CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 106Astrophysics and Star Formation StudiesAstro and Planetary ScienceStellar, planetary, and galactic studies

Do Proto‐jovian Planets Drive Outflows?

Open access
Quillen, A. C., Trilling, D. E.·1998·The Astrophysical Journal
DOI 10.1086/306421
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We discuss the possibility that gaseous giant planets drive strong outflows during early phases of their formation. We consider the range of parameters appropriate for magneto-centrifugally driven stellar and disk outflow models and find that, if the proto-Jovian planet or accretion disk had a magnetic field of ≳10 G and moderate mass-inflow accretion rates through the disk of less than ~10 -7 M J yr -1 , it is possible to drive an outflow. Estimates based both on scaling from empirical laws observed in protostellar outflows and the magneto-centrifugal disk and stellar plus disk wind models suggest that winds with mass-outflow rates of order 10 -8 M J yr -1 and velocities of order ~20 km s -1 could be driven from proto-Jovian planets. Prospects for detection and some implications for the formation of the solar system are briefly discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/306421

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Martin & Lubow (2011) suggest a tidal truncation limit of ξ ~0.4 and hydrodynamic simulations find ξ ~0.3.

    “Martin & Lubow (2011) suggest a tidal truncation limit of ξ ∼ 0 . 4 and hydrodynamic simulations of planets in circumstellar disks find ξ ∼ 0 . 3 (Quillen & Trilling 1998; Ayliffe & Bate 2009).”

    From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Quillen & Trilling 1998

    Section 1.3 (page unavailable) estimates a centrifugal radius of about one-third of the Hill radius for material entering through the Lagrange points, a flow pattern it says was seen in simulations. It does not report that hydrodynamic simulations measured a disk truncation limit of ξ ≈ 0.3. The ξ ≈ 0.4 statement is attributed to Martin & Lubow, not to this source. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • An important stability criterion for the disc is that it remains stable under gravitational interactions with the host star; to ensure an extended lifetime, R_disc < 0.3 R_Hill.

    “An important stability criterion for the disc is that the disc remains stable under the gravitational interactions with the host star. To ensure an extended lifetime of the disc, R disc &lt; 0 . 3 R Hill , where R Hill is the Hill radius defined by Equation 23 (Quillen &amp; Trilling 1998).”

    From Beyond Circular Eclipsers (BeyonCE) light curve modelling (2024) · cites this paper as Quillen & Trilling 1998

    Section 1.3 (page unavailable) calls the Hill radius a maximum radius for the proto-Jovian disk and estimates a centrifugal radius of about one-third of the Hill radius. It does not present R_disc < 0.3 R_Hill as a stability criterion or say that this limit ensures an extended disk lifetime; the one-third figure describes a centrifugal radius, not a required disk-size limit. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Estimates of the size ratio ξ for circumplanetary disks range from about 0.1 to about 0.4.

    “Based on a centripetal radius argument, Quillen & Trilling (1998) estimated that an accreting circumplanetary disk would have ξ = 1/3.Hydrodynamic simulations of planets embedded in circumstellar disks also can find ξ ∼ 0.3 (Ayliffe & Bate 2009).A tidal truncation argument suggests ξ ∼ 0.4 (Martin & Lubow 2011).Theoretical models for Jupiter's circumplanetary disk accounting for Galilean satellite”

    From PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS (2012) · cites this paper as Quillen & Trilling 1998

  • Typical values of ξ are expected to be in the range 0.1 < ξ < 0.3.

    “Simulations indicate that ξ &gt; 0 . 4 are unlikely and that typical values are expected to be in the range of 0 . 1 &lt; ξ &lt; 0 . 3 (Quillen &amp; Trilling 1998; Canup &amp; Ward 2002; Magni &amp; Coradini 2004; Ayliffe &amp; Bate 2009; Ward &amp; Canup 2010).”

    From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Quillen & Trilling 1998

    Section 1.3 estimates a centrifugal radius of about one-third of the Hill radius, but does not identify that ratio as ξ or give typical values of 0.1–0.3. Section 2.3 discusses a different factor, f, for an X-wind model. Searches for ξ, the claimed range, and the simulation threshold found no passage establishing the claim in our copy; page numbers were unavailable. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Simulations indicate that ξ > 0.4 are unlikely.

    “Simulations indicate that ξ &gt; 0 . 4 are unlikely and that typical values are expected to be in the range of 0 . 1 &lt; ξ &lt; 0 . 3 (Quillen &amp; Trilling 1998; Canup &amp; Ward 2002; Magni &amp; Coradini 2004; Ayliffe &amp; Bate 2009; Ward &amp; Canup 2010).”

    From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Quillen & Trilling 1998

    Section 1.3 estimates a centrifugal radius of about one-third of the Hill radius under an assumed accretion path, but does not identify ξ or say simulations make values above 0.4 unlikely. Searches for ξ, the 0.4 threshold, and simulation-based limits found no passage in our copy establishing the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. [13]13. A., Cerroni, P., Magni, G., & Federico, C. 1989, in Origin and Coradini, Evolution of Planetary and Satellite Atmospheres, ed. S. K. Atreya, J. B. Pollack, & M. S. Matthews (Tucson : University of Arizona Press), 723
  2. [32]32. G. P. 1951, in Astrophysics, ed. J. A. Hynek (New York : McGraw- Kuiper, Hill), 357
  3. [34]34. E. H., Ruzmaikin, A. A., & Ruzmaikina, T. V. 1991, in The Sun in Levy, Time, ed. C. P. Sonnett, M. S. Giampapa, & M. S. Mathews (Tucson : University of Arizona Press), 589
  4. [38]38. G., Spruit, H., & Levy, E. H. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, MorÐll, ed. E. H. Levy & J. I. Lunine (Tucson : University of Arizona Press), 939
  5. [44]44. M., Hubbard, W. B., & Pollack, J. B. 1993, in Protostars and Podolak, Planets III, ed. E. H. Levy & J. I. Lunine (Tucson : University of Arizona Press), 1109
  6. [46]46. J. B., Lunine, J. I., & Tittemore, W. C. 1990, in Uranus, ed. J. T. Pollack, Bergstrahl, E. D. Miner, & M. S. Matthews (Tucson : University of Arizona Press), 469
  7. [47]47. R. G. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, ed. E. H. Levy & J. I. Prinn, Lunine (Tucson : University of Arizona Press), 1005
  8. [62]62. D. J., Harris, A. W., & Lunine, J. I. 1986, in Satellites, ed. J. A. Stevenson, Burns & M. S. Matthews (Tucson : The University of Arizona Press), 39
  9. [66]66. S. J., & Cuzzi, J. N. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, Weidenschilling, ed. E. H. Levy & J. I. Lunine (Tucson : University of Arizona Press), 1031

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Quillen, A. C., & Trilling, D. E.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
ORCID
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Publisher
American Astronomical Society
Published
1998-12
Volume
508
Issue
2
Pages
707-713
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
DOI
10.1086/306421
OpenAlex
W2046128110
Semantic Scholar
a705fcf3bdd5428f3ae109ad31a495aa30bbae1f
Cited by
106
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Astrophysical Journal (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (9529190)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astro and Planetary Science
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Keywords
magnetocentrifugal winds, accretion disks, protostellar outflows, magnetic field, disk accretion rate, planet formation, solar system formation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review