CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 464Astrophysics and Star Formation StudiesStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesAstro and Planetary Science

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 136 of the 136 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Birth Environment of the Solar System

Open access
Adams, Fred C.·2010·Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics
DOI 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130830
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This review examines our current understanding of the possible birth environments of our Solar System. Because most stars form within groups and clusters, the question becomes one of determining the nature of the birth aggregate of the Sun. This discussion starts by reviewing Solar System properties that provide constraints on our environmental history. We then outline the range of star-forming environments that are available in the Galaxy and discuss how they affect star and planet formation. The nature of the solar birth cluster is constrained by many physical considerations, including radiation fields provided by the background environment, dynamical scattering interactions, and by the necessity of producing the short-lived radioactive nuclear species inferred from meteoritic measurements. Working scenarios for the solar birth aggregate can be constructed, as discussed herein, although significant uncertainties remain.

Overview

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 · 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130830

Cites

136 of 136 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. Allen L, Megeath ST, Gutermuth R, Myers PC, Wolk S, et al. 2007. See Reipurth, Jewitt & Keil 2007, pp. 361–76
  2. Belbruno E, Moro-Martin A, Malhotra R. 2010. Astron. J. In press arXiv:0808.3268 · arXiv
  3. Binney J, 1987, Galactic Dynamics
  4. Cameron AGW. 1993. In Protostars and Planets III , ed. EH Levy, JI Lunine, pp. 47–73. Tucson: Univ. Ariz. Press
  5. Goswami JN, Vanhala HAT. 2000. In Protostars and Planets IV , ed. V Mannings, AP Boss, SS Russell, pp. 963–94. Tucson: Univ. Ariz. Press
  6. Hester JJ, Desch SJ. 2005. In Chondrites and the Protoplanetary Disk . ASP Conf. Ser., Vol. 341, ed. AN Krot, ERD Scott, B Reipurth, pp. 107–30. San Francisco: Astron. Soc. Pac.
  7. Lissauer JJ, Stevenson DJ. 2007. See Reipurth, Jewitt & Keil 2007, pp. 591–606
  8. Megeath ST, Gaidos E, Hester JJ, Adams FC, Bally J, et al. 2008. In 14th Cambridge Workshop on Cool Stars Stellar Systems and the Sun . ASP Conf. Ser. Vol. 384, ed. G van Belle, pp. 393–401. San Francisco: Astron. Soc. Pac.
  9. Meyer BS. 2005. In Chondrites and the Protoplanetary Disk . ASP Conf. Ser., Vol. 341, ed. AN Krot, ERD Scott, B Reipurth, pp. 515–26. San Francisco: Astron. Soc. Pac.
  10. Morbidelli A, Levison HF. 2004. Astron. J. 128:2564 · DOI
  11. Proszkow EM. 2009. PhD. thesis. Univ. Mich., Ann Arbor. 200 pp.
  12. Reipurth B, 2007, . Protostars and Planets V
  13. Scalo JM. 1998. In The Stellar Initial Mass Function . ASP Conf. Ser., Vol. 142, ed. G Gilmore, D Howell, pp. 201–36. San Francisco: Astron. Soc. Pac.
  14. Shu FH, 1992, Gas Dynamics: The Physics of Astrophysics
  15. Wadhwa M, Amelin Y, Davis AM, Lugmair GW, Meyer B, et al. 2007. See Reipurth, Jewitt & Keil 2007, pp. 835–48
  16. Wasserburg GJ. 1985. In Protostars and Planets II , ed. DC Black, MS Matthews, pp. 703–37. Tucson: Univ. Ariz. Press
  17. Young ED, Gounelle M, Smith RL, Morris MR, Pontoppidan KM. 2009. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 40:1967

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 464

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Adams, F. C.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Adams, Fred C.
Venue
Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
2010-08-01
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
47-85
ISSN
  • 0066-4146 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4282
DOI
10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130830
OpenAlex
W2159354014
Cited by
464
References
136
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 23
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • 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
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Space and Planetary Science › Astro and Planetary Science
Keywords
star formation, planet formation, radiation field, dynamical scattering, short-lived radionuclides, meteorites, 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