4.5 Article

Making other earths: dynamical simulations of terrestrial planet formation and water delivery

期刊

ICARUS
卷 168, 期 1, 页码 1-17

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2003.11.019

关键词

planetary formation; extrasolar planets; origin; solar system; cosmochemistry; exobiology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present results from 44 simulations of late stage planetary accretion, focusing on the delivery of volatiles (primarily water) to the terrestrial planets. Our simulations include both planetary embryos (defined as Moon to Mars sized protoplanets) and planetesimals, assuming that the embryos formed via oligarchic growth. We investigate volatile delivery as a function of Jupiter's mass, position and eccentricity, the position of the snow line, and the density (in solids) of the solar nebula. In all simulations, we form 1-4 terrestrial planets inside 2 AU, which vary in mass and volatile content. In 44 simulations we have formed 43 planets between 0.8 and 1.5 AU, including 11 habitable planets between 0.9 and 1.1 AU. These planets range from dry worlds to water worlds with 100 + oceans of water (1 ocean = 1.5 x 10(24) g), and vary in mass between 0.23Mcircle plus and 3.85Mcircle plus. There is a good deal of stochastic noise in these simulations, but the most important parameter is the planetesimal mass we choose, which reflects the surface density in solids past the snow line. A high density in this region results in the formation of a smaller number of terrestrial planets with larger masses and higher water content, as compared with planets which form in systems with lower densities. We find that an eccentric Jupiter produces drier terrestrial planets with higher eccentricities than a circular one. In cases with Jupiter at 7 AU, we form what we call super embryos, 1-2Mcircle plus protoplanets which can serve as the accretion seeds for 2 + Mcircle plus planets with large water contents. (C) 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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