Planets in Binaries: Formation and Dynamical Evolution

AI-generated keywords: Binary Star Systems Planet Formation Dynamical Evolution Secular Perturbations Mean Motion Resonances

AI-generated Key Points

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.

  • The study explores the formation and evolution of planets in binary star systems.
  • Binary systems with separations smaller than 100 au have fewer planets, suggesting that close companion stars hinder planet formation.
  • The gravitational pull of the second star affects all stages of planet formation.
  • Planetesimal accretion might be hampered due to increased impact velocities during the crucial accretion phase.
  • Binary secular perturbations and mean motion resonances lead to unstable regions where planet formation is inhibited and massive bodies could be ejected from the system on a hyperbolic orbit.
  • S and P type planets are affected differently by these effects, highlighting the influence of companion stars on planet formation.
  • Long-term dynamical evolution influences final architecture in planetary systems in binaries for both S and P type systems.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Francesco Marzari, Philippe Thebault

arXiv: 2002.12006v1 - DOI (astro-ph.EP)
Published on Galaxies, vol. 7, issue 4, p. 84

Abstract: Binary systems are very common among field stars. While this relatively small number of planets in binaries is probably partly due to strong observational biases, there is, however, statistical evidence that planets are indeed less frequent in binaries with separations smaller than 100 au, strongly suggesting that the presence of a close in companion star has an adverse effect on planet formation. It is indeed possible for the gravitational pull of the second star to affect all the different stages of planet formation, from proto-planetary disk formation to dust accumulation into planetesimals, to the accretion of these planetesimals into large planetary embryos and, eventually, the final growth of these embryos into planets. For the crucial planetesimal accretion phase, the complex coupling between dynamical perturbations from the binary and friction due to gas in the protoplanetary disk suggests that planetesimal accretion might be hampered due to increased, accretion hostile impact velocities. Likewise, the interplay between the binary secular perturbations and mean motion resonances lead to unstable regions, where not only planet formation is inhibited, but where a massive body would be ejected from the system on a hyperbolic orbit. The amplitude of these two main effects is different for S and P type planets, so that a comparison between the two populations might outline the influence of the companion star on the planet formation process. Unfortunately, at present the two populations (circumstellar or circumbinary) are not known equally well and different biases and uncertainties prevent a quantitative comparison. We also highlight the long term dynamical evolution of both S and P type systems and focus on how these different evolutions influence the final architecture of planetary systems in binaries.

Submitted to arXiv on 27 Feb. 2020

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2002.12006v1

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

The study by Francesco Marzari and Philippe Thebault explores the formation and dynamical evolution of planets in binary star systems. While binary systems are common among field stars, there is statistical evidence that planets are less frequent in binaries with separations smaller than 100 au, suggesting that the presence of a close companion star has an adverse effect on planet formation. The gravitational pull of the second star can affect all stages of planet formation, from proto-planetary disk formation to dust accumulation into planetesimals, to the accretion of these planetesimals into large planetary embryos and eventually the final growth of these embryos into planets. The complex coupling between dynamical perturbations from the binary and friction due to gas in the protoplanetary disk suggests that planetesimal accretion might be hampered due to increased, accretion-hostile impact velocities during the crucial planetesimal accretion phase. Additionally, interplay between binary secular perturbations and mean motion resonances lead to unstable regions where not only is planet formation inhibited but also where a massive body would be ejected from the system on a hyperbolic orbit. The amplitude of these two main effects differs for S and P type planets; thus, a comparison between both populations could outline the influence of companion stars on the planet formation process. However, at present circumstellar or circumbinary populations are not equally known well enough for quantitative comparison due to different biases and uncertainties. The authors also highlight how long-term dynamical evolution influences final architecture in planetary systems in binaries for both S and P type systems. Overall, this study provides insights into how binary star systems affect planetary formation processes. It highlights potential challenges faced by such systems while forming planets as well as their long-term dynamics that ultimately shape their planetary architectures.
Created on 07 Apr. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.