Paper detail

Vertical structure of debris discs

The vertical thickness of debris discs is often used as a measure of these systems' dynamical excitation and as clues to the presence of hidden massive perturbers such as planetary embryos. However, this argument could be flawed because the observed dust should be naturally placed on inclined orbits by the combined effect of radiation pressure and mutual collisions. We critically reinvestigate this issue and numerically estimate what the "natural" vertical thickness of a collisionally evolving disc is, in the absence of any additional perturbing body. We use a deterministic collisional code, following the dynamical evolution of a population of indestructible test grains suffering mutual inelastic impacts. Grain differential sizes as well as the effect of radiation pressure are taken into account. We find that, under the coupled effect of radiation pressure and collisions, grains naturally acquire inclinations of a few degrees. The disc is stratified with respect to grain sizes, with the smallest grains having the largest vertical dispersion and the bigger ones clustered closer to the midplane. Debris discs should have a minimum "natural" observed aspect ratio $h_{min}\sim 0.04\pm0.02$ at visible to mid-IR wavelengths where the flux is dominated by the smallest bound grains. These values are comparable to the estimated thicknesses of many vertically resolved debris discs, as is illustrated with the specific example of AU Mic. For all systems with $h \sim h_{min}$, the presence (or absence) of embedded perturbing bodies cannot be inferred from the vertical dispersion of the disc

preprint2009arXivOpen 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 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.