The formation of Uranus and Neptune in the Jupiter–Saturn region of the Solar System

Planets are believed to have formed through the accumulation of a large number of small bodies. In the case of the gas-giant planets Jupiter and Saturn, they accreted a significant amount of gas directly from the protosolar nebula after accumulating solid cores of about 5–15 Earth masses. Such models, however, have been unable to produce the smaller ice giants Uranus and Neptune at their present locations, because in that region of the Solar System the small planetary bodies will have been more widely spaced, and less tightly bound gravitationally to the Sun. When applied to the current Jupiter–Saturn zone, a recent theory predicts that, in addition to the solid cores of Jupiter and Saturn, two or three other solid bodies of comparable mass are likely to have formed. Here we report the results of model calculations that demonstrate that such cores will have been gravitationally scattered outwards as Jupiter, and perhaps Saturn, accreted nebular gas. The orbits of these cores then evolve into orbits that resemble those of Uranus and Neptune, as a result of gravitational interactions with the small bodies in the outer disk of the protosolar nebula.

[1]  Peter Bodenheimer,et al.  Calculations of the accretion and evolution of giant planets: The effects of solid cores , 1986 .

[2]  G. Wetherill An alternative model for the formation of the asteroids , 1992 .

[3]  Harold F. Levison,et al.  From the Kuiper Belt to Jupiter-Family Comets: The Spatial Distribution of Ecliptic Comets☆ , 1997 .

[4]  Francesco Marzari,et al.  Gravitational scattering as a possible origin for giant planets at small stellar distances , 1996, Nature.

[5]  John E. Chambers,et al.  Making the Terrestrial Planets: N-Body Integrations of Planetary Embryos in Three Dimensions , 1998 .

[6]  Harold F. Levison,et al.  A Multiple Time Step Symplectic Algorithm for Integrating Close Encounters , 1998 .

[7]  Eric B. Ford,et al.  Dynamical Instabilities and the Formation of Extrasolar Planetary Systems , 1996, Science.

[8]  E. Thommes On the formation of Uranus and Neptune , 2001 .

[9]  Orbital Evolution of Planets Embedded in a Planetesimal Disk , 1999, astro-ph/9902370.

[10]  C. Trujillo,et al.  A new dynamical class of object in the outer Solar System , 1997, Nature.

[11]  Jack J. Lissauer,et al.  Formation of the Giant Planets by Concurrent Accretion of Solids and Gas , 1995 .

[12]  Harold F. Levison,et al.  On the Character and Consequences of Large Impacts in the Late Stage of Terrestrial Planet Formation , 1999 .

[13]  Shigeru Ida,et al.  On the Origin of Massive Eccentric Planets , 1997 .

[14]  M. Duncan,et al.  A disk of scattered icy objects and the origin of Jupiter-family comets. , 1997, Science.

[15]  V. Safronov,et al.  Evolution of the protoplanetary cloud and formation of the earth and the planets , 1972 .

[16]  Harold F. Levison,et al.  Modeling the Diversity of Outer Planetary Systems , 1998 .

[17]  Renu Malhotra,et al.  The origin of Pluto's orbit: implications for the , 1994, astro-ph/9504036.

[18]  Julio A. Fernández,et al.  Some dynamical aspects of the accretion of Uranus and Neptune: The exchange of orbital angular momentum with planetesimals , 1984 .

[19]  Dale P. Cruikshank,et al.  Neptune and Triton , 1995 .

[20]  Eiichiro Kokubo,et al.  Oligarchic growth of protoplanets , 1996 .