Paper detail

How Empty are Disk Gaps Opened by Giant Planets?

Gap clearing by giant planets has been proposed to explain the optically thin cavities observed in many protoplanetary disks. How much material remains in the gap determines not only how detectable young planets are in their birth environments, but also how strong corotation torques are, which impacts how planets can survive fast orbital migration. We determine numerically how the average surface density inside the gap, sigma_gap, depends on planet-to-star mass ratio q, Shakura-Sunyaev viscosity parameter alpha, and disk height-to-radius aspect ratio h/r. Our results are derived from our new GPU-accelerated Lagrangian hydrodynamical code PEnGUIn, and are verified by independent simulations with ZEUS90. For Jupiter-like planets, we find sigma_gap \propto q^-2.2 alpha^1.4 (h/r)^6.6, and for near brown dwarf masses, sigma_gap \propto q^-1 alpha^1.3 (h/r)^6.1. Surface density contrasts inside and outside gaps can be as large as 10^4, even when the planet does not accrete. We derive a simple analytic scaling, sigma_gap \propto q^-2 alpha^1 (h/r)^5, that compares reasonably well to empirical results, especially at low Neptune-like masses, and use discrepancies to highlight areas for progress.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.