4.5 Article

Eccentric extrasolar planets: The jumping Jupiter model

Journal

ICARUS
Volume 156, Issue 2, Pages 570-579

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1006/icar.2001.6786

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Most extrasolar planets discovered to date are more massive than Jupiter, in surprisingly small orbits (semimajor axes less than 3 AU). Many of these have significant orbital eccentricities. Such orbits may be the product of dynamical interactions in multiplanet systems. We examine outcomes of such evolution in systems of three Jupiter-mass planets around a solar-mass star by integration of their orbits in three dimensions. Such systems are unstable for a broad range of initial conditions, with mutual perturbations leading to crossing orbits and close encounters. The time scale for instability to develop depends on the initial orbital spacing; some configurations become chaotic after delays exceeding 10(8) y. The most common outcome of gravitational scattering by close encounters is hyperbolic ejection of one planet. Of the two survivors, one is moved closer to the star and the other is left in a distant orbit; for systems with equal-mass planets, there is no correlation between initial and final orbital positions. Both survivors may have significant eccentricities, and the mutual inclination of their orbits can be large. The inner survivor's semimajor axis is usually about half that of the innermost starting orbit. Gravitational scattering alone cannot produce the observed excess of hot Jupiters in close circular orbits. However, those scattered planets with large eccentricities and small periastron distances may become circularized if tidal dissipation is effective. Most stars with a massive planet in an eccentric orbit should have at least one additional planet of comparable mass in a more distant orbit. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science (USA).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available