Cited by 40Astro and Planetary ScienceStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies

Producing distant planets by mutual scattering of planetary embryos

Open access
Silsbee, Kedron, Tremaine, Scott·2018·The Astronomical Journal

Abstract

It is likely that multiple bodies with masses between those of Mars and Earth (“planetary embryos”) formed in the outer planetesimal disk of the solar system. Some of these were likely scattered by the giant planets into orbits with semimajor axes of hundreds of au. Mutual torques between these embryos may lift the perihelia of some of them beyond the orbit of Neptune, where they are no longer perturbed by the giant planets, so their semimajor axes are frozen in place. We conduct N-body simulations of this process and its effect on smaller planetesimals in the region of the giant planets and the Kuiper Belt. We find that (i) there is a significant possibility that one sub-Earth mass embryo, or possibly more, is still present in the outer solar system; (ii) the orbit of the surviving embryo(s) typically has perihelion of 40–70 au, semimajor axis less than 200 au, and inclination less than 30°; (iii) it is likely that any surviving embryos could be detected by current or planned optical surveys or have a significant effect on solar system ephemerides; (iv) whether or not an embryo has survived to the present day, its dynamical influence earlier in the history of the solar system can explain the properties of the detached disk (defined in this paper as containing objects with perihelia >38 au and semimajor axes between 80 and 500 au).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3847/1538-3881/aaa19b

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The bound on additional planets from the orbits of known giant planets scales as m/r^3.

    “As a result, the bound on additional planets from the orbits of known giant planets scales as m = r 3 (see the discussion of Silsbee and Tremaine 2018).”

    From The planet nine hypothesis (2019) · cites this paper as Silsbee and Tremaine 2018

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 49 · Cited by 40

Authors
Silsbee, K., & Tremaine, S.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Institute for Advanced Study (US)
Venue
The Astronomical Journal
Published
2018-01-19
Volume
155
Issue
2
Pages
75
ISSN
  • 0004-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-3881
OpenAlex
W2774508606
Cited by
40
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 3
FWCI
2.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Astronomical Journal (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • 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
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Keywords
planetary embryos, Kuiper belt, N-body simulations, orbital dynamics, solar system ephemerides, optical surveys, planetesimal disk

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