How Jupiter may have destroyed the inner solar system

It came in like a wrecking ball…

|
Reuters/NASA
The planet Jupiter is shown with one of its moons, Ganymede.

In the early days of our solar system, a rogue Jupiter destroyed everything in its path.

And according to researchers, Earth owes its very existence to those collisions.

Caltech astrophysicist Konstantin Batygin and UCSC’s Greg Laughlin conducted statistical studies based on Jupiter’s wandering orbit, in hopes of zeroing in on what makes our solar system so apparently unique. Their findings were published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Exoplanetary searches, like NASA’s Kepler Mission, suggest a “default” mode of planet formation. In this model, systems that develop around Sun-like stars tend to produce at least one massive, close-orbiting planet.

“The innermost realm of our own solar system, by contrast, is completely, mysteriously empty,” Dr. Laughlin said. “So it was the context provided by the extrasolar planets that gave us a clue that something is unusual in our own.”

Until fairly recently, there was no explanation for how those planets could have gone missing. In 2012, researchers first described an interplanetary model based on the suggestion that Jupiter’s orbit is not fixed – that it migrated nearer to the sun during the formation of our solar system, only to turn and pull away over millions of years. Because it seemed to resemble a sailboat “tacking” around a buoy, researchers dubbed it the “Grand Tack Hypothesis.”

As Jupiter ducked into close orbit, gravitational disturbances would have whipped inner planets into each other. Then, “headwinds” of swirling gas would have propelled remaining debris into the Sun. Jupiter would have remained, for the time being, in close orbit with its central star.

Typically, that’s where the story ends. The formation of giant planets is unusual, so two would be considered a rarity. But Jupiter was drawn away by another massive celestial body – Saturn. As the space between Jupiter and the Sun widened, new planets were able to develop out of leftover materials from the collisions. This theory is supported by evidence that our inner-to-middle planets – Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars – are younger than our outer planets. They are also rocky, rather than gaseous, and their atmospheres are comparatively thin.

“Over the years, we had looked at a number of approaches for clearing out the inner solar system,” Laughlin said, “and none of them were particularly promising. But then Konstantin pointed out the idea of a collisional cascade, and it became, as far as we could tell, very straightforward to understand what might have happened. It was surprising that the Grand Tack, which has been getting a fair amount of attention over the past few years, works so well in explaining why our inner solar system has ‘gone missing’.”

Laughlin’s statistics and simulations are based on the Grand Tack Hypothesis – as such, his findings can only be as accurate as that model. But luckily, there are ways to test them.

“Our theory predicts that there should be an anti-correlation between the presence of super-Earth planets with short orbital periods, and the presence of a giant planet with an orbital period of roughly a year or more,” Laughlin said. “The validity of this anti-correlation should be testable with NASA's TESS Mission, currently planned for launch in 2017.”

And if Grand Tack proves true, it could have serious implications for humanity’s ongoing search for exo-Earths. Laughlin’s findings suggest that planets with Earth-like masses and orbits should have “substantial” atmospheres – thick with hydrogen, helium, water vapor, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen.

“In the context of our hypothesis, Earth-mass planets should be very common,” Laughlin said. “Truly Earth-like planets, however, with solid surfaces and atmospheric pressures similar to what we have here on Earth, would be expected to be rather rare.”

“I would hazard a guess that the Earth will indeed turn out to be rather special,” he added. “It will be very interesting to see how this hypothesis holds up over the coming years and decades as we learn more about extrasolar planets.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to How Jupiter may have destroyed the inner solar system
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2015/0323/How-Jupiter-may-have-destroyed-the-inner-solar-system
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe