Paper detail

From planetesimals to terrestrial planets: N-body simulations including the effects of nebular gas and giant planets

We present results from a suite of N-body simulations that follow the accretion history of the terrestrial planets using a new parallel treecode that we have developed. We initially place 2000 equal size planetesimals between 0.5--4.0 AU and the collisional growth is followed until the completion of planetary accretion (> 100 Myr). All the important effect of gas in laminar disks are taken into account: the aerodynamic gas drag, the disk-planet interaction including Type I migration, and the global disk potential which causes inward migration of secular resonances as the gas dissipates. We vary the initial total mass and spatial distribution of the planetesimals, the time scale of dissipation of nebular gas, and orbits of Jupiter and Saturn. We end up with one to five planets in the terrestrial region. In order to maintain sufficient mass in this region in the presence of Type I migration, the time scale of gas dissipation needs to be 1-2 Myr. The final configurations and collisional histories strongly depend on the orbital eccentricity of Jupiter. If today's eccentricity of Jupiter is used, then most of bodies in the asteroidal region are swept up within the terrestrial region owing to the inward migration of the secular resonance, and giant impacts between protoplanets occur most commonly around 10 Myr. If the orbital eccentricity of Jupiter is close to zero, as suggested in the Nice model, the effect of the secular resonance is negligible and a large amount of mass stays for a long period of time in the asteroidal region. With a circular orbit for Jupiter, giant impacts usually occur around 100 Myr, consistent with the accretion time scale indicated from isotope records. However, we inevitably have an Earth size planet at around 2 AU in this case. It is very difficult to obtain spatially concentrated terrestrial planets together with very late giant impacts.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.