4.4 Article

A water budget dichotomy of rocky protoplanets from 26Al-heating

期刊

NATURE ASTRONOMY
卷 3, 期 4, 页码 307-313

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41550-018-0688-5

关键词

-

资金

  1. ETH Zurich Research Grant [ETH-17 13-1]
  2. Swiss Society for Astrophysics and Astronomy through a MERAC travel grant
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF)
  4. SNSF [BSSGI0_155816]
  5. SNSF

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In contrast to the water-poor planets of the inner Solar System, stochasticity during planetary formation(1,2) and orderof- magnitude deviations in exoplanet volatile contents(3) suggest that rocky worlds engulfed in thick volatile ice layers(4,5) are the dominant family of terrestrial analogues(6,7) among the extrasolar planet population. However, the distribution of compositionally Earth-like planets remains insufficiently constrained(3), and it is not clear whether the Solar System is a statistical outlier or can be explained by more general planetary formation processes. Here we use numerical models of planet formation, evolution and interior structure to show that a planet's bulk water fraction and radius are anticorrelated with initial Al-26 levels in the planetesimal-based accretion framework. The heat generated by this short-lived radionuclide rapidly dehydrates planetesimals(8) before their accretion onto larger protoplanets and yields a system-wide correlation(9,10) of planetary bulk water abundances, which, for instance, can explain the lack of a clear orbital trend in the water budgets of the TRAPPIST-1 planets(11). Qualitatively, our models suggest two main scenarios for the formation of planetary systems: high-Al-26 systems, like our Solar System, form small, water-depleted planets, whereas those devoid of Al-26 predominantly form ocean worlds. For planets of similar mass, the mean planetary transit radii of the ocean planet population can be up to about 10% larger than for planets from the Al-26-rich formation scenario.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据