A possible dividing line between massive planets and brown-dwarf companions

Ségransan, D.; Queloz, D.; Udry, S.

doi:10.1017/s1743921311020047

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…−23 MJup, derived by Grether & Lineweaver (2006) using their stellar companion and giant planet sample within 50 pc around the sun. This mass function minimum is also consistent with that derived by Sahlmann et al (2011b), who found a void in the mass range between 25 and 45 MJup using the data from the CORALIE radial-velocity survey. They further suggested that there may be a possible dividing line between massive planets and substellar companions.…”

Section: Two Different Brown Dwarf Populationssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…They further suggested that there may be a possible dividing line between massive planets and substellar companions. Schneider et al (2011) has chosen arbitrarily and probably provisionally 25MJup as the upper limit of massive planets based on previous studies (e.g., Sahlmann et al 2011b;Baraffe, Chabrier, & Barman 2010).…”

Section: Two Different Brown Dwarf Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Statistical properties of brown dwarf companions: implications for different formation mechanisms

Ma¹,

Ge²

2014

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

135

207

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mass domain where massive extrasolar planets and brown dwarfs overlap is still poorly understood due to the paucity of brown dwarfs orbiting close to solar-type stars, the so-called brown dwarf desert. In this paper we collect all of available data about close brown dwarfs around solar type stars and their host stars from literature and study the demographics of the brown dwarf desert. The data clearly show a short period and a medium mass gap in the brown dwarf period-mass distribution diagram (35 < m sin i < 55M Jup and P < 100 days), representing the "driest land" in the brown dwarf desert. Observation biases are highly unlikely to cause this gap due to its short period and medium mass, of which brown dwarfs can be easily detected by previous RV surveys. Brown dwarfs above and below this gap have significantly different eccentricity distribution, which not only confirms that this gap is real, but also implies that they may have different origins. Our further statistical study indicates that brown dwarfs below this gap may primarily form in the protoplanetary disk through disk gravitational instability, while brown dwarfs above this gap may dominantly form like a stellar binary through molecular cloud fragmentation. Our discoveries have offered important insights about brown dwarf formation mechanisms and their possible relationships with planet and star formation.

show abstract

Section: Two Different Brown Dwarf Populationssupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Two Different Brown Dwarf Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Statistical properties of brown dwarf companions: implications for different formation mechanisms

Ma¹,

Ge²

2014

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

135

207

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because there was no such minimum in the mass spectrum of free-floating brown dwarfs, they speculated that migration and not a characteristic mass scale of fragmentation in protoplanetary disks was responsible for the apparent minimum. Sahlmann et al (2011) used the combination of the Doppler and astrometric techniques to remove the sin i degeneracy to confirm the previous result, finding that low-mass brown dwarfs with M 25 M Jup cleanly separated from high-mass brown dwarfs with M 45 M Jup . In contrast to Grether & Lineweaver (2006), they argued that the low-mass brown dwarfs may be massive planets formed by core accretion.…”

Section: Comparison To Previous Studies Of Thesupporting

confidence: 62%

Evidence of an Upper Bound on the Masses of Planets and Its Implications for Giant Planet Formation

Schlaufman

2018

ApJ

141

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Celestial bodies with a mass of M ≈ 10 M Jup have been found orbiting nearby stars. It is unknown whether these objects formed like gas-giant planets through core accretion or like stars through gravitational instability. I show that objects with M 4 M Jup orbit metal-rich solar-type dwarf stars, a property associated with core accretion. Objects with M 10 M Jup do not share this property. This transition is coincident with a minimum in the occurrence rate of such objects, suggesting that the maximum mass of a celestial body formed through core accretion like a planet is less than 10 M Jup . Consequently, objects with M 10 M Jup orbiting solar-type dwarf stars likely formed through gravitational instability and should not be thought of as planets. Theoretical models of giant planet formation in scaled minimum-mass solar nebula Shakura-Sunyaev disks with standard parameters tuned to produce giant planets predict a maximum mass nearly an order of magnitude larger. To prevent newly formed giant planets from growing larger than 10 M Jup , protoplanetary disks must therefore be significantly less viscous or of lower mass than typically assumed during the runaway gas accretion stage of giant planet formation. Either effect would act to slow the Type I/II migration of planetary embryos/giant planets and promote their survival. These inferences are insensitive to the host star mass, planet formation location, or characteristic disk dissipation time.

show abstract

“…The choice of 25 M the authors justified by the start of a dip at around this mass in the observed distribution in M sin i of substellar mass objects [e.g. 185,[187][188][189].…”

Section: Very Massive Giants and Metallicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Heavy Metal Rules. I. Exoplanet Incidence and Metallicity

Adibekyan

2019

Geosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discovery of only handful of exoplanets required to establish a correlation between giant planet occurrence and metallicity of their host stars. More than 20 years have already passed from that discovery, however, many questions are still under lively debate: What is the origin of that relation? what is the exact functional form of the giant planet -metallicity relation (in the metal-poor regime)?, does such a relation exist for terrestrial planets? All these question are very important for our understanding of the formation and evolution of (exo)planets of different types around different types of stars and are subject of the present manuscript. Besides making a comprehensive literature review about the role of metallicity on the formation of exoplanets, I also revisited most of the planet -metallicity related correlations reported in the literature using a large and homogeneous data provided by the SWEET-Cat catalog. This study lead to several new results and conclusions, two of which I believe deserve to be highlighted in the abstract: i) The hosts of sub-Jupiter mass planets (∼0.6 -0.9 M ) are systematically less metallic than the hosts of Jupiter-mass planets. This result might be related to the longer disk lifetime and higher amount of planet building materials available at high metallicities, which allow a formation of more massive Jupiter-like planets. ii) Contrary to the previous claims, our data and results do not support the existence of a breakpoint planetary mass at 4 M above and below which planet formation channels are different. However, the results also suggest that planets of the same (high) mass can be formed through different channels depending on the (disk) stellar mass i.e. environmental conditions.

show abstract

A possible dividing line between massive planets and brown-dwarf companions

Cited by 11 publications

References 11 publications

Statistical properties of brown dwarf companions: implications for different formation mechanisms

Statistical properties of brown dwarf companions: implications for different formation mechanisms

Evidence of an Upper Bound on the Masses of Planets and Its Implications for Giant Planet Formation

Heavy Metal Rules. I. Exoplanet Incidence and Metallicity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About