Paper detail

Are Planetary Systems Filled to Capacity? A Study Based on Kepler Results

We used a sample of Kepler candidate planets with orbital periods less than 200 days and radii between 1.5 and 30 Earth radii to determine the typical dynamical spacing of neighboring planets. To derive the intrinsic (i.e., free of observational bias) dynamical spacing of neighboring planets, we generated populations of planetary systems following various dynamical spacing distributions, subjected them to synthetic observations by the Kepler spacecraft, and compared the properties of observed planets in our simulations with actual Kepler detections. We found that, on average, neighboring planets are spaced 21.7 mutual Hill radii apart with a standard deviation of 9.5. This dynamical spacing distribution is consistent with that of adjacent planets in the Solar System. To test the packed planetary systems hypothesis, the idea that all planetary systems are dynamically packed or filled to capacity, we determined the fraction of systems that are dynamically packed by performing long-term (10^8 years) numerical simulations. In each simulation, we integrated a system with planets spaced according to our best-fit dynamical spacing distribution but containing an additional planet on an intermediate orbit. The fraction of simulations exhibiting signs of instability provides an approximate lower bound on the fraction of systems that are dynamically packed; we found that >31%, >35%, and >45% of 2-planet, 3-planet, and 4-planet systems are dynamically packed, respectively. Such sizeable fractions suggest that many planetary systems are indeed filled to capacity. This feature of planetary systems is another profound constraint that formation and evolution models must satisfy.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.