Models of Jupiter and Saturn after Galileo mission

New models of Jupiter are based on observational data provided by the Galileo spaceprobe, which considerably improved previously existing estimates of the helium abundance in the atmosphere of Jupiter. These data yield for Jupiter’s atmosphere 20% of the solar oxygen abundance and do not agree with the results of the analysis of the collision of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 with Jupiter (10 times the solar value). Therefore, both the models of Jupiter with water-depleted and water-enriched atmosphere are considered. By analogy with Jupiter, trial models of Saturn with a water-depleted external envelope are also developed. The molecular-metallic phase transition pressure of hydrogen P_m was taken to be 1.5, 2 and 3 Mbar. Since Saturn’s internal molecular envelope is noticeably enriched in the IR-component (its weight concentration, 0.25–0.30, being by a factor of 3–4 higher than in Jupiter), the phase transition pressure in Saturn can be lower than in Jupiter. In the constructed models, the IR-core masses are 3–3.5 M_⊕ for Jupiter and 3–5.5 M_⊕ for Saturn. Jupiter’s and Saturn’s IR-cores can be considered embryos onto which the accretion of the gas occurred during the formation of the planets. The mass of the hydrogen–helium component dispersed in the zone of planetary formation constitutes ≈2–5 planetary masses for Jupiter and ≈11–14 planetary masses for Saturn.     

New Constraints on the Composition of Jupiter from Galileo Measurements and Interior Models

Using the helium abundance measured by Galileo in the atmosphere of Jupiter and interior models reproducing the observed external gravitational field, we derive new constraints on the composition and structure of the planet. We conclude that, except for helium which must be more abundant in the metallic interior than in the molecular envelope, Jupiter could be homogeneous (no core) or could have a central dense core up to 12M_⊕. The mass fraction of heavy elements is less than 7.5 times the solar value in the metallic envelope and between 1 and 7.2 times solar in the molecular envelope. The total amount of elements other than hydrogen and helium in the planet is between 11 and 45M_⊕.     

The structure of the planets Jupiter and Saturn

Planetary models for Jupiter and Saturn are computed using a fourth-order theory and a new molecular equation of state. The equation of state for the molecular hydrogen and helium planetary envelopes is taken from the Monte Carlo calculations of Slattery and Hubbard [Icarus 29, 187–192 (1976)]. Models for Jupiter are found that have a small amount of heavy elements either mixed with hydrogen and helium throughout the interior of the planet or concentrated in a small dense core. Saturn is modeled with a solar-composition hydrogen and helium envelope and a small derse core. We conclude that the molecular equation of state linked with suitable interior equations of state can produce Jovian models which satisfy the observational data. The planetary models show that the enrichment of heavy elements (relative to solar composition) is approximately 3 times for Jupiter and 10 times for Saturn.     

Phase separation in giant planets: inhomogeneous evolution of Saturn

We present the first models of Jupiter and Saturn to couple their evolution to both a radiative-atmosphere grid and to high-pressure phase diagrams of hydrogen with helium and other admixtures. We find that prior calculated phase diagrams in which Saturn's interior reaches a region of predicted helium immiscibility do not allow enough energy release to prolong Saturn's cooling to its known age and effective temperature. We explore modifications to published phase diagrams that would lead to greater energy release, and propose a modified H-He phase diagram that is physically reasonable, leads to the correct extension of Saturn's cooling, and predicts an atmospheric helium mass fraction Y_atmos=0.185, in agreement with recent estimates. We also explore the possibility of internal separation of elements heavier than helium, and find that, alternatively, such separation could prolong Saturn's cooling to its known age and effective temperature under a realistic phase diagram and heavy element abundance (in which case Saturn's Y_atmos would be solar but heavier elements would be depleted). In none of these scenarios does Jupiter's interior evolve to any region of helium or heavy-element immiscibility: Jupiter evolves homogeneously to the present day. We discuss the implications of our calculations for Saturn's primordial core mass.     

Empirical models of pressure and density in Saturn's interior: Implications for the helium concentration, its depth dependence, and Saturn's precession rate

We present ‘empirical’ models (pressure vs. density) of Saturn's interior constrained by the gravitational coefficients J₂, J₄, and J₆ for different assumed rotation rates of the planet. The empirical pressure-density profile is interpreted in terms of a hydrogen and helium physical equation of state to deduce the hydrogen to helium ratio in Saturn and to constrain the depth dependence of helium and heavy element abundances. The planet's internal structure (pressure vs. density) and composition are found to be insensitive to the assumed rotation rate for periods between 10h:32m:35s and 10h:41m:35s. We find that helium is depleted in the upper envelope, while in the high pressure region (P?1 Mbar) either the helium abundance or the concentration of heavier elements is significantly enhanced. Taking the ratio of hydrogen to helium in Saturn to be solar, we find that the maximum mass of heavy elements in Saturn's interior ranges from ∼6 to 20 M_⊕. The empirical models of Saturn's interior yield a moment of inertia factor varying from 0.22271 to 0.22599 for rotation periods between 10h:32m:35s and 10h:41m:35s, respectively. A long-term precession rate of about ^0.754″ yr⁻¹ is found to be consistent with the derived moment of inertia values and assumed rotation rates over the entire range of investigated rotation rates. This suggests that the long-term precession period of Saturn is somewhat shorter than the generally assumed value of 1.77×¹⁰⁶ years inferred from modeling and observations.     

Core formation in giant gaseous protoplanets

Sedimentation rates of silicate grains in gas giant protoplanets formed by disk instability are calculated for protoplanetary masses between 1 MSaturn to 10 MJupiter. Giant protoplanets with masses of 5 MJupiter or larger are found to be too hot for grain sedimentation to form a silicate core. Smaller protoplanets are cold enough to allow grain settling and core formation. Grain sedimentation and core formation occur in the low mass protoplanets because of their slow contraction rate and low internal temperature. It is predicted that massive giant planets will not have cores, while smaller planets will have small rocky cores whose masses depend on the planetary mass, the amount of solids within the body, and the disk environment. The protoplanets are found to be too hot to allow the existence of icy grains, and therefore the cores are predicted not to contain any ices. It is suggested that the atmospheres of low mass giant planets are depleted in refractory elements compared with the atmospheres of more massive planets. These predictions provide a test of the disk instability model of gas giant planet formation. The core masses of Jupiter and Saturn were found to be ∼0.25 M_⊕ and ∼0.5 M_⊕, respectively. The core masses of Jupiter and Saturn can be substantially larger if planetesimal accretion is included. The final core mass will depend on planetesimal size, the time at which planetesimals are formed, and the size distribution of the material added to the protoplanet. Jupiter's core mass can vary from 2 to 12 M_⊕. Saturn's core mass is found to be ∼8 M_⊕.     

The effect of dense cores on the structure and evolution of Jupiter and Saturn

We have calculated evolutionary and static models of Jupiter and Saturn with homogeneous solar composition mantles and dense cores of material consisting of solar abundances of SiO₂, MgO, Fe, and Ni. Evolutionary sequences for Jupiter were calculated with cores of mass 2, 4, 6, and 8% of the Jovian mass. Evolutionary sequences for Saturn were calculated with cores of mass 16, 18, 20, and 22% of total mass. Two envelope mixtures, representative of the solar abundances were used: X (mass fraction of hydrogen) = 0.74, Y (mass fraction of helium) = 0.24 and X = 0.77 and Y = 0.21. For Jupiter, the observations of the temperature at 1 bar pressure (T_1bar), radius and internal luminosity were best fit by evolutionary models with a core mass of ～6.5% and chemical composition of X = 0.77, Y = 0.21. The calculated cooling time for Jupiter is approximately 4.9 × 10⁹ years, which is consistent, within our error bars, with the known age of the solar system. For Saturn, the observations of the radius, internal luminosity and T_1BAR can be best fit by evolutionary models with a core mass of ～21% and chemical composition of X = 0.77, Y = 0.21. The cooling time calculated for Saturn is approximately 2.6 × 10⁹ years, almost a factor 2 less than the present age of the solar system. Static models of Jupiter and Saturn were calculated for the above chemical compositions in order to investigate the sensitivity of the calculated gravitational moments, J₂ and J₄, to the mass of the dense core, T_1BAR and hydrogen/helium ratio. We find for Jupiter that a model having a core mass of approximately 7% gives values of J₂, J₄, and T_1BAR that are within observational limits, for the mixture X = 0.77, Y = 0.21. The static Jupiter models are completely consistent with the evolutionary results. For Saturn, the quantities J₂, J₄, and J₆ determined from the static models with the most probable T_1BAR of 140°K, using modeling procedures which result in consistent models for Jupiter, are considerably below the observed values.     

Models and theoretical spectrum for the free oscillations of Saturn

We constructed new models of Saturn with an allowance made for a helium mass fraction of ～0.18–0.25 in its atmosphere. Our modeling shows that the composition of Saturn differs markedly from the solar composition; more specifically, during its formation, the planet was ～11–15 planetary masses short of the hydrogen-helium component. Saturn, as well as the other giant planets, must have been formed according to Schmidt’s scenario, through the formation of embryonic nuclei, rather than according to Laplace’s scenario. The masses of the embryonic nuclei themselves lie within the range (3.5–8) M_⊕. We calculated a theoretical free-oscillation spectrum for our models of Saturn, each of which fits all of the available observational data. The results of our calculations are presented graphically and in tables. Of particular interest are the diagnostic potentialities of the discontinuity gravitational modes related to density jumps in the molecular envelope of Saturn and at the interface between its molecular and metallic envelopes. When observational data appear, our results can be used both to identify the observed modes and to improve the models themselves. We discuss some of the cosmogonical aspects associated with the formation of the giant planets.     

The free oscillations of Jupiter

The spectrum of free oscillations of Jupiter is calculated for a set of models, each of them fitting all available observational data. Diagnostic capabilities of the spectrum are studied. They could be used, as soon as relevant observations are performed, for both the identification of the observed modes and the improvement of the models themselves. The calculations were made for five-layer models. They differ in the core mass (2–10 M_⊕) and in the molecular-metallic phase transition pressure of hydrogen (1.5–3 Mbar). The spectrum of Jupiter consists of gravitational modes related to density jumps in the planetary interiors and of acoustic modes. The periods of the acoustic modes are calculated for degree up to l=30 and overtone number up to n=20. The investigated models have a characteristic frequency of ≈152–155 μHz. Two outer gravitational modes related to density jumps in the molecular envelope and at the interface with the metallic envelope have nonzero displacements at the planetary surface. These modes have good diagnostic properties. The values of the kinetic energy averaged over the period of oscillation are calculated for a 1-m amplitude of the displacement at the planetary surface. The influence of all effects of rotation on the spectrum is discussed.     

Hydrogen Eos at Megabar Pressures and the Search for Jupiter’s Core

The interior structure of Jupiter serves as a benchmark for an entire astrophysical class of liquid–metallic hydrogen-rich objects with masses ranging from ~0.1M _J to ~80M _J (1M _J = Jupiter mass = 1.9e30 g), comprising hydrogen-rich giant planets (mass < 13M _J) and brown dwarfs (mass > 13M _J but ~ < 80M _J), the so-called substellar objects (SSOs). Formation of giant planets may involve nucleated collapse of nebular gas onto a solid, dense core of mass ~0.04M _J rather than a stellar-like gravitational instability. Thus, detection of a primordial core in Jupiter is a prime objective for understanding the mode of origin of extrasolar giant planets and other SSOs. A basic method for core detection makes use of direct modeling of Jupiter’s external gravitational potential terms in response to rotational and tidal perturbations, and is highly sensitive to the thermodynamics of hydrogen at multi-megabar pressures. The present-day core masses of Jupiter and Saturn may be larger than their primordial core masses due to sedimentation of elements heavier than hydrogen. We show that there is a significant contribution of such sedimented mass to Saturn’s core mass. The sedimentation contribution to Jupiter’s core mass will be smaller and could be zero.     

Computation of Jupiter interior models from gravitational inversion theory

A method for deriving a planetary interior model which exactly satisfies a set of N gravitational constraints is implemented. For Jupiter, recent spacecraft measurements provide the mass, radius at a standard pressure level, rotation law, multipole moments of the internal mass distribution, and constraints on the internal composition and temperature distribution. By appropriate iterations, interior models are found which exactly satisfy these constraints. The models are assumed to have constant chemical composition and constant specific entropy in the hydrogenic envelope. The derived pressure-density relation in the outer envelope depends sensitively on the observational uncertainty in the mass multipole moment J₄. Models are not forced to fit the more indirectly derived constraints, which are instead used as consistency checks. For a helium mass fraction in the envelope (Y) equal to 0.20, the inferred pressure at a mass density ≈ 0.2 g/cm³ is about a factor of 2 higher than would be indicated by experimental hydrogen shock compression data in the relevant pressure range of 10⁵ to 10⁶ bar. The inferred pressure distribution is in much better agreement with the shock data for a nominal Y = 0.30 ± 0.05. This value of Y is interpreted in terms of an enhancement in the envelope, by a factor of order 5 over solar abundance, of species primarily consisting of CH₄, NH₃, and possibly H₂O. The same method is applied to Saturn, but existing uncertainties in Saturn's gravitational parameters are still too large to allow useful conclusions about the composition of its envelope.     

The role of rotation in the evolution of dynamo-generated magnetic fields in Super Earths

Planetary magnetic fields could impact the evolution of planetary atmospheres and have a role in the determination of the required conditions for the emergence and evolution of life (planetary habitability). We study here the role of rotation in the evolution of dynamo-generated magnetic fields in massive Earth-like planets, Super Earths (1–10 M_⊕). Using the most recent thermal evolution models of Super Earths (Gaidos, E., Conrad, C.P., Manga, M., Hernlund, J. [2010]. Astrophys. J. 718, 596–609; Tachinami, C., Senshu, H., Ida, S. [2011]. Astrophys. J. 726, 70) and updated scaling laws for convection-driven dynamos, we predict the evolution of the local Rossby number. This quantity is one of the proxies for core magnetic field regime, i.e. non-reversing dipolar, reversing dipolar and multipolar. We study the dependence of the local Rossby number and hence the core magnetic field regime on planetary mass and rotation rate. Previous works have focused only on the evolution of core magnetic fields assuming rapidly rotating planets, i.e. planets in the dipolar regime. In this work we go further, including the effects of rotation in the evolution of planetary magnetic field regime and obtaining global constraints to the existence of intense protective magnetic fields in rapidly and slowly rotating Super Earths. We find that the emergence and continued existence of a protective planetary magnetic field is not only a function of planetary mass but also depend on rotation rate. Low-mass Super Earths (M ? 2 M_⊕) develop intense surface magnetic fields but their lifetimes will be limited to 2–4 Gyrs for rotational periods larger than 1–4 days. On the other hand and also in the case of slowly rotating planets, more massive Super Earths (M ? 2 M_⊕) have weak magnetic fields but their dipoles will last longer. Finally we analyze tidally locked Super Earths inside and outside the habitable zone of GKM stars. Using the results obtained here we develop a classification of Super Earths based on the rotation rate and according to the evolving properties of dynamo-generated planetary magnetic fields.     

A calculation of Saturn's gravitational contraction history

A calculation has been made of the gravitational contraction of a homogeneous, quasi-equilibrium Saturn model of solar composition. The calculations begin at a time when the planet's radius is ten times larger than its present size, and the subsequent gravitational contraction is followed for 4.5 × 10⁹ years. For the first million years of evolution, the Saturn model contracts rapidly like a pre-main sequence star and has a much higher luminosity and effective temperature than at present. Later stages of contraction occur more slowly and are analogous to the cooling phase of a degenerate white dwarf star.Examination of the interior structure of the models indicates the presence of a metallic hydrogen region near the center of the planet. Differences in the size of this region for Jupiter and Saturn may, in part, be responsible for Saturn having a weaker magnetic field. While the interior temperatures are much too high for the fluids in the molecular and metallic regions to become solids by the current epoch, the temperature in the outer portion of the metallic zone falls below Stevenson's [Phys. Rev. J. (1975)] phase separation curve for helium after 1.2 billion years of evolution. This would lead to a sinking of helium from the outer to the inner portion of the metallic region, as described by Salpeter [Astrophys. J.181, L83–L86 (1973)].At the current epoch, the radius of the model is about 9% larger, while its excess luminosity is comparable to the observed value of Rieke [Icarus26, 37–44 (1975)], as refined by Wright [Harvard College Obs. Preprint No. 480 (1976)]. This behavior of the Saturn model may be compared to the good agreement with both Jupiter's observed radius and excess luminosity shown by an analogous model of Jupiter [Graboske et al., Astrophys. J.199, 255–264 (1975)]. The discrepancy in radius of our Saturn model may be due to errors in the equations of state and/or our neglect of a rocky core. However, arguments are presented which indicate that helium separation may cause an expansion of the model and thus lead to an even bigger discrepancy in radius. Improvement in the radius may also foster a somewhat larger predicted luminosity. At least part and perhaps most of Saturn's excess luminosity is due to the loss of internal thermal energy that was built up during the early rapid contraction, with a minor contribution coming from Saturn's present rate of contraction. These two sources dominate Jupiter's excess luminosity. If helium separation makes an important contribution to Saturn's excess luminosity, then planetwide segregation is required.Finally, because Saturn's early high luminosity was about an order of magnitude smaller than Jupiter's, water-ice satellites may have been able to form closer to Saturn to Jupiter.     

The atmospheric composition and structure of Jupiter and Saturn from ISO observations: a preliminary review

Infrared spectra of Jupiter and Saturn have been recorded with the two spectrometers of the Infrared Space Observatory (ISO) in 1995–1998, in the 2.3–180 μm range. Both the grating modes (R=150–2000) and the Fabry-Pérot modes (R=8000–30,000) of the two instruments were used. The main results of these observations are (1) the detection of water vapour in the deep troposphere of Saturn; (2) the detection of new hydrocarbons (CH₃C₂H, C₄H₂, C₆H₆, CH₃) in Saturn’s stratosphere; (3) the detection of water vapour and carbon dioxide in the stratospheres of Jupiter and Saturn; (4) a new determination of the D/H ratio from the detection of HD rotational lines. The origin of the external oxygen source on Jupiter and Saturn (also found in the other giant planets and Titan in comparable amounts) may be either interplanetary (micrometeoritic flux) or local (rings and/or satellites). The D/H determination in Jupiter, comparable to Saturn’s result, is in agreement with the recent measurement by the Galileo probe (Mahaffy, P.R., Donahue, T.M., Atreya, S.K., Owen, T.C., Niemann, H.B., 1998. Galileo probe measurements of D/H and ³He/⁴He in Jupiters atmosphere. Space Science Rev. 84 251–263); the D/H values on Uranus and Neptune are significantly higher, as expected from current models of planetary formation.     

Benzene and aerosol production in Titan and Jupiter's atmospheres: a sensitivity study

Benzene has recently been observed in the atmosphere of Jupiter, Saturn and also Titan. This compound is required as a precursor for larger aromatic species (PAHs) that may be part of aerosol particles. Several photochemical models have tried to reproduce the observed quantities of benzene in the atmospheres of Jupiter (both low- and high-latitudes regions), Saturn and Titan. In this present work, we have conducted a sensitivity study of benzene and PAHs formation, using similar photochemical schemes both for Titan and Jupiter (low-latitudes conditions). Two different photochemical schemes are used, for which the modeled composition fairly agrees with observational constraints, both for Jupiter and Titan. Some disagreements are specific to each atmospheric case, which may point to needed improvements, especially in kinetic data involved in the corresponding chemical cycles. The observed benzene mole fraction in Titan's stratosphere is reproduced by the model, but in the case of Jupiter, low-latitudes benzene abundance is only 3% of the observed column density, which may indicate a possible influence of latitudinal transport, since abundance of benzene is much higher in auroral regions. Though, the photochemical scheme of C₆ compounds at temperature and pressure conditions of planetary atmospheres is still very uncertain. Several variations are therefore done on key reactions in benzene production. These variations show that benzene abundance is mainly sensitive to reactions that may affect the propargyl radical. The effect of aerosol production on hydrocarbons composition is also tested, as well as possible heterogenous recombination of atomic hydrogen in the case of Titan. PAHs are a major pathway for aerosol production in both models. The mass production profiles for aerosols are discussed for both Titan and Jupiter. Total production mass fluxes are roughly three times the one expected by observational constraints in both cases. Such comparative studies are useful to bring more constraints on photochemical models.     

On the stability of Earth-like planets in multi-planet systems

We present a continuation of our numerical study on planetary systems with similar characteristics to the Solar System. This time we examine the influence of three giant planets on the motion of terrestrial-like planets in the habitable zone (HZ). Using the Jupiter–Saturn–Uranus configuration we create similar fictitious systems by varying Saturn’s semi-major axis from 8 to 11 AU and increasing its mass by factors of 2–30. The analysis of the different systems shows the following interesting results: (i) Using the masses of the Solar System for the three giant planets, our study indicates a maximum eccentricity (max-e) of nearly 0.3 for a test-planet placed at the position of Venus. Such a high eccentricity was already found in our previous study of Jupiter–Saturn systems. Perturbations associated with the secular frequency g ₅ are again responsible for this high eccentricity. (ii) An increase of the Saturn-mass causes stronger perturbations around the position of the Earth and in the outer HZ. The latter is certainly due to gravitational interaction between Saturn and Uranus. (iii) The Saturn-mass increased by a factor 5 or higher indicates high eccentricities for a test-planet placed at the position of Mars. So that a crossing of the Earth’ orbit might occur in some cases. Furthermore, we present the maximum eccentricity of a test-planet placed in the Earth’ orbit for all positions (from 8 to 11 AU) and masses (increased up to a factor of 30) of Saturn. It can be seen that already a double-mass Saturn moving in its actual orbit causes an increase of the eccentricity up to 0.2 of a test-planet placed at Earth’s position. A more massive Saturn orbiting the Sun outside the 5:2 mean motion resonance (a _S  ≥9.7 AU) increases the eccentricity of a test-planet up to 0.4.     

Models of the protosatellite disk of Saturn: Conditions for Titan’s formation

Models of the protosatellite accretion disk of Saturn are developed that satisfy cosmochemical constraints on the volatile abundances in the atmospheres of Saturn and Titan with due regard for the data obtained with the Cassini orbiter and the Huygens probe, which landed on Titan in January 2005. All basic sources of heating of the disk and protosatellite bodies are taken into account in the models, namely, dissipation of turbulence in the disk, accretion of gaseous and solid material onto the disk from the feeding zone of Saturn in the solar nebula, and heating by the radiation of young Saturn and thermal radiation of the surrounding region of the solar nebula. Two-dimensional (axisymmetric) temperature, pressure, and density distributions are calculated for the protosatellite disk. The distributions satisfy the cosmochemical constraints on the disk temperature, according to which the temperature at the stage of the satellite formation ranged from 60–65 K to 90–100 K at pressures from 10^?7 to ?10^?4 bar in the zone of Titan’s formation (according to estimates, r = 20–35R _Sat). Variations of the basic input parameters (the accretion rate onto the protosatellite disk of Saturn from the feeding zone of the planet ?; the parameter α characterizing turbulent viscosity of the disk; and the mass concentration ratio in the solid/gas system) satisfying the aforementioned temperature constraint are found. The spectrum of models satisfying the cosmochemical constraints covers a considerable range of consistent parameters. A model with a rather small flux of ? = 10^?8 M _Sat/ yr and a tenfold depletion of Saturn’s disk in gas due to gas scattering from the solar nebula is at one side of this range. A model with a much higher flux of ? = 10^?6 M _Sat/yr and a hundredfold decrease in opacity of the disk matter owing to decreased concentration of dust particles and/or their agglomeration into large aggregates and sweeping up by planetesimals is at the other side of the range.     

Accretion of the gaseous envelope of Jupiter around a 5-10 Earth-mass core

New numerical simulations of the formation and evolution of Jupiter are presented. The formation model assumes that first a solid core of several M_⊕ accretes from the planetesimals in the protoplanetary disk, and then the core captures a massive gaseous envelope from the protoplanetary disk. Earlier studies of the core accretion-gas capture model [Pollack, J.B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., Lissauer, J.J., Podolak, M., Greenzweig, Y., 1996. Icarus 124, 62-85] demonstrated that it was possible for Jupiter to accrete with a solid core of 10-30 M_⊕ in a total formation time comparable to the observed lifetime of protoplanetary disks. Recent interior models of Jupiter and Saturn that agree with all observational constraints suggest that Jupiter's core mass is 0-11 M_⊕ and Saturn's is 9-22 M_⊕ [Saumon, G., Guillot, T., 2004. Astrophys. J. 609, 1170-1180]. We have computed simulations of the growth of Jupiter using various values for the opacity produced by grains in the protoplanet's atmosphere and for the initial planetesimal surface density, σinit,Z, in the protoplanetary disk. We also explore the implications of halting the solid accretion at selected core mass values during the protoplanet's growth. Halting planetesimal accretion at low core mass simulates the presence of a competing embryo, and decreasing the atmospheric opacity due to grains emulates the settling and coagulation of grains within the protoplanet's atmosphere. We examine the effects of adjusting these parameters to determine whether or not gas runaway can occur for small mass cores on a reasonable timescale. We compute four series of simulations with the latest version of our code, which contains updated equation of state and opacity tables as well as other improvements. Each series consists of a run without a cutoff in planetesimal accretion, plus up to three runs with a cutoff at a particular core mass. The first series of runs is computed with an atmospheric opacity due to grains (hereafter referred to as ‘grain opacity’) that is 2% of the interstellar value and . Cutoff runs are computed for core masses of 10, 5, and 3 M_⊕. The second series of Jupiter models is computed with the grain opacity at the full interstellar value and . Cutoff runs are computed for core masses of 10 and 5 M_⊕. The third series of runs is computed with the grain opacity at 2% of the interstellar value and . One cutoff run is computed with a core mass of 5 M_⊕. The final series consists of one run, without a cutoff, which is computed with a temperature dependent grain opacity (i.e., 2% of the interstellar value for ramping up to the full interstellar value for ) and . Our results demonstrate that reducing grain opacities results in formation times less than half of those for models computed with full interstellar grain opacity values. The reduction of opacity due to grains in the upper portion of the envelope with has the largest effect on the lowering of the formation time. If the accretion of planetesimals is not cut off prior to the accretion of gas, then decreasing the surface density of planetesimals lowers the final core mass of the protoplanet, but increases the formation timescale considerably. Finally, a core mass cutoff results in a reduction of the time needed for a protoplanet to evolve to the stage of runaway gas accretion, provided the cutoff mass is sufficiently large. The overall results indicate that, with reasonable parameters, it is possible that Jupiter formed at 5 AU via the core accretion process in 1 Myr with a core of 10 M_⊕ or in 5 Myr with a core of 5 M_⊕.     

On the origin and initial temperature of Jupiter and Saturn

A two-stage growth of the giant planets, Jupiter and Saturn, is considered, which is different from the model of contraction of large gaseous protoplanets. In the first stage, within a time of ～3 × 10⁷ years in Jupiter's zone and ～2 × 10⁸ years in Saturn's zone, a nucleus forms from condensed (solid) material having the mass, ～10²⁸ g, necessary for the beginning of acceleration. The second stage may gravitating body, and a relatively slow accretion begins until the mass of the planet reaches ～10 m_⊕. Then a rapid accretion begins with the critical radius less than the radius of the Hill lobe, so that the classical formulae for the rate of accretion may be applied. At a mass m > m₁ ≈ 50 m_⊕ accretion proceeds slower than it would according to these formulae. When the planet sweeps out all the gas from its nearest zone of feeding (m = m₂ ≈ 130 m_⊕), the width of the exhausted zone being $\text{～}\text{built1}\text{3}$ of the whole zone of the planet) growth is provided the slow diffusion of gas from the rest of the zone (time scale increases to 10⁵?10⁶ years and more). The process is terminated by the dissipation of the remnants of gas. In Saturn's zone m₁ > m₂ ≈ 30 m_⊕. The initial mass of the gas in Jupiter's zone is estimated. Before the beginning of the rapid accretion about 90% of the gas should have been lost from the solar system, and in the planet's zone less than two Jupiter masses remain. The highest temperature of Jupiter's surface, ≈5000°K, is reached at the stage of rapid accretion, m < 100 m_⊕, when the luminosity of the planet reaches 3 × 10^?3 L_⊙. This favors an effective heating of the inner parts of the accretionary disk and the dissipation of gas from the disk. The accretion of Saturn produced a temperature rise up to 2000?2400° K (at m ≈ 20?25 m_⊕) and a luminosity up to 10^?4 L_⊙.     

Comparative evolution of Jupiter and Saturn

We present evolutionary sequences for Jupiter and Saturn, based on new non-gray model atmospheres, which take into account the evolution of the solar luminosity and partitioning of dense components to deeper layers. The results are used to set limits on the extent to which possible interior phase separation of hydrogen and helium may have progressed in the two planets. When combined with static models constrained by the gravity field, our evolutionary calculations constrain the helium mass fraction in Jupiter to be between 0.20 and 0.27, relative to total hydrogen and helium. This is consistent with the Galileo determination. The helium mass fraction in Saturn’s atmosphere lies between 0.11 and 0.21, higher than the Voyager determination. Based on the discrepancy between the Galileo and Voyager results for Jupiter, and our models, we predict that revised observational results for Saturn will yield a higher atmospheric helium mass fraction relative to the Voyager value.