cores grow in 0.5 Myr (J), 2 Myr (S), 5-6 Myr (N) and 9-11 Myr (U) • Even Uranus and Neptune reach 10 M before H, He gas gone Desch (2007)

  15. Masses of Solids in Planets Inside 15 AU, planets limited by availability of solids; they achieve isolation masses Outside 15 AU, planets cannot grow before gas dissipates; no gas = no damping of eccentricities Desch (2007)

  16. Summary Past planet migration implies solar nebula was more massive and concentrated than thought. Using Nice model positions, Desch (2007) found new MMSN model. Mass ~ 0.1 M, (r) ~ r-2.2. Strongly implies Uranus and Neptune switched orbits. Cannot be in steady-state accretion; but (r) is consistent with outer solar system as a steady-state alpha decretion disk being photo-evaporated at about 60 AU (like in Orion) Dust (read: Inti) would have moved from a few AU to comet-forming zone in a few Myr All the giant planet cores could reach 10 M and accrete H, He gas in lifetime of the nebula

More Related