Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:48:03.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Turning solar systems into extrasolar planetary systems in stellar clusters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2011

Melvyn B. Davies
Melvyn B. Davies*
Affiliation:
Lund Observatory, Box 43, SE-221 00, Lund, Sweden email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Many stars are formed in some form of cluster or association. These environments can have a much higher number density of stars than the field of the galaxy. Such crowded places are hostile environments: a large fraction of initially single stars will undergo close encounters with other stars or exchange into binaries. We describe how such close encounters and exchange encounters will affect the properties of a planetary system around a single star. We define singletons as single stars which have never suffered close encounters with other stars or spent time within a binary system. It may be that planetary systems similar to our own solar system can only survive around singletons. Close encounters or the presence of a stellar companion will perturb the planetary system, leading to strong planet-planet interactions, often leaving planets on tighter and more eccentric orbits. Thus, planetary systems which initially resembled our own solar system may later more closely resemble the observed extrasolar planetary systems.

Keywords

planetary systemsopen clusters and associations: generalbinaries: general
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 6 , Symposium S276: The Astrophysics of Planetary Systems: Formation, Structure, and Dynamical Evolution , October 2010 , pp. 304 - 307
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2011

References

Adams, F. C. 2010, ARA&A, 48, 47Google Scholar
Fabrycky, D. & Tremaine, S. 2007, ApJ, 669, 1298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jurić, M. & Tremaine, S. 2008, ApJ, 686, 603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozai, Y. 1962, ApJ, 67, 591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovis, C., et al. 2011, A&A, 528, A112Google Scholar
Malmberg, D. & Davies, M. B. 2009, MNRAS, 394, L26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmberg, D., Davies, M. B., & Chambers, J. E. 2007, MNRAS, 377, L1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmberg, D., de Angeli, F., Davies, M. B., Church, R. P., Mackey, D., & Wilkinson, M. I. 2007, MNRAS, 378, 1207Google Scholar
Malmberg, D., Davies, M. B., & Heggie, D. C. 2011, MNRAS, 411, 859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scharf, C. & Menou, K. 2009, ApJ, 693, L113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triaud, A. H. M. J., et al. 2010, A&A, 524, A25Google Scholar
Veras, D., Crepp, J. R., & Ford, E. B., 2009, ApJ, 696, 1600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, Y., Murray, N. W., & Ramshai, J. M., 2007, ApJ, 670, 820CrossRefGoogle Scholar