Atmosphere loss in planet–planet collisions

Denman, Thomas; Leinhardt, Z. M.; Carter, Philip J.; Mordasini, Christoph

doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1623

Cited by 35 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Two consequences of giant impacts are obvious: first, they populate the evaporation valley with cores that would otherwise be too massive for the envelope to be lost only via atmospheric escape. The fact that the valley appears rather too blurred in the 100 embryo population compared to observations (Fulton et al 2017;Petigura et al 2018) could be an observational hint that impact stripping might be overestimated in the model and should be improved in further model generations, for example along the lines of Denman et al (2020). Second, in the 100 embryo population, in the group of planets at around a = 1 au and with radii between about 1.5 and 2 R ⊕ (which is above the evaporation valley), there is a region of mixed planets with some possessing H/He, and others without it.…”

Section: Distance-radius Plotmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis (NGPPS)

Emsenhuber

Mordasini

Burn

et al. 2021

A&A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. Planetary formation and evolution is a combination of multiple interlinked processes. Constraining the mechanisms observationally requires statistical comparison to a large diversity of planetary systems. Aims. We want to understand global observable consequences of different physical processes (accretion, migration, and interactions) and initial properties (like disc masses and metallicities) on the demographics of the planetary population. We also want to study the convergence of our scheme with respect to one initial condition, the initial number of planetary embryo in each disc. Methods. We selected distributions of initial conditions that are representative of known protoplanetary discs. Then, we used the Generation III Bern model to perform planetary population synthesis. We synthesise five populations with each a different initial number of Moon-mass embryos per disc: 1, 10, 20, 50, and 100. The last is our nominal population consisting of 1000 stars (systems) that was used for an extensive statistical analysis of planetary systems around 1 M⊙ stars. Results. The properties of giant planets do not change much as long as there are at least ten embryos in each system. The study of giants can thus be done with simulations requiring less computational resources. For inner terrestrial planets, only the 100-embryos population is able to attain the giant-impact stage. In that population, each planetary system contains, on average, eight planets more massive than 1 M⊕. The fraction of systems with giants planets at all orbital distances is 18%, but only 1.6% are at >10 au. Systems with giants contain on average 1.6 such planets. The planetary mass function varies as M−2 between 5 and 50 M⊕. Both at lower and higher masses, it follows approximately M−1. The frequency of terrestrial and super-Earth planets peaks at a stellar [Fe/H] of −0.2 and 0.0, respectively, being limited at lower [Fe/H] by a lack of building blocks, and by (for them) detrimental growth of more massive dynamically active planets at higher [Fe/H]. The frequency of more massive planets (Neptunian, giants) increases monotonically with [Fe/H]. The fast migration of planets in the 5–50 M⊕ range is reduced by the presence of multiple lower-mass inner planets in the multi-embryos populations. To assess the impact of parameters and model assumptions, we also study two non-nominal populations: insitu formation without gas-driven migration, and a different initial planetesimal surface density. Conclusions. We present one of the most comprehensive simulations of (exo)planetary system formation and evolution to date. For observations, the syntheses provides a large data set to search for comparison synthetic planetary systems that show how these systems have come into existence. The systems, including their full formation and evolution tracks are available online. For theory, they provide the framework to observationally test the global statistical consequences of theoretical models for specific physical processes. This is an important ingredient towards the development of a standard model of planetary formation and evolution.

show abstract

Section: Distance-radius Plotmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In future work, we will improve the way how impact stripping of gaseous envelopes is dealt with (Schlichting & Mukhopadhyay 2018;Denman et al 2020). As described in Paper I, at the moment the impact energy is added into the internal structure calculation.…”

Section: Formation Timementioning

confidence: 99%

The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis (NGPPS)

Emsenhuber

Mordasini

Burn

et al. 2021

A&A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lastly, giant impacts have been theorized to greatly change the evolution of a planet [67]. The stochastic nature of collisions and giant impacts during formation are potentially a means of increasing the diversity among planetary systems [68,69]. Giant impacts could indeed explain the bifurcation in the history of Uranus and Neptune [67].…”

Section: (C) Formation and Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The exoplanet perspective on future ice giant exploration

Wakeford

Dalba

2020

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exoplanets number in their thousands, and the number is ever increasing with the advent of new surveys and improved instrumentation. One of the most surprising things we have learnt from these discoveries is not that small-rocky planets in their stars habitable zones are likely to be common, but that the most typical size of exoplanets is that not seen in our solar system—radii between that of Neptune and the Earth dubbed mini-Neptunes and super-Earths. In fact, a transiting exoplanet is four times as likely to be in this size regime than that of any giant planet in our solar system. Investigations into the atmospheres of giant hydrogen/helium dominated exoplanets has pushed down to Neptune and mini-Neptune-sized worlds revealing molecular absorption from water, scattering and opacity from clouds, and measurements of atmospheric abundances. However, unlike measurements of Jupiter, or even Saturn sized worlds, the smaller giants lack a ground truth on what to expect or interpret from their measurements. How did these sized worlds form and evolve and was it different from their larger counterparts? What is their internal composition and how does that impact their atmosphere? What informs the energy budget of these distant worlds? In this we discuss what characteristics we can measure for exoplanets, and why a mission to the ice giants in our solar system is the logical next step for understanding exoplanets. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘Future exploration of ice giant systems’.

show abstract

“…Recent work suggests that forming protoplanets and their precursors experience a significant degree of high‐energy processing (Benedikt et al., 2020; Fegley Jr. et al., 2020; Sossi et al., 2019) during planetary formation. Planetesimals and protoplanets evolve due to impacts (Denman et al., 2020; Kegerreis et al., 2020; Quintana et al., 2016) and internal radiogenic heating (Lichtenberg et al., 2016; Lichtenberg, Golabek, et al., 2019; Lichtenberg, Keller, et al., 2019), both of which dramatically alter the thermal budget and volatile content of young rocky worlds. The composition of early‐ and late‐accreted material can alter the initial oxidation state, and thus chemical speciation of the upper mantle and atmosphere (Gaillard & Scaillet, 2014; Ortenzi et al., 2020; Zahnle et al., 2020), which is relevant for the planetary environment of prebiotic chemistry (Benner et al., 2019; Rimmer & Rugheimer, 2019; Sasselov et al., 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vertically Resolved Magma Ocean–Protoatmosphere Evolution: H₂, H₂O, CO₂, CH₄, CO, O₂, and N₂as Primary Absorbers

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magma oceans with different volatiles display varying timescales of solidification, out-11 gassing, and atmospheric stratification 12 • Atmospheric blanketing and cooling time increase in three principle classes from N 2 , CO, 13 O 2 to H 2 O, CO 2 , CH 4 to H 2 14 • Coupled mantle-atmosphere systems display distinctive features that link the interior and 15 surface state to atmospheric spectrum and climate 16

show abstract

Atmosphere loss in planet–planet collisions

Cited by 35 publications

References 37 publications

The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis (NGPPS)

The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis (NGPPS)

The exoplanet perspective on future ice giant exploration

Vertically Resolved Magma Ocean–Protoatmosphere Evolution: H₂, H₂O, CO₂, CH₄, CO, O₂, and N₂as Primary Absorbers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Atmosphere loss in planet–planet collisions

Cited by 35 publications

References 37 publications

The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis (NGPPS)

The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis (NGPPS)

The exoplanet perspective on future ice giant exploration

Vertically Resolved Magma Ocean–Protoatmosphere Evolution: H2, H2O, CO2, CH4, CO, O2, and N2as Primary Absorbers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Vertically Resolved Magma Ocean–Protoatmosphere Evolution: H₂, H₂O, CO₂, CH₄, CO, O₂, and N₂as Primary Absorbers