Paper detail

Hot Super Earths: disrupted young jupiters?

Recent {\em Kepler} observations revealed an unexpected abundance of "hot" Earth-size to Neptune-size planets in the inner $0.02-0.2$ AU from their parent stars. We propose that these smaller planets are the remnants of massive giant planets that migrated inward quicker than they could contract. We show that such disruptions naturally occur in the framework of the Tidal Downsizing hypothesis for planet formation. We find that the characteristic planet-star separation at which such "hot disruptions" occur is $R \approx 0.03-0.2$ AU. This result is independent of the planet's embryo mass but is dependent on the accretion rate in the disc. At high accretion rates, $\dot M \simgt 10^{-6}\msun$ yr$^{-1}$, the embryo is unable to contract quickly enough and is disrupted. At late times, when the accretion rate drops to $\dot M \simlt 10^{-8} \msun$ yr$^{-1}$, the embryos migrate sufficiently slow to not be disrupted. These "late arrivals" may explain the well known population of hot jupiters. If type I migration regime is inefficient, then our model predicts a pile-up of planets at $R\sim 0.1$ AU as the migration rate suddenly switches from the type II to type I in that region.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 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.