Differences between revisions 1 and 2
Revision 1 as of 2015-08-04 23:09:49
Size: 735
Comment:
Revision 2 as of 2015-08-05 00:11:57
Size: 1849
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 15: Line 15:
 .p67 "Planetary-forming processes in our system seem to be essentially accidental and repetition of the particular sequence of events on another system seems as unlikely as multiple wins in a lottery. '''If planets share any common factor, it is uniqueness.'''
 .p68 "...such comments fail to understand that planetary formation is essentially stochastic. The processes forming planets are chaotic, with all outcomes possible. Seeking one model is an illusion."
 .p73 "For the ice giants, Uranus and Neptune, the answer is also clear. They formed too late to catch much gas before it was all gone."
 .p75 1st: accretion of bodies approaching Mars in size < 1MY 2nd: collisions for bodies the size of Earth and Venus, 100 MY
 .p76 "material now in Earth and Venus probably came from the entire inner solar system" "...the final outcome, was a matter of chance"
 .p78 "Chaos is a major factor in planetary growth"
  . Lithium depletion in solar-like stars: no planet connection / Baumann Astronomy&Astrophysics Vol 519, p. A 87, 2010

Look at Sharf again - what's with the AL26/MN26 nearby supernova?

Planet Formation


Destiny or Chance, Taylor, 2012

  • Tzero = 3467 +- 2 MYA earliest crystalline material
  • Triton(Neptune) 39K
  • Sun 1.4% metallicity ( ~0 to 4% )
  • p31 typ galaxy 1e11 stars Milky Way formed stars 10GYA
  • p33 Gas clouds H2 100-1000 H/cm3, 1% of galactic volume, 10K, up to 100 LY diam, gas for 1e5 to 1e6 stars
  • p34 100 KY cloud collapse to ignition
  • p35 red dwarf >75% 80xJupiter / Jupiter 150K accretion energy / Brown dwarf 300K

  • p48 Planetesimal Hypothesis dustygrains > boulders > mountains

  • p49 like a spiral storm, not a uniform disk
  • Goldilocks problem, too much gas, fall into sun
    • [7] Roberge & Kamp "Protoplanets and debris disks" in Exoplanets/Seager.2010 p285

  • p67 "Planetary-forming processes in our system seem to be essentially accidental and repetition of the particular sequence of events on another system seems as unlikely as multiple wins in a lottery. If planets share any common factor, it is uniqueness.

  • p68 "...such comments fail to understand that planetary formation is essentially stochastic. The processes forming planets are chaotic, with all outcomes possible. Seeking one model is an illusion."
  • p73 "For the ice giants, Uranus and Neptune, the answer is also clear. They formed too late to catch much gas before it was all gone."
  • p75 1st: accretion of bodies approaching Mars in size < 1MY 2nd: collisions for bodies the size of Earth and Venus, 100 MY

  • p76 "material now in Earth and Venus probably came from the entire inner solar system" "...the final outcome, was a matter of chance"
  • p78 "Chaos is a major factor in planetary growth"
    • Lithium depletion in solar-like stars: no planet connection / Baumann Astronomy&Astrophysics Vol 519, p. A 87, 2010

Look at Sharf again - what's with the AL26/MN26 nearby supernova?

PlanetFormation (last edited 2019-10-05 19:25:43 by KeithLofstrom)