Planetary migration
Planetary migration is the process by which a planet's orbit shifts over time through interactions with the disk of gas or smaller rocky bodies surrounding its star. It sounds gradual, almost gentle. But the consequences are staggering. Planets that formed far from their stars can end up circling just a few days' distance away. Entire solar systems can be scrambled. And the reason our own outer planets look the way they do today may trace back to a single catastrophic resonance crossing roughly four billion years ago.
What makes migration so unsettling to astronomers is that it undermines a tidy picture. Standard planet formation theory says giant planets with masses comparable to Jupiter cannot form close to their stars. There is not enough material, and the temperatures are too high. Yet we observe them there. How did they get there? And what does that journey do to everything else in the system? Those are the questions planetary migration was developed to answer.
The discovery of hot Jupiters forced astronomers to reckon with a fundamental mismatch between theory and observation. These are exoplanets with masses on par with Jupiter but orbital periods of only a few days, placing them extraordinarily close to their host stars. Standard planet formation theory holds that such worlds cannot assemble where they are found. The temperatures are too high, and the available mass at those small distances from the star is insufficient for rocky or icy building blocks to coalesce.
Type II disk migration offers one explanation for how they arrived. A planet massive enough, roughly the mass of Saturn and above, can carve an annular gap of lower density in the surrounding gas disk by exerting tidal torques on the gas. Once that gap forms, the planet's orbital evolution becomes tied to the viscous evolution of the gas itself. In the inner disk, the planet spirals inward as gas accretes onto the star. The migration rate in this regime is typically slower than in the earlier Type I phase, but the inward drift can carry a planet from a distant birthplace to an orbit lasting just days.
The depth of the gap depends on the temperature and viscosity of the gas and on the planet's own mass. In more realistic disk models, gas continues to flow across the gap, and the torques acting on the planet remain sensitive to local disk conditions, blurring the boundary between Type I and Type II behavior. That transition, which occurs at roughly the mass of Saturn, is generally smooth rather than abrupt.
Gas in protoplanetary disks surrounding young stars persists for only a few million years, according to observations. Within that window, any planet with a mass of roughly one Earth mass or greater can exchange angular momentum with the surrounding gas, nudging its orbit inward or outward. The mechanism is subtle: the planet's gravity perturbs the gas density around it, and by Newton's reaction principle, the disturbed gas pushes back on the planet as a torque.
For smaller planets undergoing what researchers call Type I migration, two sets of gravitational resonances dominate. Lindblad resonances generate spiral density waves both inside and outside the planet's orbit. In most disk conditions, the outer wave exerts a stronger torque than the inner one, draining angular momentum from the planet and pushing it toward the star. A second set of co-rotation torques arises from gas moving on horseshoe-shaped paths in the planet's vicinity. Gas sweeping ahead of the planet comes from a larger orbital radius and may be cooler and denser; gas reversing behind the planet may be warmer and less dense. That asymmetry can transfer angular momentum to the planet, partially countering the inward pull.
Type I migration rates scale with the planet's mass and the local gas density, producing timescales that are short relative to the disk's million-year lifespan. Regions of outward migration can exist for particular mass ranges and disk conditions, including near steep temperature or density gradients. Type I migration in a locally isothermal disk has been shown to be compatible with the long-term orbital evolution of some of the planets found by the Kepler mission. Rapid accretion of solid material onto the planet can also produce a heating torque that adds angular momentum, further complicating the picture.
Disk migration shuts off once the gas disperses, typically after a few million years. Tidal migration, by contrast, can continue for billions of years. When a planet orbits very close to its star, it raises a tidal bulge on the stellar surface. If the star rotates more slowly than the planet orbits, the bulge lags slightly behind the line connecting the planet to the star's center. That offset creates a torque that saps the planet's angular momentum, shrinking its orbit over time. Tidal evolution of close-in planets tends to produce semi-major axes roughly half as large as they were when the gas nebula cleared.
For planets in eccentric orbits, tidal effects are strongest near perihelion, the closest point of approach. Each perihelion passage slows the planet most sharply, causing the far point of the orbit, the aphelion, to shrink faster than the near point. The orbit circularizes as a result.
A distinct pathway combines what are called Kozai cycles with tidal friction. A planet orbiting in a system that also contains a distant binary companion star can exchange eccentricity and orbital inclination repeatedly under the gravitational influence of that companion. The process is called the Kozai mechanism. If the eccentricity climbs high enough, the planet's closest approach to its star becomes small enough for strong tidal forces to take hold. The orbit then shrinks rapidly once the planet's path is pulled out of the distant star's gravitational reach and tidal circularization takes over. This same mechanism can flip a planet's orbit into retrograde, meaning it travels in the opposite direction to the star's rotation, and a similar process can operate between two planets with differing orbital inclinations.
Not all migration requires a gas disk. During the late stages of planetary system formation, dense swarms of planetesimals, the rocky and icy building blocks left over after planet assembly, interact gravitationally with the fully formed planets in a chaotic, ongoing exchange. Each close encounter transfers a small packet of angular momentum between a planetesimal and a planet. Over many such encounters, the cumulative effect shifts the planet's orbit, inward or outward depending on whether the planetesimals it meets carry more or less orbital energy than the planet itself.
In a system with multiple planets, the dynamics grow richer. An outer planet tends to strip high-angular-momentum planetesimals from its inner neighbor's influence while delivering low-angular-momentum ones in return, pushing the two planets' orbits apart over time. The planet's own resonances also pump up the eccentricities of nearby planetesimals until those bodies cross the planet's path and are scattered away. Migration can become self-reinforcing: the planet's movement through the disk continuously sweeps up new planetesimals, sustaining the process. If that feedback loop drives the motion, researchers call it runaway migration; if another planet is responsible for funneling planetesimals in, they call it forced migration.
Gravitational scattering by larger planets can also fling bodies onto highly eccentric orbits with perihelion distances close to the star, setting the stage for tidal forces to reshape those orbits further. In the Solar System, Uranus and Neptune may have reached their current positions partly through gravitational scattering by close encounters with Jupiter and Saturn. The outward migration of Neptune is widely considered responsible for capturing Pluto and similar bodies, called Plutinos, into the 3:2 orbital resonance with Neptune, meaning they orbit the Sun twice for every three Neptune orbits.
When planets migrate toward each other, their orbital periods can settle into whole-number ratios, a state called orbital resonance. Resonances can lock planets into stable configurations or serve as the trigger for catastrophic rearrangement. Migration is expected to produce systems of planets linked in resonance chains, yet most known exoplanets are not in resonances. Once the gas disk disperses, gravitational instabilities can shatter those chains. Tidal interactions with the star, turbulence in the disk, and the gravitational wake of a nearby planet can all disrupt resonances. Planets smaller than Neptune with eccentric orbits may bypass resonance capture entirely.
The grand tack hypothesis illustrates how resonance capture can redirect a planet's entire migration history. In this model, Jupiter migrated inward through the young Solar System before its migration was halted and reversed when Saturn was captured into an outer resonance with Jupiter. The subsequent outward movement of both planets, along with the capture of Uranus and Neptune in further resonances, may have prevented the Solar System from assembling a compact inner system of super-Earths, the type of system that the Kepler mission has found to be common around other stars.
Resonance capture also leaves its mark on smaller bodies. As Neptune migrated outward, it swept trans-Neptunian objects in the Kuiper belt into resonance with it, producing the resonant populations still observed there today.
The Kuiper belt, which lies between 30 and 55 AU from the Sun, was once a very different place. According to current models, it was originally denser, more compact, and populated by millions of planetesimals, with an outer edge at roughly 30 AU, the present location of Neptune. The scattered disc extends beyond 100 AU, and the distant Oort cloud begins at approximately 50,000 AU. All three regions are thought to supply most of the comets observed today.
The trigger for the dramatic reorganization of the outer Solar System was a resonance crossing between Jupiter and Saturn. After roughly 500-600 million years following the Solar System's formation, about four billion years ago, Jupiter and Saturn divergently crossed the 2:1 resonance, in which Saturn completed one orbit for every two of Jupiter's. That crossing amplified the eccentricities of both planets and destabilized Uranus and Neptune. Close encounters followed, during which Neptune was pushed past Uranus and plunged into the dense planetesimal belt beyond.
Neptune and the other outer planets scattered the majority of those small icy bodies inward. Those planetesimals in turn scattered off the next planet inward, transferring momentum outward to the planets while themselves falling deeper into the Solar System. The chain terminated at Jupiter, whose gravity either ejected planetesimals outright or sent them into extreme elliptical orbits. Jupiter moved slightly inward as a result of those ejections. The inner planets, by contrast, are not thought to have migrated substantially over the Solar System's lifetime; their orbits have remained stable following the era of giant impacts that ended planet formation in the inner system.
Common questions
What is planetary migration in astronomy?
Planetary migration is the alteration of a planet's orbital parameters, especially its semi-major axis, through gravitational interactions with a disk of gas or planetesimals surrounding its star. The process can move planets inward toward their star or outward to more distant orbits. Migration timescales range from millions of years for gas-disk-driven migration to billions of years for tidal migration.
Why are hot Jupiters thought to be explained by planetary migration?
Hot Jupiters are giant exoplanets with Jovian masses but orbital periods of only a few days, placing them so close to their stars that standard planet formation theory says they cannot have formed there. Type II disk migration provides the leading explanation: a Saturn-mass or larger planet opens a gap in the surrounding gas disk and spirals inward as the disk evolves, potentially ending up in a very close orbit.
What is the difference between Type I and Type II planetary migration?
Type I migration applies to smaller planets that do not open a gap in the gas disk; it is driven by torques at Lindblad and co-rotation resonances and tends to be faster. Type II migration applies to planets massive enough to open an annular gap, roughly from the mass of Saturn upward, and the planet's orbital evolution then follows the viscous evolution of the disk, typically at a slower rate. The transition between the two regimes is generally smooth.
How did Neptune's outward migration affect Pluto?
Outward migration of Neptune is believed to be responsible for the resonant capture of Pluto and other similar bodies, called Plutinos, into the 3:2 mean-motion resonance with Neptune, meaning they orbit the Sun twice for every three Neptune orbits. This happened through planetesimal-driven migration, in which gravitational encounters with a large number of small icy bodies gradually pushed Neptune outward.
What triggered the reorganization of the outer Solar System according to the Nice model?
After roughly 500-600 million years following the Solar System's formation, about four billion years ago, Jupiter and Saturn crossed the 2:1 orbital resonance, in which Saturn completed one orbit for every two of Jupiter's. That resonance crossing increased the eccentricities of both planets, destabilized the orbits of Uranus and Neptune, and triggered close encounters that sent Neptune plunging into the dense planetesimal belt, scattering most of those bodies inward.
What are Kozai cycles and how do they cause planetary migration?
Kozai cycles are a gravitational mechanism in which a distant companion star causes a planet's orbital eccentricity and inclination to exchange repeatedly, cycling through high and low values over time. If eccentricity climbs high enough, the planet's closest approach to its star becomes small enough for strong tidal forces to act, shrinking the orbit. This combination of Kozai cycles and tidal friction can also flip a planet's orbit into retrograde.
All sources
46 references cited across the entry
- 1journalThe dispersal of planet-forming discs: theory confronts observationsB. Ercolano et al. — 2017
- 2bookHandbook of ExoplanetsG. D'Angelo — Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature — 2018
- 3bookExoplanetsLubow, S.H. et al. — University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ — 2011
- 4journalHalting type I planet migration in non-isothermal disksS.-J. Paardekooper et al. — 2006
- 5journalSaving super-Earths: Interplay between pebble accretion and type I migrationR. Brasser et al. — 2017
- 6journalThree-Dimensional Interaction between a Planet and an Isothermal Gaseous Disk: I. Corotation and Lindblad Torques and Planet MigrationTanaka, H. et al. — 2002
- 7journalThree-dimensional disk-planet torques in a locally isothermal diskD'Angelo, G. et al. — 2010
- 8journalOutwards migration for planets in stellar irradiated 3D discsE. Lega et al. — 2015
- 9journalIn-situ and ex-situ formation models of Kepler 11 planetsD'Angelo, G. et al. — 2016
- 10journalPlanet heating prevents inward migration of planetary coresPablo Benítez-Llambay et al. — 2015
- 11journalLecture notes on the formation and early evolution of planetary systemsPhillip J. Armitage — 2007
- 12journalGas flow across gaps in protoplanetary disksLubow, S. et al. — 2006
- 13journalEvolution of migrating planets undergoing gas accretionD'Angelo, G. et al. — 2008
- 14journalOrbital migration and mass accretion of protoplanets in three-dimensional global computations with nested gridsD'Angelo, G. et al. — 2003
- 15journalOn the migration of protogiant solid coresMasset, F.S. et al. — 2006
- 16journalEvolution of Giant Planets in Eccentric DisksGennaro D'Angelo et al. — 2006
- 17journalRunaway migration and the formation of hot JupitersMasset, F.S. et al. — 2003
- 18journalThe dependence of protoplanet migration rates on co-orbital torquesD'Angelo, G. et al. — 2005
- 19journalMigration of accreting planets in radiative discs from dynamical torquesA. Pierens et al. — 2016
- 20journalOrbital migration of giant planets induced by gravitationally unstable gaps: the effect of planet massR. Cloutier — 2013
- 21journalThe Formation of Uranus and Neptune among Jupiter and SaturnE. W. Thommes — 2002
- 22journalOrigins of Eccentric Extrasolar Planets: Testing the Planet-Planet Scattering ModelEric B. Ford et al. — 2008
- 23journalPlanet-Planet Scattering Leads to Tightly Packed Planetary SystemsSean N. Raymond et al. — 2009
- 24journalPlanet-Planet Scattering in Planetesimal Disks: II. Predictions for Outer Extrasolar Planetary SystemsSean N. Raymond et al. — 2010
- 25arxivTidal evolution of close-in extra-solar planetsBrian Jackson et al. — 4 Jan 2008
- 26journalShrinking Binary and Planetary Orbits by Kozai Cycles with Tidal FrictionDaniel Fabrycky et al. — 2007
- 27journalHot Jupiters from secular planet-planet interactionsSmadar Naoz et al. — 2011
- 28journalFormation of Hot Planets by a Combination of Planet Scattering, Tidal Circularization, and the Kozai MechanismM. Nagasawa et al. — 2008
- 29bookProtostars and Planets VH.F. Levison et al. — University of Arizona Press — 2007
- 30journalSimulations of planet migration driven by planetesimal scatteringDavid R. Kirsh et al. — 2009
- 31journalPlanetesimal-driven planet migration in the presence of a gas diskChristopher C. Capobianco et al. — 2011
- 32journalHot super-Earths and giant planet cores from different migration historiesCchristophe Cossou et al. — 2014
- 33journalConvergence zones for Type I migration: An inward shift for multiple planet systemsC. Cossou et al. — 2013
- 34journalMean motion resonances from planet-planet scatteringSean N. Raymond et al. — 2008
- 35journalA low mass for Mars from Jupiter's early gas-driven migrationKevin J. Walsh et al. — 2011
- 36journalGas giant planets as dynamical barriers to inward-migrating super-EarthsAndré Izidoro et al. — 2015
- 37journalThe origin of Pluto's orbit: Implications for the Solar System beyond NeptuneRenu Malhotra — 1995
- 38journalBreaking the Chains: Hot Super-Earth systems from migration and disruption of compact resonant chainsAndre Izidoro et al. — 2017
- 39journalPlanetesimal interactions can explain the mysterious period ratios of small near-resonant planetsSourav Chatterjee et al. — 2015
- 40bookProtostars and Planets VIC. Baruteau et al. — University of Arizona Press — 2014
- 41arxivAvoiding resonance capture in multi-planet extrasolar systemsMargaret Pan et al. — 2017
- 42journalOrigin of the cataclysmic Late Heavy Bombardment period of the terrestrial planetsGomes, R. — 2005
- 43journalOrigin of the structure of the Kuiper Belt during a dynamical instability in the orbits of Uranus and NeptuneLevison, Harold F. et al. — 2007
- 44arxivOrigin and dynamical evolution of comets and their reservoirsAlessandro Morbidelli — 2005
- 45webUranus, Neptune, and the Mountains of the MoonTaylor, G. Jeffrey — Hawaii Institute of Geophysics & Planetology — 21 August 2001
- 46magazineThe Chaotic Genesis of PlanetsLin, Douglas N.C. — May 2008