Paper detail

Tests of In-Situ Formation Scenarios for Compact Multiplanet Systems

Kepler has identified over 600 multiplanet systems, many of which have several planets with orbital distances smaller than that of Mercury -- quite different from the Solar System. Because these systems may be difficult to explain in the paradigm of core accretion and disk migration, it has been suggested that they formed in situ within protoplanetary disks with high solid surface densities. The strong connection between giant planet occurrence and stellar metallicity is thought to be linked to enhanced solid surface densities in disks around metal-rich stars, so the presence of a giant planet can be a detectable sign of planet formation in a high solid surface density disk. I formulate quantitative predictions for the frequency of long-period giant planets in these in situ models of planet formation by translating the proposed increase in disk mass into an equivalent metallicity enhancement. I rederive the scaling of giant planet occurrence with metallicity as P_gp = 0.05_{-0.02}^{+0.02} x 10^{(2.1 +/- 0.4) [M/H]} = 0.08_{-0.03}^{+0.02} x 10^{(2.3 +/- 0.4) [Fe/H]} and show that there is significant tension between the frequency of giant planets suggested by the minimum mass extrasolar nebula scenario and the observational upper limits. This fact suggests that high-mass disks alone cannot explain the observed properties of the close-in Kepler multiplanet systems and that migration is still a necessary contributor to their formation. More speculatively, I combine the metallicity scaling of giant planet occurrence with recently published small planet occurrence rates to estimate the number of Solar System analogs in the Galaxy. I find that in the Milky Way there are perhaps 4 x 10^6 true Solar System analogs with an FGK star hosting both a terrestrial planet in the habitable zone and a long-period giant planet companion.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

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.