Paper detail

Metal loading of giant gas planets

One of many challenges in forming giant gas planets via Gravitational disc Instability model (GI) is an inefficient radiative cooling of the pre-collapse fragments. Since fragment contraction times are as long at $10^5 -10^7$ years, the fragments may be tidally destroyed sooner than they contract into gas giant planets. Here we explore the role of "pebble accretion" onto the pre-collapse giant planets and find an unexpected result. Despite larger dust opacity at higher metallicities, addition of metals actually accelerates -- rather than slows down -- collapse of high opacity, relatively low mass giant gas planets ($M_p$ below a few Jupiter masses). A simple analytical theory that explains this result exactly in idealised simplified cases is presented. The theory shows that planets with the central temperature in the range between $\sim$ 1000 to 2000K are especially sensitive to pebble accretion: addition of just $\sim 5$ to 10 % of metals by weight is sufficient to cause their collapse. These results show that dust grain physics and dynamics is essential for an accurate modelling of self-gravitating disc fragments and their near environments in the outer massive and cold protoplanetary discs.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.