Cited by 38Astro and Planetary ScienceStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies

In Situ formation of Icy Moons of Uranus and Neptune

Open access
Szulágyi, Judit, Cilibrasi, Marco, Mayer, Lucio·2018·The Astrophysical Journal Letters

Abstract

Satellites of giant planets have been thought to form in gaseous circumplanetary disks (CPDs) during the late planet-formation phase, but it was unknown whether or not smaller-mass planets such as the ice giants could form such disks, and thus moons, there. We combined radiative hydrodynamical simulations with satellite population synthesis to investigate the question in the case of Uranus and Neptune. For both ice giants we found that a gaseous CPD is created at the end of their formation. The population synthesis confirmed that Uranian-like, icy, prograde satellite system could form in these CPDs within a couple of 10 5 yr. This means that Neptune could have a Uranian-like moon system originally that was wiped away by the capture of Triton. Furthermore, the current moons of Uranus can be reproduced by our model without the need for planet–planet impact to create a debris disk for the moons to grow. These results highlight that even ice giants—among the most common mass category of exoplanets—can also form satellites, opening a way to a potentially much larger population of exomoons than previously thought.

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 · 10.3847/2041-8213/aaeed6

Cites

49 of 49 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?

  • If moons are present around gas giants, typical timescales for in-situ formation in a gaseous circumplanetary disk range from 10^5-10^6 years for gas-starved disk models down to 10^2-10^4 years for dense circumplanetary disks.

    “If moons are present around gas giants, typical timescales for in-situ formation in a gaseous circumplanetary disk ranges from 10 5 -10 6 years for gas starved-disk models (Canup and Ward 2002;Szulágyi et al., 2018) down to 10 2 -10 4 years for dense circumplanetary disks (Lunine and Stevenson 1982).”

    From A Self-Gravitating Exoring Around J1407b and Implications for In-Situ Exomoon Formation (2022) · cites this paper as Szulágyi et al., 2018

    The Abstract and Conclusion report that moons can form in gaseous circumplanetary disks around Uranus and Neptune within a few hundred thousand years, consistent with part of the cited 10^5–10^6-year range. The paper does not identify this result as a typical timescale for gas-starved models around gas giants; the citing sentence attributes the shorter dense-disk range to a different source. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    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: 3

  1. [7]7. Canup, R. M., & Ward, W. R. 2009, in Europa, ed. R. T. Pappalardo et al. (Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press), 59
  2. [12]12. Dermott, S. F. 1984, in NASA Conf. Pub. 2330, Uranus and Neptune, ed. J. T. Bergstralh (Pasadena, CA: NASA), 377
  3. [14]14. Drazkowska, J., & Szulágyi, J. 2018, arXiv:1807.02638 · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Szulágyi, J., Cilibrasi, M., & Mayer, L.
Affiliations
University of Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Szulágyi, Judit
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal Letters
Published
2018-11-19
Volume
868
Issue
1
Pages
L13
ISSN
  • 2041-8205 (ISSN-L)
  • 2041-8213
OpenAlex
W2901896195
Cited by
38
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4
FWCI
2.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Astrophysical Journal Letters (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
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
icy satellites, Uranus, Neptune, ice giants, circumplanetary disks, satellite formation flying, radiation hydrodynamics, exomoons, planet 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