Codex @codex  0

The region of a disk from which a planetary embryo can efficiently accrete solids. Its width depends on gravitational encounters and the surrounding orbital population. Approximating that width by a multiple of the Hill radius gives a useful local isolation mass.

A fragment formed by gravitational instability of an astrophysical disk must remain bound after it forms. Its own gravity competes with the surrounding tidal field, while heating, cooling and accretion change its size and internal support.

For a low-mass clump on a circular orbit around a dominant star, its Hill radius estimates the region over which its attraction can resist the local stellar tide. Cooling and contraction can make a fragment more compact, whereas inward migration can shrink that tidal region. A calculation demonstrating initial fragmentation therefore does not alone establish a long-lived giant planet: survival requires the subsequent thermal and orbital evolution as well.

For an opaque or detectably extinguishing spherical debris cloud of radius $R_c=\eta R_H$ much larger than the stellar radius, a central exoplanet transit lasts approximately $2R_c/(na)$. Combining this with the Hill radius gives the displayed mass estimate. For cloud impact distance $s$, replace $R_c$ by $\sqrt{R_c^2-s^2}$: the central formula then gives a lower mass estimate unless the chord geometry is known.

The Hill sphere estimates the region around a small secondary where its gravity competes successfully with the primary's tidal field. For secondary mass $m\ll M$ on a nearly circular orbit of radius $a$, its characteristic Hill radius isIn the local rotating approximation, balancing $Gm/r^2$ against the radial tidal-plus-centrifugal term $3GMr/a^3$ gives this scale. It also approximates the distance to the adjacent Collinear Lagrange points.

This is a scale for orbital dynamics, not a surface where the two gravitational attractions become equal. Satellite stability depends on the trajectory and orbital orientation; being inside the nominal Hill sphere alone does not prove long-term stability. The small-mass-ratio collinear Lagrange points make the underlying approximation explicit.

The mass reached after consuming an idealized local annulus of solids. With full annular width $\Delta a=Ba[M_{\mathrm{iso}}/(3M_{\star }){]}^{1/3}$ and solid surface density ${\Sigma }_s$, the balance $M_{\mathrm{iso}}=2\pi a\Delta a{\Sigma }_s$ gives the displayed value. Radial replenishment, migration and embryo mergers can overcome local isolation; defining the width with a mutual rather than single-body Hill radius changes the numerical coefficient.

The collinear Lagrange point beyond the smaller primary, away from the larger one, is $L_2$. For a small mass ratio it lies approximately one Hill radius from the secondary and has a growing linear mode.

A scale for the combined gravitational influence of two small orbiting bodies relative to their common host star. It is often used to express the separation of neighboring planetary embryos. For equal masses and nearly equal orbital radii it exceeds the individual Hill radius by $2^{1/3}$.

Icarus 131, 171–178. The primary abstract describes three-dimensional simulations that produce comparable-mass embryos amid smaller planetesimals, and reports orbital spacing typically about ten individual Hill radii.

Core accretion builds a solid core and then a massive gaseous envelope before protoplanetary disk dispersal. The solid and gas stages overlap; this is not direct collapse of a whole disk patch.

In a protoplanetary disk, refractory grains and, beyond a snow line, condensed ices provide solids. Settling and protoplanetary dust coagulation build aggregates, but fragmentation, bouncing and radial drift of solids in a gas disk can interrupt simple sticking. Concentration processes such as the streaming instability can produce dense particle structures that collapse into planetesimals. Subsequent collisions build planetary embryos; alternatively, embryos can efficiently capture drifting particles through gas-assisted pebble accretion. Neither the initial planetesimal population nor unrestricted growth through every size should be assumed without a mechanism.

For gravitationally focused growth of a planetary core, the two-body capture cross-section isAn illustrative thin-disk estimate is ${\dot{M}}_c\sim {\Sigma }_s\Omega {\sigma }_{\mathrm{coll}}$, up to geometry and velocity-distribution factors. At fixed solid density and random speed, strong gravitational focusing gives ${\dot{M}}_c\propto M_c^{4/3}$: runaway planetesimal growth. As large embryos stir the smaller bodies, encounter speeds increase and focusing weakens, giving oligarchic growth. Consuming the local feeding zone leads toward an isolation mass; radial supply, migration and mergers can extend growth. Snow lines can increase the solid reservoir, but a distant core also grows more slowly because orbital times are longer.^[ref]

A growing core binds gas over a scale limited by the smaller of its Bondi radius and Hill radius. The envelope approximately satisfiesAn equation of state, disk boundary conditions, and radiative or convective energy transport close the structure. In an optically thick radiative region,Here $\kappa$ is opacity; an unstable radiative gradient instead drives convection. Solid accretion releases roughly $L_s\sim G{M}_c{\dot{M}}_c/R_c$, heating and supporting the envelope. Gas capture consequently depends on cooling, not just whether the potential can bind gas instantaneously.

The envelope loses energy on a Kelvin-Helmholtz cooling time, $t_{\mathrm{KH}}\sim |E_{\mathrm{env}}|/L$. Lower grain opacity, higher core mass, or reduced solid-accretion heating can accelerate contraction. The critical core mass for gas accretion is therefore model dependent; “of order ten Earth masses” is a common scale, not a universal switch. As envelope self-gravity becomes important and the gas and solid masses become comparable, contraction permits still more gas capture, producing runaway gas accretion. The classical sequence has a rapid solid-growth phase, a slower envelope-growth phase, and accelerated gas accumulation.^[ref]

The decisive race is $t_{\mathrm{core}}+t_{\mathrm{envelope}}\lesssim t_{\mathrm{disk}}$. Failure to cool or obtain a sufficiently large core before gas removal leaves a smaller solid or ice-rich planet. Successful growth is ultimately limited by disk supply, gap opening by a planet, and dispersal; a gap does not completely seal off accretion. Angular-momentum exchange drives planetary migration, so the observed orbit need not be the formation radius. Accretion-shock radiation and subsequent contraction set the young giant's entropy and luminosity; final core mass, envelope enrichment and orbital location depend on the whole growth history, not on one fixed threshold. The necessary cooling, supply and orbital constraints make the model testable rather than an assertion that every embryo must become a gas giant.

The Hill radius compares planetary gravity with the differential stellar tide. Expanding the stellar tide near a circular orbit gives $G{M}_p/r_H^2\simeq 3{\Omega }^2{r}_H$, soIt sets the size of the planet's tidal neighbourhood, controls encounter and feeding zone scales, and limits the region within which material can remain bound against stellar shear. It is not itself a solid surface or a guarantee of capture.

The Bondi radius compares planetary potential energy per unit mass with the gas thermal scale,This convention uses the ambient sound speed; definitions based on escape speed can differ by a factor of two. Inside $r_B$, gravity can substantially perturb thermal gas. Gas still needs a way to dissipate energy and angular momentum to accrete; a geometric boundary alone does not supply a gas-capture rate.

For an embedded hydrostatic envelope a useful outer scale is $r_{\mathrm{out}}\sim \min (r_B,r_H)$, subject to disk thickness and gas recycling. Let $h=H/a=c_s/(a\Omega )$ and $q=M_p/M_{\star }$. The Bondi-Hill crossover in a protoplanetary disk obeysSmall cores are usually thermally limited, whereas larger ones become tidally limited. These radii also organize pebble accretion: gas drag can turn an encounter into capture, with drift-dominated and shear-dominated regimes depending on particle stopping and encounter times. There is no universal accretion efficiency fixed by $r_H$ or $r_B$ alone.^[ref]

Oligarchic growth is the stage in which a relatively small number of planetary embryos dominate the dynamics of many smaller planetesimals. It follows runaway planetesimal growth. The embryos remain separated, grow to broadly comparable masses within similar local disk conditions, and regulate their accretion by stirring the population that supplies their material. The primary numerical study describes this embryo–planetesimal structure and typical separations of about ten individual Hill radii.^[ref]

The key feedback is gravitational focusing. In a dispersion-dominated encounter with approach speed $v$ and a small impactor, conservation of energy and conservation of angular momentum give the collision cross-sectionAt fixed internal mass density, $R\propto M^{1/3}$ and $v_{\mathrm{esc}}^2\propto M^{2/3}$. If the background random speed initially is controlled by small planetesimals and varies little with embryo mass, strong focusing gives ${\sigma }_{\mathrm{coll}}\propto M^{4/3}$. For a disk with planetesimal thickness of order $v_z/{\Omega }_K$ and a fixed ratio $v/v_z$, the associated estimate isup to geometric factors. With nearly fixed $v$, this gives $\dot{M}\propto M^{4/3}$ and $\dot{M}/M\propto M^{1/3}$: the largest bodies have the shortest fractional growth times, the essence of runaway growth.

As embryos grow, their gravitational encounters increasingly excite the random eccentricities and inclinations of nearby planetesimals. This is viscous stirring of planetesimals, not molecular fluid viscosity. Higher encounter speeds lower the focusing factor. The largest local embryo heats its feeding population most strongly and thereby suppresses its own relative growth advantage. Gas drag and dissipative collisions oppose stirring; dynamical friction tends to keep the more massive embryos' random motions relatively small while transferring random energy to lighter bodies. The balance between these processes controls the accretion rate.

For an illustrative self-regulated scaling $v\propto M^{1/3}$, the ratio $v_{\mathrm{esc}}/v$ is approximately fixed. The previous growth estimate becomesLarger embryos now grow more slowly in fractional terms, allowing neighboring embryos in comparable environments to approach similar masses. This scaling illustrates the feedback; it is not a universal exact exponent for every planetesimal size distribution, damping law or disk surface-density profile. In particular, a two-body focusing cross-section must be modified in the shear-dominated regime, where encounters are governed by the stellar tidal field.

The relevant gravitational interaction scale is the Hill radius,Close embryo encounters and orbital repulsion keep adjacent embryos separated by several Hill-scale lengths. The mutual Hill radius uses their combined mass; for equal neighboring masses it is $2^{1/3}{R}_H$. Stating which definition is used matters when quoting a spacing coefficient. The spacing is a dynamical scale, not an exact universal integer.

Each feeding zone of a planetary embryo contains a finite solid reservoir. To estimate its isolation mass, let the full annular width be $\Delta a=B{R}_H$, where the dimensionless coefficient $B$ includes the stated choice of width and Hill-radius convention. For local solid surface density ${\Sigma }_s$,Solving givesThus denser solid disks and wider feeding annuli allow larger embryos. If ${\Sigma }_s\propto a^{-p}$, the estimate scales as $M_{\mathrm{iso}}\propto a^{3-3p/2}$ at fixed host mass and $B$. This is a local exhaustion estimate, not an absolute maximum planet mass: radial delivery of solids, pebble accretion, migration and embryo mergers can replenish or enlarge a feeding zone. No solid surface-density normalization is given, so a numerical isolation mass would require an invented disk model.

As the local supply is depleted, growth slows further. After gas damping weakens, embryo orbits may cross and giant collisions can assemble larger terrestrial planets. Farther out, sufficiently massive cores may instead acquire gas before protoplanetary disk dispersal. Oligarchic growth explains why a few comparable embryos share a disk while many smaller planetesimals remain: gravitational stirring weakens focusing and makes accretion self-regulating.

Let $M=M_1+M_2$ and $\alpha =M_2/M$, with $0<\alpha <1$. In the centre of mass frame the two primary distances are $r_1=\alpha R$ and $r_2=(1-\alpha )R$. Applying Newton's law of universal gravitation and circular centripetal acceleration to the first primary gives $M_1{\omega }^2\alpha R=G{M}_1{M}_2/R^2$, and henceThe same result follows from the second primary or from the relative two-body equation of motion.

A rotating-frame equilibrium has zero rotating-frame velocity, so its Coriolis force vanishes. Above the orbital plane both primaries have downward gravitational components; below it both have upward components. The centrifugal force has no $z$ component. More explicitly,which vanishes only at $z=0$ for finite nonsingular points. Thus all equilibria lie in the orbital plane.

The equation of motion in a rotating frame for the dwarf isOn the orbital plane the centrifugal contribution is $m{\omega }^2\mathbf{r}$. Thus the rotating-frame effective potential is $E=U-m{\omega }^2(x^2+y^2)/2$; equilibria are exactly its stationary points. The Coriolis force affects motion about those equilibria but not their positions. This is the circular restricted three-body problem, with the dwarf treated as a test mass.

The printed energy unit has the wrong dimensions. The correct total energy unit is $mGM/R$, or $GM/R$ for specific energy; $GM/R^2$ is an acceleration. Dividing $E$ by $mGM/R$ and measuring lengths in units of $R$ gives the dimensionless effective potentialThe primary coordinates are $(-\alpha ,0)$ and $(1-\alpha ,0)$. Restricting to $y=0$ gives $F(x)=\mathcal{E}(x,0)$ andThe absolute values are essential; dropping them would reverse the attraction on the left of a primary. On each of the intervals separated by the two primaries, $F^{\prime }$ decreases strictly from $+\infty$ to $-\infty$. There is exactly one Collinear Lagrange point on each interval, a maximum along the $x$ direction.

For the inner Lagrange point, write $x=1-\alpha -\delta$ with $\delta >0$. For the L2 Lagrange point, write $x=1-\alpha +\delta$. The respective equations areBalancing the leading terms gives $\delta =(\alpha /3{)}^{1/3}+O({\alpha }^{2/3})$. Therefore the small-mass-ratio collinear Lagrange points obeyThe omitted $-\alpha$ displacement of the secondary is smaller than the stated error. The leading distance from the secondary is the dimensionless Hill radius.

For the L3 Lagrange point put $x=-1+c\alpha +O({\alpha }^2)$. It lies to the left of both primaries, soExpanding the two positive inverse-square factors gives $(1-\alpha )/(x+\alpha {)}^2=1+(2c+1)\alpha +O({\alpha }^2)$ and $\alpha /(x-1+\alpha {)}^2=\alpha /4+O({\alpha }^2)$. Thus $F^{\prime }=-(3c+5/4)\alpha +O({\alpha }^2)$, soAll three have $y=z=0$. The small-$\alpha$ equalities in the paper are asymptotic expressions, not exact coordinates for finite mass ratio.

For the remaining Lagrange points, introduce plane polar coordinates about the first primary: $x=-\alpha +s\cos \theta$, $y=s\sin \theta$. Its distance to the second primary is $d=(s^2+1-2s\cos \theta {)}^{1/2}$, andThe angular stationary condition is ${\partial }_{\theta }\mathcal{E}=\alpha s\sin \theta (d^{-3}-1)=0$. For an off-axis point $s>0$ and $\sin \theta \ne 0$, so $d=1$. The radial stationary condition becomesHence $s=1$, and $d=1$ implies $\cos \theta =1/2$. The Triangular Lagrange points are exactlyBoth triangles are equilateral. The collinear and off-axis calculations together exhaust the stationary points.

For the requested sketch, $\mathcal{E}$ tends to $-\infty$ at either primary and at large in-plane radius. Each Collinear Lagrange point is a saddle of the planar effective potential: its $x$ curvature is negative and its $y$ curvature is positive. To see the latter, let $d_1=|x+\alpha |$, $d_2=|x-1+\alpha |$ and $D=(1-\alpha )/d_1^3+\alpha /d_2^3$. At an inner point both distances are below one, so $D>1$. At an exterior stationary point, use barycentric positions $a_1=-\alpha$, $a_2=1-\alpha$ and weights $1-\alpha ,\alpha$: the equation implies $x(D-1)=\sum w_i{a}_i/|x-a_i{|}^3$. To the right, the weighted sum is positive because the positive primary is closer; to the left it is negative because the negative primary is closer. Thus $D>1$ there as well, and ${\mathcal{E}}_{yy}=D-1>0$.

At either Triangular Lagrange point, the planar Hessian isIts trace is $-3$ and determinant $27\alpha (1-\alpha )/4>0$, so these are local maxima. Their height is $\mathcal{E}=-3/2+\alpha (1-\alpha )/2$. The sketch below uses a finite mass ratio to separate the five points clearly; its singular wells are clipped only for display. These curvature labels concern the effective potential, not a stability test that ignores the Coriolis force.

Write $R_p$ for the physical planet radius and $R_c=\eta R_{H1}$ for the debris-cloud radius; the source uses $R_1$ for both even though their stated size orderings are opposite. A central transit duration of a small planet on a nearly circular Kepler orbit is $D_p\simeq 2R_{\star }/(n_1{a}_1)=P_1{R}_{\star }/(\pi a_1)$. Kepler's third law, with $M_{\star }=4\pi {\rho }_{\star }{R}_{\star }^3/3$, givesA noncentral planetary exoplanet transit is shorter, so within the small-radius and nearly circular approximations, a duration requiringis too long for the planet alone and favors extended debris. For a central cloud transit with $R_c\gg R_{\star }$, the path length is approximately $2R_c$. Using the Hill radius $R_{H1}=a_1(M_1/(3M_{\star }){)}^{1/3}$ gives $D_1/P_1\simeq R_c/(\pi a_1)$, hence the Hill-cloud transit mass estimateThis equality assumes a central cloud chord. An orbit described merely as nearly edge-on need not have central cloud crossings. If its projected cloud impact distance is $s$, the measured half-chord is $\sqrt{R_c^2-s^2}$, so the boxed mass is multiplied by $[1-(s/R_c{)}^2{]}^{-3/2}$. It is a lower estimate when that geometry is unknown.

For the dynamical calculation use ${\mu }_2=M_2/M_{\star }$, $A=G{M}_2/a_2$, and $\mathcal{R}=Af(\alpha )e_1\cos {\varphi }_1$. The derivatives in the supplied Lagrange planetary equations hold the other osculating orbital elements fixed:Since $A/(n_1{a}_1^2)=n_1{\mu }_2\alpha$, the physical mean-longitude equation for a first-order resonant term isThe source's epoch notation needs care when $n_1$ varies. Literally differentiating ${\lambda }_1=n_1(t)t+{ϵ}_1(t)$ adds $t{\dot{n}}_1$; one cannot retain that definition and also identify the printed ${\dot{ϵ}}_1$ with ${\dot{\lambda }}_1-n_1$. A consistent version writes ${\lambda }_1={\int }_0^t{n}_1(s)ds+{ϵ}_{\mathrm{int}}$ and assigns the displayed correction to ${\dot{ϵ}}_{\mathrm{int}}$. Equivalently, the canonical mean-longitude equation for a first-order resonant term follows from the disturbing function directly. The result for $g$ is the intended physical equation under that convention.

Away from resonant-argument libration, neglect changes in $e_1,\alpha ,{\varpi }_1$ on one slow cycle to this order. With $n_0=2\pi /P_1$ the reference mean motion, the signed slow frequency isThis is the near-resonant transit-timing superperiod. Choose ${\varphi }_1(0)=0$. Differentiating $n_1\propto a_1^{-3/2}$ with the semi-major axis equation givesLet $C=3j{\mu }_2{n}_0^2\alpha f{e}_1$ and $n_s=n_1(0)$. Direct integration giveswith zero initial mean longitude. The constant and linear terms are absorbed into the fitted transit ephemeris: the measured mean frequency is $\bar{n}=n_s-C/\omega$. This distinction avoids mistaking an arbitrary initial frequency for the long-term fitted period.

For $|\Delta |\ll 1$, the double-integrated frequency term dominates the direct $g$ term provided $g/f$ stays finite. Relative to the fitted linear ephemeris, ${\lambda }_1(t_k)=2\pi k$ givesHere $P_1$ denotes the fitted mean period at the retained order. The signed-frequency convention fixes the phase sign. Replacing $\omega$ by $2\pi /P_t>0$ changes the sign of the signed $A_t$ when needed; a nonnegative amplitude hasUsing a signed $P_t=2\pi /\omega$ instead gives the source's signed proportionality $A_t/P_t\simeq 3{\mu }_2\alpha f{e}_1/(2\pi \Delta )$. The leading implicit transit equation can equally use $P_{1}k$ inside the sine, since the difference is higher order in the perturbation. This is the eccentricity-enhanced near-resonant transit-timing variation; its derivation assumes small longitude oscillations, ${\mu }_2{e}_1\ll {\Delta }^2$ at fixed resonance coefficients, and the effectively fixed eccentricity used in this truncated model. Dominance over forced-eccentricity timing terms typically also requires $e_1\gg |\Delta |$ at fixed $j$. A full transit calculation also includes forced orbital eccentricity and the conversion from mean longitude to the actual sky-crossing angle. Those are lower order in this eccentricity-enhanced regime, rather than identically absent; broader near-resonant formulas are derived by Lithwick, Xie and Wu.

Inside a mean-motion resonance, ${\varphi }_1$ undergoes resonant-argument libration and its evolution must be solved together with $a_1,e_1,{\varpi }_1$. The constant circulation frequency $\omega$ and the associated ${\Delta }^{-2}$ expansion then fail. At approximately fixed eccentricity, the resonant resonant pendulum approximation has libration frequency of order $j{n}_0\sqrt{{\mu }_2\alpha |f|e_1}$, up to numerical factors. The transit-timing variation follows that libration period and depends on its libration amplitude of a resonant argument. Exactly at a resonant equilibrium there need be no libration signal; near a separatrix the period grows, and eccentricity dynamics can modify the simple estimate. Resonant amplitudes remain controlled by the bounded resonant motion rather than diverging as the circulating detuning tends to zero.

The normalization of the circular restricted three-body problem implies ${\mu }_1+{\mu }_2=1$, by Kepler's third law. The two bodies have barycentric positions $(-{\mu }_2,0)$ and $({\mu }_1,0)$. ConsequentlyDifferentiate the effective potential directly:Since $x={\mu }_1(x+{\mu }_2)+{\mu }_2(x-{\mu }_1)$ and $y=({\mu }_1+{\mu }_2)y$, these becomeOn $y=0$, centrifugal acceleration is the straight line $a_{\mathrm{cf}}=x$. Each gravitational term points towards its source, diverges at that source, and tends to zero far away. Let $f(x)=U_x(x,0)$; away from the sources,Thus the net acceleration is strictly increasing on each of the three intervals separated by the bodies. On the left interval $f$ runs from $-\infty$ to $+\infty$; on the middle interval it runs from $-\infty$ just right of $M_1$ to $+\infty$ just left of $M_2$; on the right interval it runs from $-\infty$ to $+\infty$. The intermediate value theorem and strict monotonicity give exactly three collinear Lagrange points, $L_3,L_1,L_2$ in increasing $x$ order. The sketch plots gravity and centrifugal acceleration separately; their intersections with $a_{\mathrm{grav}}=-x$ locate the equilibria.

Write $x_{L2}={\mu }_1+\delta$, so $r_{2,L2}=\delta$ and $r_{1,L2}=1+\delta$. The exact right-hand equilibrium equation isAs ${\mu }_2\to 0$, ${\mu }_1\to 1$, so $3{\delta }^3\simeq {\mu }_2$. Therefore the distance is the leading Hill radius in units of the binary separation:Replacing $M_1+M_2$ by $M_1$ changes only higher-order terms. In dimensional units the right-hand side is multiplied by the binary separation.

Use the displacement vector $\mathbf{q}=(X,Y,\dot{X},\dot{Y}{)}^T$, where $X=x-x_{L2}$ and $Y=y$. The absolute coordinate $x$ cannot be the first entry of a homogeneous linear system about $L_2$; it must be translated. At $L_2$, reflection symmetry gives $U_{xy}=0$, while the Hessian matrix hasTo first order in $|X|/\alpha$ and $|Y|/\alpha$, the Coriolis acceleration then givesThis is the linearization at L2. The expression for $B$ is exact at the true equilibrium; in the small-secondary limit, ${\mu }_2/{\delta }^3\simeq 3$ and ${\mu }_1/(1+\delta {)}^3\simeq 1$, so $B\simeq 4$.

For an eigenmode proportional to $e^{\lambda t}$, eliminate the velocity coordinates. The characteristic polynomial isThusFor $B\simeq 4$, the four eigenvalues areThere is an exponentially growing eigenmode, so $L_2$ is an unstable saddle-centre equilibrium. A generic displacement has an unstable component whose distance grows as $e^{\sqrt{1+2\sqrt{7}}t}$. The L2 escape e-folding time isThis is a local exponential timescale, not the time to reach a prescribed distance from an unspecified initial offset. Starting with unstable amplitude $q_0$, reaching $q_1$ within the linear neighborhood takes approximately ${\tau }_{\mathrm{grow}}\log (q_1/q_0)$. Initial data exactly on the centre-stable subspace need not grow forward at this linear order; the existence of the growing eigenmode already proves instability.

Exclude collisions from the ejection count. The effective collision width is $2R_p$, while the favorable noncolliding ejection width is $(b_{\mathrm{ej}}-R_p{)}_{+}$. Define the first flyby-ejection threshold and the equal-rate crossover byThere are no direct noncolliding ejections in this weak-deflection model for $Q\le Q_{\mathrm{hit}}$. Above that threshold, comparison of the two rates gives collision is more likely for $Q<Q_{\mathrm{crit}}$, while ejection is more likely for $Q>Q_{\mathrm{crit}}$. In the deep-crossing limit $Q_{\mathrm{crit}}\simeq [9/(2\sqrt{2})](M_{\star }/M_p)R_p$, so its scaling at fixed density is $M_{\star }{M}_p^{-2/3}{\rho }_p^{-1/3}$. Order-one factors depend on encounter geometry; the robust condition compares $(M_p/M_{\star })Q$ with $R_p$.

Adding the mutually exclusive rare-event loss rates gives the collision-ejection lifetime of a comet:For $Q\le Q_{\mathrm{hit}}$ this is $t_{\mathrm{col}}\propto Q^{3/2}$. For $Q\gg Q_{\mathrm{hit}}$ it approaches $t_{\mathrm{ej}}\propto Q^{1/2}$. A logarithmic sketch therefore bends from slope $3/2$ to slope $1/2$, with no maximum. At the equal-rate crossover the lifetime is half either individual loss time.

These asymptotic branches use the corrected residence density from part iii and require $Q\gg a_p$ and a local encounter scale below the Hill radius. They cannot be extrapolated indefinitely to arbitrarily distant weakly bound orbits.

The two halo centres orbit their centre of mass with separation $R$. Their relative coordinate obeys $\ddot{\mathbf{R}}=-G(M_1+M_2)\mathbf{R}/R^3$, hence circular motion requiresReflection symmetry about the orbital plane makes the vertical force point back toward $z=0$, while the centrifugal force has no vertical component. An equilibrium away from that plane is therefore impossible.

In the uniformly rotating frame, an equilibrium is a stationary point of the gravitational plus centrifugal effective potentialSet $R=1$, divide by $G(M_1+M_2)/R$, and write $\alpha =M_2/(M_1+M_2)$. The primary and secondary lie at $x=-\alpha$ and $x=1-\alpha$, so on their line

For the two roots near the secondary, put $x=1-\alpha \mp d$ in $F^{\prime }(x)=0$. Dominant balance gives $3d\simeq \alpha /d^2$, so $d=(\alpha /3{)}^{1/3}$. Expanding the root beyond the primary directly in powers of $\alpha$ givesto the requested orders. The other equilibria are the two Triangular Lagrange points

The distance from $H_2$ to either nearby collinear point is the Hill radius. Since $\alpha \simeq M_2/M_1$,Inside this tidal radius, the subhalo's gravity dominates the host's differential gravitational field; outside it, material can escape through the neighborhoods of $L_1$ and $L_2$. For an extended spherical host, $M_1$ is replaced by enclosed mass and the coefficient becomes $3-d\log M_1/d\log R$, giving the Jacobi tidal radius. An extended subhalo requires the bound mass inside $r_t$ to be found self-consistently. On an eccentric orbit there is no time-independent rotating potential or exact tidal boundary; stripping is strongest near pericentre and the instantaneous radius varies around the orbit.

Because the dark component is more extended, tidal stripping first sends dark matter through both $L_1$ and $L_2$, producing leading and trailing dark-matter tidal tails. The compact stellar component is stripped more deeply and also produces a leading and a trailing stellar tail. The two constituents therefore give four tails distinguished by composition, with the dark tails broader and more extended.

For each point $(\Delta {\varphi }_1,e)$, sample $\delta \in [-\Delta {\varphi }_1,\Delta {\varphi }_1]$ and the three conjunction branchesFor every branch, solve Kepler's equation for the eccentric anomaly, evaluate $r=a(1-e\cos E)$, and minimize the planet-planetesimal separation over $\delta$ and $k$. Mark the point as encounter-capable when this minimum is below a chosen $R_{\mathrm{enc}}$, naturally the Hill radius for strong scattering. Repeating this calculation on a grid traces the boundary in the $\Delta {\varphi }_1$--$e$ plane.

Direct integrations of the circular restricted three-body problem can then refine the geometric map by allowing the resonant argument, eccentricity, and conjunction kicks to evolve self-consistently. The integrations distinguish merely orbit-crossing initial data from trajectories that actually enter the encounter region, and reveal chaotic layers near the boundary.

At conjunction, the planetesimal's mean anomaly isIf ${\varphi }_1=\pi +\delta$ with $|\delta |\le \Delta {\varphi }_1\le \pi$, the conjunction branch that can come closest to periapsis hasLet $E_{min}$ solve Kepler's equationAt that phase the orbital radius is $r_{min,c}=a(1-e\cos E_{min})$. A geometrical close encounter is possible only ifwhere $R_{\mathrm{enc}}$ may be chosen as the planet's Hill radius or another encounter distance. With a point planet, set $R_{\mathrm{enc}}=0$. This implicit inequality is the requested eccentricity constraint as a function of $\Delta {\varphi }_1$.

The weaker necessary condition that the orbits cross isIt becomes sufficient for phase access only as $\Delta {\varphi }_1\to \pi$, when a conjunction can approach periapsis. Smaller libration amplitude keeps conjunctions farther from periapsis and requires a larger eccentricity than this orbit-crossing bound.

In barycentric coordinates with unit primary separation, a small secondary mass fraction $\alpha$ gives distances $(\alpha /3{)}^{1/3}$ from that secondary to the two neighboring Lagrange points at leading order. This is the dimensionless Hill radius. The opposite exterior L3 Lagrange point has coordinate $-1-5\alpha /12+O({\alpha }^2)$.