Paper detail

Dynamical instabilities in systems of multiple short-period planets are likely driven by secular chaos: a case study of Kepler-102

We investigated the dynamical stability of high-multiplicity Kepler and K2 planetary systems. Our numerical simulations find instabilities in $\sim20\%$ of the cases on a wide range of timescales (up to $5\times10^9$ orbits) and over an unexpectedly wide range of initial dynamical spacings. To identify the triggers of long-term instability in multi-planet systems, we investigated in detail the five-planet Kepler-102 system. Despite having several near-resonant period ratios, we find that mean motion resonances are unlikely to directly cause instability for plausible planet masses in this system. Instead, we find strong evidence that slow inward transfer of angular momentum deficit (AMD) via secular chaos excites the eccentricity of the innermost planet, Kepler-102 b, eventually leading to planet-planet collisions in $\sim80\%$ of Kepler-102 simulations. Kepler-102 b likely has a mass $>\sim0.1M_{\oplus}$, hence a bulk density exceeding about half Earth's, in order to avoid dynamical instability. To investigate the role of secular chaos in our wider set of simulations, we characterize each planetary system's AMD evolution with a "spectral fraction" calculated from the power spectrum of short integrations ($\sim5\times10^6$ orbits). We find that small spectral fractions ($\lesssim0.01$) are strongly associated with dynamical stability on long timescales ($5\times10^9$ orbits) and that the median time to instability decreases with increasing spectral fraction. Our results support the hypothesis that secular chaos is the driver of instabilities in many non-resonant multi-planet systems, and also demonstrate that the spectral analysis method is an efficient numerical tool to diagnose long term (in)stability of multi-planet systems from short simulations.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.