A body of diameter has mass . Integrating the power-law size distribution therefore gives
Hence
When and , the belt mass is dominated by its largest bodies and .
The impactors' number density per diameter is . With gravitational focusing neglected, the geometric collision cross-section is . The planetesimal collision rate is consequently
where
For equal mass density, the specific impact energy is
Thus the smallest catastrophic impactor has , where
Integrating the collision rate gives
For , the last term is the dominant lower-limit contribution, so the catastrophic planetesimal collision rate is
The definition of gives
The cratering collision prescription therefore removes the target-mass fraction
Cratering impactors satisfy . For , they also satisfy , so . The fractional mass-loss rate is then
Using the catastrophic planetesimal collision rate found above,
For , the fraction removed from the largest remnant is
because . Again using near the dominant lower limit,
Consequently the catastrophic collision mass-loss timescale is
A size-independent gives the steady Dohnanyi collisional cascade exponent . The preceding results become
Thus, under these idealized prescriptions, cratering collisions remove target mass about three times faster than catastrophic collisions. The conclusion concerns mass removed from targets; both processes contribute fragments to the collisional cascade.
Write . Taking the cross product of the equation of motion with gives
Since at every time, the orbit lies in the fixed plane perpendicular to the conserved specific angular momentum . Taking the inner product with gives the conserved specific orbital energy
For , the effective inverse-square force is repulsive and the potential term is positive.
In polar coordinates in the orbital plane, . Setting , the Binet equation for the effective inverse-square force is
Its general solution is
and hence
This is a branch of a hyperbolic Kepler orbit; because , its physical branch has a negative denominator.
The parent body's circular Kepler orbit has speed . Release without a velocity impulse therefore gives
The release point is the dust orbit's point of closest approach, where . Substituting in the orbit equation gives
The longitude of periapsis specifies the symmetry axis of the conic. With this signed repulsive-force convention, it points opposite the release direction, so the closest point is at .
At release,
At large radius the potential vanishes, so
The asymptote satisfies , where . If the angular displacement from the release direction is , then
For , , and therefore
Resolving the conserved energy into radial and azimuthal parts gives
Using the release values of and , and choosing the outward root,
Equivalently, with ,
In a steady axisymmetric outflow, mass conservation makes independent of . The steady radial dust outflow therefore has
It has an integrable pile-up just outside the source ring, where the radial speed starts from zero, and approaches at large radius.
The large-distance profile is proportional to . At , the exact profile is proportional to . Thus
as . The enhancement is the finite-radius remnant of the source-ring pile-up.
The disturbing function may be expanded in harmonics of the planets' orbital angles. Its terms fall into three useful classes:
Well-separated planets far from resonance are governed on long timescales mainly by the secular terms.
Diagonalize the real Laplace-Lagrange secular matrix . Its eigenvalues are
and choose corresponding real eigenvectors . If , the initial complex eccentricity vector determines complex mode coefficients
The matrix exponential solution is
Thus
where a negative eigenvector component may equivalently be made positive by adding to its phase. The are secular precession frequencies, each eigenvector fixes the planets' eccentricity ratio and relative apsidal orientation, and fixes the phase selected by the initial conditions.
Insert the planets' two secular eigenmodes and define their forcing strengths
Solving the first-order linear ordinary differential equation gives
The first term is the particle's freely precessing eccentricity. The remaining terms are its forced eccentricity, phase-locked to the planets' modes. In the complex plane, their vector sum makes the eccentricity and longitude of periapsis oscillate. A denominator becomes small at a secular resonance ; the nonresonant formula then ceases to be uniform.
The free precession rate tends to zero far inside the inner planet, diverges on approaching , diverges on both sides of , and tends to zero far outside the outer planet. Between and it diverges at both ends and has at least one minimum. A horizontal line therefore crosses once inside and once outside , plus zero, one tangent, or two times between the planets. There are consequently
locations of the corresponding secular resonance. This argument uses the smooth Laplace-Lagrange secular theory away from the immediate neighborhoods of the planets and from mean-motion resonances.
Linear eccentricity damping adds to the complex equation:
Its solution is
Unlike the undamped free eccentricity, the homogeneous term decays exponentially. The forced response survives, acquires a phase lag, and has finite amplitude
For , the free term has disappeared. Exactly at , the resonant contribution tends to
with finite eccentricity and a quarter-cycle phase shift. Without damping, exact resonance instead gives
whose secular resonance amplitude grows linearly in the ideal linear theory.
Very near one planet, that planet dominates both the particle's free-precession coefficient and its forcing coefficient, with the leading terms arranged approximately as . Since close to the planet, the late-time forced solution approaches
The particle's orbit therefore tends toward the planet's eccentricity and apsidal direction. Extremely close to the planet, close encounters, co-orbital dynamics, and individual mean-motion resonances invalidate the orbit-averaged linear approximation.
Treat the just-bound orbit as a parabolic Kepler orbit with . Its specific angular momentum is , so its instantaneous angular speed is . Equating this to the planet's mean motion gives
The parabolic orbit equation then gives , or to the nearest ten degrees.
If the bodies were in conjunction at periapsis, Barker equation gives
The planetesimal is therefore at its maximum lead, approximately
ahead of the planet as seen from the star.
In the frame rotating with the planet, put the planet at fixed radius . At periapsis the planetesimal moves prograde faster than the planet and passes just outside it. Its relative longitude initially increases, reaches a turning point near at a lead of about , and then decreases because its angular speed has fallen below the frame rate. Meanwhile its radius continues to grow along the outgoing parabolic branch. A sketch should therefore show an exterior cusp-like closest passage, a short prograde sweep to maximum lead, and a long outward trail that bends retrograde in the rotating frame.
Let . At periapsis the nearly parabolic planetesimal and planet have parallel speeds and , so
For a passage just outside the planet, the impact parameter is . In the small-angle limit of the supplied gravitational scattering angle,
Thus
In the planetocentric frame, the incoming relative velocity is prograde and the encounter outside the planet bends it inward through , without changing . In the inertial frame , so
Substitution of the previous result yields the negative gravitational assist energy kick
The specific orbital energy changes by , so a marginally bound orbit becomes more tightly bound. Neglecting its tiny initial binding energy,
To obtain the new periapsis, put and . Immediately after the encounter,
Using the post-encounter energy and angular momentum in the Kepler orbit relations and retaining gives
The inward radial kick therefore lowers the next periapsis as well as shrinking the semi-major axis.
The body now returns on a bound, highly eccentric orbit whose periapsis crosses more deeply into the planet's neighborhood. Repeated planetary scattering produces a sequence of energy and angular-momentum kicks rather than smooth secular evolution. Possible endpoints include ejection onto an unbound orbit, collision with the planet or star, tidal disruption, or diffusion onto a detached orbit that no longer encounters the planet. Temporary protection by a mean-motion resonance is also possible. The approximate Tisserand parameter constrains weak separated encounters, but the close-encounter sequence is chaotic and does not select a unique final orbit.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.