Cited by 433Astro and Planetary ScienceAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesStellar, planetary, and galactic studies

Formation of the Galilean Satellites: Conditions of Accretion

Open access
Canup, Robin M., Ward, William R.·2002·The Astronomical Journal

Abstract

We examine formation conditions for the Galilean satellites in the context of models of late-stage giant planet accretion and satellite-disk interactions. We first reevaluate the current standard, in which the satellites form from a "minimum mass subnebula" disk, obtained by augmenting the mass of the current satellites to solar abundance and resulting in a disk mass containing about 2% of Jupiter's mass. Conditions in such a massive and gas-rich disk are difficult to reconcile with both the icy compositions of Ganymede and Callisto and the protracted formation time needed to explain Callisto's apparent incomplete differentiation. In addition, we argue that disk torques in such a gas-rich disk would cause large satellites to be lost to inward decay onto the planet. These issues have prevented us from identifying a self-consistent scenario for the formation and survival of the Galilean satellites using the standard model. We then consider an alternative, in which the satellites form in a circumplanetary accretion disk produced during the very end stages of gas accretion onto Jupiter. In this case, an amount of gas and solids of at least ∼0.02 Jovian masses must still be processed through the disk during the satellite formation era, but this amount need not have been present all at once. We find that an accretion disk produced by a slow inflow of gas and solids, e.g., 2 × 10 -7 Jovian masses per year, is most consistent with conditions needed to form the Galilean satellites, including disk temperatures low enough for ices and protracted satellite accretion times of ≥10 5 yr. Such a "gas-starved" disk has an orders-of-magnitude lower gas surface density than the minimum mass subnebula (and for many cases is optically thin). Solids delivered to the disk build up over many disk viscous cycles, resulting in a greatly reduced gas-to-solids ratio during the final stages of satellite accretion. This allows for the survival of Galilean-sized satellites against disk torques over a wide range of plausible conditions.

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 · 10.1086/344684

Cites

69 of 69 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?

  • For Galilean satellites forming in the Jovian circumplanetary disk after dissipation, smaller values of ξ ~0.1-0.2 are found.

    “For the Galilean satellites forming in the Jovian circumplanetary disk after dissipation, smaller values of ξ ∼ 0 . 1 -0 . 2 are found (Canup & Ward 2002; Magni & Coradini 2004; Ward & Canup 2010).”

    From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Canup & Ward 2002

    Section 1.4 uses 0.1 as a reference value for the disk scale-height ratio, and Section 3.3 discusses how that ratio varies across a circumjovian disk. Our copy does not identify it as ξ or report a range of 0.1–0.2 specifically for the satellite-forming disk after dissipation. (LLM, conf=0.70)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Simulations indicate that ξ > 0.4 are unlikely.

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

    From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Canup & Ward 2002

    The Summary and Discussion gives a model requirement of specific angular momentum equivalent to 0.3–0.4 in units of Jupiter’s orbital frequency and Hill radius. It does not say simulations find values above 0.4 unlikely; instead, it says future hydrocode simulations may be able to test that requirement. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The lifetime of the second phase of Jupiter's circumstellar disk is estimated to be of order a million years.

    “The lifetime of the second phase of Jupiter's circumstellar disk is estimated to be of order a million years (Canup & Ward 2002;Alibert et al. 2005;Ward & Canup 2010).”

    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 Canup & Ward 2002

    Section 3.3 (page unavailable) uses 5 × 10^6 years as a characteristic timescale for gas inflow onto Jupiter, but says that slow inflow need persist for at least about 10^5 years to supply the satellites. It does not estimate a million-year lifetime for a “second phase” disk; the model concerns a circumjovian, or circumplanetary, disk rather than a circumstellar one. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The circumplanetary disk aspect ratio h/r is predicted to be in the range 0.1-0.3.

    “The circumplanetary disk aspect ratio h/r is predicted to be in the range 0.1-0.3”

    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 Canup & Ward 2002

    Section 3.3 describes a modeled circumplanetary disk whose aspect ratio increases with radius, and Section 3.4 uses approximately 0.1 as a disk value. The passages do not establish 0.3 as an upper bound or explicitly predict a 0.1–0.3 range (pages unavailable in our copy). (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • After gas is cleared out of the planetary system, dust in the circumplanetary disk accretes into moons or remains as a ring system within the Roche limit of the planet.

    “After the gas is cleared out of the planetary system, dust in the circumplanetary disk then accretes into moons or remains as a ring system within the Roche limit of the planet (Canup & Ward 2002;Magni & Coradini 2004;Ward & Canup 2010).”

    From MODELING GIANT EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEMS IN ECLIPSE AND THE CASE OF J1407B: SCULPTING BY EXOMOONS? (2015) · cites this paper as Canup & Ward 2002

    Section 3.4 describes solids in a circumplanetary disk accumulating to form satellites. But Section 3 says satellite growth occurred while the final gas inflow was still present, not after gas was cleared. The passages do not support the alternative that solids remain as a ring within the planet’s Roche limit; page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    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: 20

  1. [15]15. ---. 2002a, Paper presented at Jupiter Conference, Boulder CO (http://lasp.colorado.edu/jupiter)
  2. [28]28. Hayashi, C., Nakazawa, K., & Nakagawa, Y. 1985, in Protostars and Planets II, ed. D. C. Black & M. S. Matthews (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 1100
  3. [30]30. Hollenbach, D. J., Yorke, H. W., & Johnstone, D. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, ed. V. Mannings, A. P. Boss, & S. S. Russell (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 401
  4. [38]38. Lin, D. N. C., Papaloizou, J. C. B., Terquem, C., Bryden, G., & Ida, S. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, ed. V. Mannings, A. P. Boss, & S. S. Russell (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 1111
  5. [39]39. Lissauer, J. J., & Stewart, G. R. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, ed. E. H. Levy & J. I. Lunine (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 1061
  6. [46]46. Mosquiera, I., Estrada, P. R., Cuzzi, J. N., & Squyres, S. W. 2001, Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf., 32, 1989
  7. [50]50. Peale, S. J., & Lee, M. H. 2002, Nature, submitted Pollack, J. B., & Bodenheimer, P. 1989, in Origin and Evolution of Planetary and Satellite Atmospheres, ed. S. K. Atreya, J. B. Pollack, & M. S. Matthews (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 564
  8. [51]51. Pollack, J. B., & Consolmagno, G. 1984, in Saturn, ed. T. Gehrels & M. S. Matthews (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 811
  9. [53]53. Pollack, J. B., Lunine, J. I., & Tittemore, W. C. 1991, in Uranus, ed. J. T. Bergstralh, E. D. Miner, & M. S. Matthews (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 469
  10. [55]55. ---. 1989, in Origin and Evolution of Planetary and Satellite Atmospheres, ed. S. K. Atreya, J. B. Pollack, & M. S. Matthews (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 78
  11. [58]58. Schubert, G., Spohn, T., & Reynolds, R. T. 1986, in Satellites, ed. J. A. Burns & M. S. Matthews (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 224
  12. [63]63. Stevenson, D. J., Harris, A. W., & Lunine, J. I. 1986, in Satellites, ed. J. A. Burns & M. S. Matthews (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 39
  13. [64]64. Stone, J. M., Gammie, C. F., Balbus, S. A., & Hawley, J. F. 2000, in Proto- stars and Planets IV, ed. V. Mannings, A. P. Boss, & S. S. Russell (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 589
  14. [73]73. ---. 1996, in ASP Conf. Ser. 107, Completing the Inventory of the Solar System, ed. T. W. Rettig & J. M. Hahn (San Francisco: ASP), 337
  15. [75]75. Ward, W. R., & Canup, R. M. 2000, Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf., 31, 2050
  16. [76]76. ---. 2002, Paper presented at Jupiter Conference, Boulder CO (http://lasp.colorado.edu/jupiter)
  17. [78]78. Ward, W. R., & Hahn, J. M. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, ed. V. Mannings, A. P. Boss, & S. S. Russell (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 1135
  18. [79]79. Ward, W. R., & Hamilton, D. 2002, in '' Eurojove '': Jupiter after Galileo and Cassini, ed. B. Battrick (ESA SP-510; Garching: ESA), in press
  19. [81]81. Weidenschilling, S. J., & Cuzzi, J. N. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, ed. E. H. Levy & J. I. Lunine (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 1031
  20. [82]82. Whipple, F. 1972, in From Plasma to Planet, ed. A. Elvins (New York: Wiley), 211

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Canup, R. M., & Ward, W. R.
Affiliations
Southwest Research Institute (US)
Venue
The Astronomical Journal
Published
2002-12
Volume
124
Issue
6
Pages
3404-3423
ISSN
  • 0004-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-3881
OpenAlex
W2122237670
Cited by
433
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 17
FWCI
6.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
The Astronomical Journal (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astro and Planetary Science
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Keywords
Galilean moons, satellite formation flying, Jupiter, icy satellites, Ganymede, Callisto

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