Paper detail

Spacing of Kepler Planets: Sculpting by Dynamical Instability

We study the orbital architecture of multi-planet systems detected by the Kepler transit mission using N-body simulations, focusing on the orbital spacing between adjacent planets in systems showing four or more transiting planets. We find that the observed spacings are tightly clustered around 12 mutual Hill radii, when transit geometry and sensitivity limits are accounted for. In comparison, dynamical integrations reveal that the minimum spacing required for systems of similar masses to survive dynamical instability for as long as a billion years is, ~10 if all orbits are circular and coplanar, and ~12 if planetary orbits have eccentricities ~0.02 (a value suggested by studies of planet transit-time-variations). This apparent coincidence, between the observed spacing and the theoretical stability threshold, leads us to propose that typical planetary systems were formed with even tighter spacing, but most, except for the widest ones, have undergone dynamical instability, and are pared down to a more anemic version of their former selves, with fewer planets and larger spacings. So while the high multiple systems (five or more transiting planets) are primordial systems that remain stable, the single or double planetary systems, abundantly discovered by the Kepler mission, may be the descendants of more closely packed high multiple systems. If this hypothesis is correct, we infer that the formation environment of Kepler systems should be different from that of the terrestrial planets.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.