Celest Mech Dyn Astr (2008) 102:8395 DOI 10.

1007/s10569-008-9159-0 ORIGINAL ARTICLE

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

E. Pilat-Lohinger P. Robutel . Sli F. Freistetter

Received: 13 December 2007 / Revised: 26 July 2008 / Accepted: 30 July 2008 / Published online: 19 September 2008 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Abstract We present a continuation of our numerical study on planetary systems with similar characteristics to the Solar System. This time we examine the inuence of three giant planets on the motion of terrestrial-like planets in the habitable zone (HZ). Using the JupiterSaturnUranus conguration we create similar ctitious systems by varying Saturns semi-major axis from 8 to 11 AU and increasing its mass by factors of 230. 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 JupiterSaturn systems. Perturbations associated with the secular frequency g5 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

E. Pilat-Lohinger (B ) Institute for Astronomy, University of Vienna, Trkenschanzstrasse 17, 1180 Vienna, Austria e-mail: lohinger@astro.univie.ac.at P. Robutel Astronomie et Systmes Dynamiques, IMCCE-CNRS UMR 2028, Observatoire de Paris, 77 Av. Denfert-Rochereau, 75014 Paris, France e-mail: robutel@imcce.fr . Sli Department of Astronomy, Etvs University, XI. Pzmny Pter stny 1/A, 1117 Budapest, Hungary e-mail: a.suli@astro.elte.hu F. Freistetter Astrophysikalisches Institut, Friedrich-Schiller-Universitt Jena, Schillergsschen 2-3, 07745 Jena, Germany e-mail: orian@astro.uni-jena.de

123

84

E. Pilat-Lohinger et al.

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 Earths 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. Keywords Planetary systems Planets: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus Secular resonances Habitable zone Extra-solar planets

1 Introduction From the about 300 Extra-solar planetary systems (EPS) near sun-like stars that have been discovered so far, we know about 29 multi-planet systems that can be divided from the dynamical point of view into the following classes (cf. Ferraz-Mello et al. 2005): Ia: Planets in mean-motion resonance. Ib: Low-eccentricity near-resonant planet pairs. II: Non-resonant planets with significant secular dynamics. III: Hierarchical planet pairs. In our study, we concentrated on class Ib systems. Even if they are not very numerous up to now,1 we are interested in such systems since they might have similar characteristics like our Solar System. Therefore, we studied the inuence of JupiterSaturnUranus congurations on the motion in the so-called habitable zone (HZ). The boundaries2 of this region in the Solar System are at 0.93 AU and 1.37 AU according to the pioneering work by Kasting et al. (1993). A planet moving in this zone is habitable if it has a terrestrial ocean of supercial water, where the carbonate-silicate cycle controls the CO2 level in equilibrium with a surface temperature above the freezing in the HZ. Numerous numerical investigations about planetary motion in the HZ have been carried out during the last decade, where either specic extra-solar planetary systems were examined (see e.g. Rivera and Lissauer 2000, 2001; Jones and Sleep 2002, Laughlin et al. 2002; Menou and Tabachnik 2003; Dvorak et al. 2003; Barnes and Raymond 2004; Asghari et al. 2004; rdi et al. 2004; Jones et al. 2005, 2007; Raymond et al. 2006; Ji et al. 2005; Rivera and Haghighipour 2007; Schwarz et al. 2007; and many others) or general stability studies were performed (see e.g. Sndor et al. 2007; Sli et al. 2007). This investigation is a continuation of our previous study (Pilat-Lohinger et al. 2008), where we used the orbital parameters of Jupiter and Saturn and created similar ctitious congurations by varying Saturns semi-major axis (a S from 8 to 11 AU) and increasing its mass by factors 2 to 30. Now we add a third giant planet (i.e. Uranus) to our dynamical system and study the inuence of three gas giants on the motion of test-planets in the region from 0.6 to 1.6 AU. This enlargement of the Suns HZ is interesting from the dynamical point of view, as we obtain additional information for the positions of Venus and Mars. The resulting max-e maps representing the (at p , a S )-plane3 display clearly the perturbations
1 The OGLE-06-109L system belongs to this class. Taking in mind, that this system discovered by micro-

lensing (Gaudi et al. 2008) is one of only 6 far away planetary systems detected by this method, one can conclude that there are many similar systems that might be detected in the future. 2 The inner boundary (at 0.93 AU) denes the distance when H O will no more become a major atmospheric 2 compound; and the outer boundary (at 1.37 AU) depends on the CO2 that condensates in the atmosphere and produces CO2 clouds which can affect the temperature-CO2 coupling significantly. 3 a and a are the semi-major axes of the test-planets and Saturn, respectively. tp S

123

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

85

of the giant planets on the motion in the HZ resulting from mean motion (MMR) and secular resonancesespecially the secular frequency g5 plays an important role in the dynamical maps. A comparison with the results of Pilat-Lohinger et al. (2008) shows the inuence of Uranus on the motion in the HZ, that appears especially for Saturn-masses increased by factors 2 to 9. From the numerous computations that have been carried out for this study we will discuss in detail: (1) The JupiterSaturnUranus conguration, where an increase of the eccentricity for a test-planet placed in the position of Venus was found; (2) Systems, where the masses of Saturn and Uranus were increased by a factor 3. Especially the higher Uranus-mass changed the max-e map significantly, which indicated additional perturbations due to the secular resonances g = g7 and s = s7 ; (3) Systems with a larger Saturn-mass than that of Jupiter show perturbations in the whole HZ dened by Kasting et al. (1993), especially if Jupiter and Saturn are close to the 5:2 MMR. In the following, we describe our dynamical model and the computations in Sect. 2, then we present the results for the Solar System conguration in Sect. 3. The results for systems with a higher Saturn-mass as well as a comparison with Pilat-Lohinger et al. (2008) are discussed in Sect. 4.

2 Dynamical model and computations Based on Pilat-Lohinger et al. (2008), we took the orbital parameters of Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus (see Table 1) and varied the initial semi-major axis of Saturn (a S ) from 8 to 11 AU in steps of 0.1 AU, while the orbits of Jupiter and Uranus were xed to the parameters given in Table 1. We computed for Saturn-masses multiplied by a factor S of 1, 3, 4 and 5 the orbits of test-planets in the region from 0.6 to 1.6 AU (in steps of 0.02 AU),4 while for the other mass-factors ( S = 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, . . . , 30) a smaller region for the terrestrial-like planetsfrom 0.8 to 1.4 AU in steps of 0.02 AUwas studied. The other orbital elements for the test-planets (with negligible mass) were those of the Earth: the eccentricity et p = 0.0167the inclination i t p = 0.0008 the argument of perihelion t p = 103.946 the node t p = 358.859 and the mean anomaly Mt p = 206.900 . In the dynamical model of the restricted 5 body problem (R5BP)where the massless testplanets move in the gravitational eld of the Sun, Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus without perturbing their orbitswe computed for each map representing the (at p , a S )-plane 1581 orbits over 107 years, using the hybrid-symplectic integrator5 MERCURY 6 of Chambers (1999). For all orbits we determined the maximum eccentricity (max-e), which is a crucial orbital parameter for studies in the HZ. By calculating max-e over the whole computation time, we were able to distinguish between (i) orbits being in the HZ during the whole computation time, (ii) orbits being in the HZ for most of the time during its revolution and (iii) highly eccentric orbits, that probably cause problems for the habitability. In this context, we have to mention that Williams and Pollard (2002) have shown that the Earth could also be habitable, according to the standard definition of habitability, if its orbital eccentricity would be 0.7. But this leads certainly to strong variations in the surface temperature.
4 We made this choice to be able to compare the results with those of Pilat-Lohinger et al. (2008). 5 For the study presented in Pilat-Lohinger et al. (2008), we tested carefully this integration method regarding

the accuracy of the results.

123

86 Table 1 Orbital elements of the giant planets Planet Jupiter Saturn Uranus a (AU) 5.203 9.530 19.235 e 0.0483 0.0533 0.0473 inc. (deg) 1.305 2.486 0.773 (deg) 275.201 339.520 99.866 (deg) 100.471 113.669 74.033

E. Pilat-Lohinger et al.

M (deg) 183.898 238.293 111.688

Mass (m Sun ) 0.95479e3 0.28588e3 0.43554e4

The max-e maps show regions of higher eccentricities resulting either from MMRs between the gas giants or from secular perturbations. Planetary frequencies were determined with the aid of the frequency analysis of Laskar (1990)see also Robutel and Gabern (2007)where the secular frequencies g and s are deduced by the following secular linear approximation (see e.g. Murray and Dermott 1999): g= m J 2 (1) n m S 2 (1) m U 2 (1) J b3/2 ( J ) + S b3/2 ( S ) + b (U ) 4 M Sun M Sun M Sun U 3/2 g = s (1) (2)

where J = at p /a J , S = at p /a S , and U = at p /aU ; (a J , a S and aU are the semi-major axes (1) of Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus, respectively) and b3/2 is a Laplace coefcient. The test-planets must have nearly zero initial eccentricities and inclinations. The solutions of the equations6 in a , m S for g (at p , a S , m S ) = g5 (a S , m S )and g (at p , a S , m S ) = g6 (a S , m S ) can be found as black bold lines in all gures showing the (at p , a S )plane. One can see the good agreement of the numerical frequency analysis with the result of the max-e study. Secular perturbations due to Uranus ( g (at p , a S , m S ) = g7 (a S , m S ) and s (at p , a S , m S ) = s7 (a S , m S )) are only visible in the HZ of the system, where the Uranus-mass was increased, otherwise g7 < g so that the solution does not appear.

3 The habitable zone in the JupiterSaturnUranus system The study of the inuence of Jupiter, Saturn (with S = 1) and Uranus on test-planets (with negligible mass) moving in the region from at p = 0.6 to 1.6 AU for different semi-major axes of Saturn (a S = 8 to 11 AU) is summarized in Fig. 1. The max-e result shows different grey scales dening various maximum eccentricities, where white labels the lowest and black the highest max-e. Like in the JupiterSaturn system (see Pilat-Lohinger et al. 2008), the plot is dominated by a striking arched band of higher eccentricities, which is of secular origin. The application of the numerical frequency analysis of Laskar (1990) assigned this feature to the secular frequency g5 . In addition to this significant arched structure, some smaller areas of higher max-e appeared mostly in the outer HZ (near the position of Mars which is marked by the vertical line labeled with M). They are either close to the 2:1 MMR between Jupiter and Saturn (the dashed horizontal lines show the most important MMRs between Jupiter and Saturn) or close to the 3:1 MMR. In the latter case, the perturbation results from the g6 frequency. A comparison of the results derived for the JupiterSaturnUranus and JupiterSaturn (Pilat-Lohinger et al. 2008) systems shows more or less the same dynamical behavior. So
6 Indices 5 and 6 denote secular frequencies associated with the precession of perihelion of Jupiter and Saturn,

respectively.

123

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

87

Fig. 1 Stability map for test-planets in the HZ calculated in the SunJupiterSaturnUranus system. The panel shows the max-e result of the computations over 107 years. According to the grey scale, the eccentricity is the lowest in the white area and the highest in the black area. The solution of the frequency analysis is given by black bold lines. Horizontal dashed lines show the most important MMRs between Jupiter and Saturn. The positions of the planets Venus, Earth and Mars are shown by the vertical full lines and that of Saturn by the horizontal full line

that no significant inuence of Uranus on the HZ was detected within 107 years, when using the standard values of Uranus mass (m U ) and semi-major axis (aU ). Pointing the attention to the position of Venus (vertical full line labeled with V), we recognize a maximum eccentricity of nearly 0.3 for a test-planet placed in this region when Saturn moves in its actual orbit (see the horizontal full line marked with Sat). Compared to the JupiterSaturn system (Pilat-Lohinger et al. 2008) we observe a further increase of the test-planets eccentricity from 0.22 (dashed line in Fig. 2) to 0.265 due to Uranus (see full line in Fig. 2). The signal is quite regular but we do not observe such a high eccentricity for Venus in our Solar System. Like in Pilat-Lohinger et al. (2008) we had to
0.3 JSU-model JS-model JSUE-model 0.25

0.2

eccentricity

0.15

0.1

0.05

0 0 2e+06 4e+06 6e+06 8e+06 1e+07

time [yrs]

Fig. 2 The evolution of the eccentricity for a test-planet placed in the orbit of Venus and calculated in three different dynamical models: (i) in the JupiterSaturnUranus system (full line), (ii) in the JupiterSaturn system (dashed line) and (iii) in the JupiterSaturnUranusEarth system (dotted line)

123

88

E. Pilat-Lohinger et al.

Fig. 3 Stability map for Earth-like planets in the HZ calculated in the SunJupiterSaturnUranusEarth system. The panel shows the max-e result of the computations over 107 years. The max-e isaccording to the grey scalethe lowest in the light grey area and the highest in the black area. The bold solid, dashed and dashed-dotted lines represent the secular resonances g5 , g6 and g3 , respectively, that are derived from the secular frequency analysis. The hatched area shows the region inuenced by the Earth and the thin solid line at 0.72 AU marks the actual position of Venus. For details see the text

include the Earth in our dynamical model to decrease the eccentricity of the test-planet in the region of Venus signicantly (see dotted line of JSUE-model in Fig. 2). In this context, we have to point out that a high eccentricity of Venus due to the absence of the EarthMoon system was also found by Innanen et al. (1998) in a stability study of the inner Solar System. Moreover, a recent numerical study of the Solar System showed an escape of Mercury when its orbit is inuenced by the g5 frequency (see Laskar 2008). Comparing Figs. 1 and 3 one recognizes a significant change of the dynamical structure in the (at p , a S )-plane when adding the Earth-Moon system. This results from the well-known fact that in the linear secular theory the frequency g has a singularity located at 1 AU in the JupiterSaturnUranusEarth system, which does not appear in the JupiterSaturnUranus system. The max-e result for all test-planets in the (at p , a S )-plane computed in the Jupiter SaturnUranusEarth system is given in Fig. 3. The change in g shifts the position of Venus into the low-eccentric area (where e < 0.1) for the Solar System parameters. In this context, we still have to check the inuence of the high order MMR (13:8) between Venus and Earth. In the new system we observe a stronger inuence of the g6 frequency (which is restricted to the outer HZ for a S > 10 AU in Fig. 1). Following the bold dashed line labeled by g6 we recognize an inuence for nearly all a S even inside the Earths orbit. In contrast thereto, the perturbations due to the g5 frequency are restricted to a quite small areasee the bold solid line marked with g5 for at p < 0.85 and a S between 8 and 8.7 AU. Near at p = 0.62 AU perturbations resulting from the g3 frequency7 have been found and they are given by the vertical bold dashed-dotted line marked with g3 . There is obviously no inuence on the position of Saturn between 8 and 11 AU. Moreover, the g3 frequency is quite close to the 2:1 MMR between the test-planet and the Earth (around 0.63 AU). We also recognize a slight increase of the max-e in this region.
7 Index 3 denotes the secular frequency associated with the precession of perihelion of the Earth.

123

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

89

Besides the secular perturbations we observe also higher eccentricities near the 2:1 MMR between Jupiter and Saturn (around a S = 8.2 AU) and very strong perturbations for the bigger part of the HZ, when Saturn is placed at 8.6 and 8.7 AU (see the horizontal dark stripe from 0.6 to 1.2 AU). The origin of this perturbation can be seen in Fig. 1, where the max-e plot shows for the Earth position at a S = 8.7 AU an increase of the eccentricity (up to 0.4) due to the g5 frequency. This high eccentricity for a massive Earth at 1 AU avoids the existence of other planets between 0.6 and 1.2 AU for this a S . The hatched area between 0.92 and 1.04 AU is strongly perturbed by the Earth, where most of the test-planets escaped from the system. We did not study this area in detail in the course of this investigation, since we were mainly interested in the region near the position of Venus (see the vertical solid line close to 0.7 AU).

4 Results for higher Saturn-masses The same study for higher Saturn-masses (the multiple of the mass is given by the factor S ) is presented in this section, where we compare the results of the computations of different JupiterSaturnUranus systems with the according ones of the JupiterSaturn conguration presented in Pilat-Lohinger et al. (2008). This comparison indicates the strongest perturbations in the HZ due to the third giant planet in systems where the Saturn-mass is increased by S = 2 to 9. From the numerous systems that have been computed, we selected two cases which will be discussed in detail: 4.1 Results for Saturn-mass Jupiter-mass In the max-e plot for S = 3 we observe a shift of the dominant secular structure towards the outer border in the HZ (see Fig. 4). This moves the position of Venus in the low-eccentric region, while test-planets around 1 AU enter in the area inuenced by the g5 frequency, which induces higher eccentricities. This behavior near the Earths orbit (see the vertical line labeled by E in Fig. 4) can be observed for a S from 9.15 to 10.3 AU. It follows that a more massive Saturn placed at its actual semi-major axis (labeled by the horizontal solid line at 9.53 AU) would cause a higher eccentricity for the Earth. This was already found in the JupiterSaturn conguration when S = 3 (see Fig. 5). A comparison of Figs. 4 and 5 illustrates the inuence of Uranus that is visible due to the additional perturbations in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4 Same max-e map as Fig. 1 but with a higher Saturn-massincreased by a factor 3 (labeled by [ S = 3])

123

90

E. Pilat-Lohinger et al.

Fig. 5 Same max-e map like Fig. 4 but for test-planets calculated in the Sun JupiterSaturn system

It seems that they result mainly from MMRs between Saturn and Uranus: i.e. the 3:1 MMR near 9.2 AU, the 8:3 MMR near 10 AU and the 5:2 MMR near 10.4 AU. Following the bold black line, they appear also in the solution of the numerical frequency analysis. The gaps and uctuations indicate positions of MMRs, where the method cannot be applied. To obtain more information about the inuence of the third giant planet on the motion in the HZ, we increased the Uranus-mass by factors 3 and 5. Since the results of both systems are quite similar we show in Fig. 6 only that for 3 Uranus-masses. Of course the perturbations are stronger now. Comparing Figs. 4 and 6 we see higher eccentricities along the MMRs especially at the 5:2 and 8:3 MMRs between Saturn and Uranus at 10.4 AU and 9.2 AU, respectively. For a S between 9.2 AU and 10.8 AU stronger secular perturbations are visible. Applying the numerical frequency analysis (Laskar 1990), we detected the dominant arched

Fig. 6 Max-e map of the HZ in the Sun-JupiterSaturnUranus system, where the masses of Saturn and Uranus are increased by a factor 3. Both results (max-e and numerical frequency analysis) are plotted in this panel and coincide quite well

123

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

91

Fig. 7 The max-i in the (at p , a S )-plane computed for test-planets in the Sun-JupiterSaturnUranus system when the masses of Saturn and Uranus are increased by a factor 3. The slanted lines of higher inclination indicate the perturbation of the secular frequency s7

Fig. 8 Same max-e map as Fig. 4 but for a Saturn-mass increased by a factor of 5 (labeled by [ S = 5])

structure resulting from the inuence of the g5 frequency between at p = 1 and 1.1 AU. Additionally, perturbations due to the g = g7 resonance at at p = 0.8 AU resulting from the increased Uranus-mass were found. As well as several small areas of higher eccentricity following a slanted line that corresponds to perturbations from the s7 frequency. The calculation of the maximum inclination (max-i) for the test-planets in the JupiterSaturn(3m ) Uranus(3m ) system8 shows also this slanted stripe of higher inclination (see Fig. 7) which coincides quite well with the s = s7 solution of the numerical frequency analysis. Finally, we have to state that an increase of the Uranus-mass up to a factor of 5 does not invoke significant perturbations due to three-body resonances in the region of the HZ.
8 (3m) indicates that the masses of Saturn and Uranus are increased by a factor 3.

123

92

E. Pilat-Lohinger et al.

Fig. 9 Max-e map for a test-planet moving at 1 AU in the different SunJupiterSaturnUranus systems: the x-axis shows the different starting positions of Saturn and the y-axis the different Saturn-masses. The perturbation of the test-planet is given by the max-e (according to a grey scale), where white indicates lowest values of max-e and black the highest ones

4.2 Saturn-mass > Jupiter-mass Similar perturbations in the HZ due to a third giant planet appeared for Saturn-masses increased by factors of S > 3. In Fig. 8 we show the max-e result for S = 5, where the higher Saturn-mass causes stronger perturbations in the outer part of the HZ that can be ascribed to stronger interactions between Saturn and Uranus. We observe eccentricities between 0.1 and 0.3 for test-planets placed at the position of Mars when a S is between 9 and 10 AU. Even higher eccentricities (between 0.4 and 0.6) were found if Saturn is either between 8 and 8.7 AU or around 11 AU. There are only few positions of Saturn, where the orbits of Venus, Earth and Mars are all in the region of nearly circular motion. Moreover, such a high Saturn-mass moving in its actual orbit increases the eccentricities of the test-planets placed at the positions of Earth and Mars up to 0.15, which could lead to a minimum distance of the two planets of only 0.14 AU. As soon as S = 10 (or larger) the strong interactions between Saturn and Uranus are no longer visible in the max-e maps of the HZ. For such high masses of Saturn we got plots showing an arched band of higher eccentricities associated with the g5 frequencywhich mainly inuences the test-planets at Earth position for a S between 9.6 and 10.8 AU. In addition, three horizontal bands of higher eccentricity indicating the 3:1, 5:2 and 2:1 MMRs between Jupiter and Saturn. They would cause quite high eccentricities for test-planets at Mars position. In some panels for S > 25 we have found another horizontal band of higher eccentricity indicating the 7:3 MMR of Jupiter and Saturn. Interesting is as well that the perturbations close to the 2:1 MMR of Jupiter and Saturn are stronger in the 2-planet systems (compare e.g. Figs. 4 and 5) when S < 10. A summary of the max-e results for a test-planet moving at 1 AU in the different JupiterSaturnUranus systems (for S = 1 to 30) is given in Fig. 9. We see the inuence of the giant planets depending on their mutual distances (due to the variation of a S ) and on the mass of Saturn. The max-e in the different 3-planet systems is dened according to the grey scale, where white areas label the regions of lowest max-e and black labels that of highest max-e. The map shows: (i) escapes of test-planets for very high Saturn-masses, when Jupiter and Saturn are in 2:1 MMR (i.e. a S near 8 AU ); (ii) a quite large region (i.e. white area) with nearly circular motion of the test-planets during the whole computation time

123

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

93

of 107 years and (iii) a large band of higher max-e between 9.6 and 10.8 AU indicating that the test-planets might leave the HZ periodically in certain congurations. Already for the double-mass of Saturn and the standard a S a max-e of about 0.14 for the test-planet placed at Earth position can be observed. In this case the perihelion of the orbit would be at 0.86 AU and, therefore, no more in the HZ according to the definition of Kasting et al. (1993).

5 Conclusion This numerical investigation examined the inuence of three gas giants on Earth-like planets moving in the HZ of a sun-like star. It is a continuation of a previous paper (Pilat-Lohinger et al. 2008), where the same study was done for two giant planets. The numerical work was based on the JupiterSaturnUranus conguration, for which a cloud of test-planets in the region from 0.6 to 1.6 AU (i.e. an extended HZ) was studied for different semi-major axes of Saturn (from 8 to 11 AU) over a time-interval of 107 years. The resulting max-e maps representing the (at p , a S )-plane show perturbations due to mean motion and secular resonances. We analyzed the stability in the HZ (i) for the JupiterSaturnUranus system, (ii) for systems, where the Saturn-mass the Jupiter-mass and (iii) for systems, where the Saturn-mass > the Jupiter-mass. Using the masses of the Solar System we have found an increase of the eccentricity (up to nearly 0.27) for a test-planet moving in the orbit of Venus. This high eccentricity was caused by the secular resonance associated with the precession of perihelion of Jupiter. We have found in both studies (Pilat-Lohinger et al. 2008 and the present study), that the only way to decrease the eccentricity in this area is to include the Earth in our dynamical model. Since the adding of the Earth changed the g frequency significantlyand, therefore, as well the solution for g5 (a S )the position of Venus was no more in the area inuenced by the g5 frequency in the Solar System conguration. An increase of Saturns mass by a factor of 2 shifted the secular resonance towards the outer border of the HZ, while further increases of its mass caused very small displacements of this secular resonance. Consequently, Venus was no longer perturbed by the secular resonance but then test-planets placed in the area near the Earth were inuenced. The calculated eccentricities of the test-planets led to a crossing of the inner border of the HZ in some cases, so that they left this region periodically. This would certainly produce significant changes in the surface temperature but maybe it does not exclude the habitability (see Williams and Pollard 2002). A comparison of the dynamical maps of the JupiterSaturn and the JupiterSaturn Uranus systems showed the inuence of the third gas giant. We analyzed in detail the additional perturbations in the HZ due to the presence of Uranus for the case where Jupiter and Saturn have nearly equal masses. The increase of the Saturn-mass showed perturbations resulting from MMRs between Saturn and Uranus. An additional increase of the Uranus-mass by a factor 3 or 5 displayed also secular perturbations assigned to the perihelion and node of Uranus. While significant perturbations due to three-body resonances were not detected. Systems, where the Saturn-mass is larger than the Jupiter-mass indicated stronger perturbations in the outer HZ due to Uranus (especially up to a mass-factor 9 for Saturn). Quite high eccentricities for test-planets at Mars position occurred for certain positions of Saturn, which could lead to close approaches or even crossings with the Earth. For Saturnmasses increased by a factor of 10 or larger, we have found quite similar results showing perturbations either due to the g5 frequency or due to the 2:1, 5:2 and 3:1 MMRs between Jupiter and Saturn. The max-e maps showed that the region near the Earth was inuenced

123

94

E. Pilat-Lohinger et al.

by the g5 frequency while that near Mars was mainly affected by MMRs. It seems that a higher Saturn-mass (>Jupiter-mass) would cause problems for the stability of the inner Solar System. In this context, we have to point out, that the existence of a JupiterSaturn conguration for a Saturn-mass Jupiter-mass is questionable since the study by Morbidelli and Crida (2007), showed a migration into the 3:2 or the 2:1 MMR for such systems. Another interesting result of this study are the perturbations around the position of Mars when Jupiter and Saturn are in 2:1 MMR, especially in connection with the so-called Nicemodel (see Tsiganis et al. 2005). A rst investigation about the inuence on the inner Solar System has been done by Agnor and Lin (2007).
Acknowledgements The work of this paper was supported by the Austrian FWF project no. P19569-N16, especially EP-L and S beneted from this project. Most of the numerical integrations were carried out on the NIIDP (National Information Infrastructure Development Program) supercomputer in Hungary.

References
Agnor, C.B., Lin, D.N.: Planet Migration and System Coupling. American Astronomical Society, DPS meeting #39, #60.03 (2007) Asghari, N., Broeg, C., Carone, L., Casas-Miranda, R. et al.: Stability of terrestrial planets in the habitable zone of Gl777A, HD72659, Gl614, 47Uma and HD4208. Astron. Astrophys. 426, 353365 (2004) Barnes, R., Raymond, S.N.: Predicting planets in known extrasolar planetary systems I. Test particle simulations. Astrophys. J. 617, 569574 (2004) Chambers, J.E.: A hybrid symplectic integrator that permits close encounters between massive bodies. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 304, 793799 (1999) Dvorak, R., Pilat-Lohinger, E., Funk, B., Freistetter, F.: A study of the stable regions in the planetary system HD74156 can it host earthlike planets in the habitable zones? . Astron. Astrophys. 410, L13 (2003) rdi, B., Dvorak, R., Sndor, Zs., Pilat-Lohinger, E., Funk, B.: The dynamical structure of the habitable zone in the HD38529, HD168443 and HD169830 systems. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 351, 10431048 (2004) Ferraz-Mello, S., Michtchenko, T.A., Beaug, C., Callegari Jr., N.: Extrasolar planetary systems. Lect. Notes Phys. 683, 219271 (2005) Gaudi, S., Bennett, D., Udalski, A., Gould, A., Chritsie, G., & 62 co-authors: Discovery of a Jupiter/Saturn analog with gravitational microlensing. Science 319, 927 (2008) Innanen, K., Mikkola, S., Wiegert, P.: The Earth-Moon system and the dynamical stability of the inner solar system. Astron. J. 116, 2055 (1998) Ji, J., Lui, L., Kinoshita, H., Li, G.: Could the 47 Ursae majoris planetary system be a second solar system? Predicting the earth-like planets. Astrophys. J. 631, 11911197 (2005) Jones, B.W., Sleep, P.N.: The stability of the orbits of Earth-mass planets in the habitable zone of 47 Ursae Majoris. Astron. Astrophys. 393, 10151026 (2002) Jones, B.W., Underwood, D.R., Sleep, P.N.: Prospects for habitable Earths in known exoplanetary systems. Astrophys. J. 622, 10911101 (2005) Jones, B.W., Sleep, P.N.: Underwood, D.R.: Habitability of known exoplanetary systems based on measured stellar properties. Astrophys. J. 649, 10101019 (2006) Kasting, J.F., Whitmire, D.P., Reynolds, R.T.: Habitable zones around main sequence stars. Icarus 101, 108 128 (1993) Laskar, J.: The chaotic motion of the solar system-a numerical estimate of the size of the chaotic zones. Icarus 88, 266291 (1990) Laskar, J.: Chaotic diffusion in the solar system. Icarus 196, 115 (2008) Laughlin, G., Chambers, J., Fischer, D.: A dynamical analysis of the 47 Ursae majoris planetary system. Astrophys. J. 579, 455467 (2002) Menou, K., Tabachnik, S.: Dynamical habitability of known extrasolar planetary systems. Astrophys. J. 583, 473488 (2003) Morbidelli, A., Crida, A.: The dynamics of Jupiter and Saturn in the gaseoous protoplanetary disk. Icarus 191, 158171 (2007) Murray, C.D., Dermott, S.F.: Solar System Dynamics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999) Pilat-Lohinger, E., Sli, ., Robutel, P., Freistetter, F.: The inuence of giant planets near a mean motion resonance on Earth-like planets in the habitable zone of Sun-like stars. Astrophys. J. 681, 16391645 (2008)

123

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

95

Raymond, S.N., Barnes, R., Kaib, N.A.: Predicting planets in known extrasolar planetary systems III. Forming terrestrial planets. Astrophys. J. 644, 12231231 (2006) Rivera, E., Haghighipour, N.: On the stability of test-particles in extrasolar multiple planet systems. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 374, 599613 (2007) Rivera, E., Lissauer, J.: Stability analysis of the planetary system orbiting Andromedae. Astrophys. J. 530, 454463 (2000) Rivera, E., Lissauer, J.: Stability analysis of the planetary system orbiting nu Andromedae II simulations using new lick observatory ts. Astrophys. J. 554, 1141L (2001) Robutel, P., Gabern, F.: The resonant structure of Jupiters Trojan asteroidsI. Long-term stability and diffusion. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 372, 14631482 (2006) Sndor, Zs., Sli, ., rdi, B., Pilat-Lohinger, E., Dvorak, R.: A stability catalogue of the habitable zones in extrasolar planetary systems. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 375, 14951502 (2007) Schwarz, R., Dvorak, R., Pilat-Lohinger, E., Sli, ., rdi, B.: Trojan planets in HD 108874? . Astron. Astrophys. 462, 11651170 (2007) Sli, ., Dvorak, R., rdi, B.: On the global stability of single-planet systems. Astronomische Nachrichten 328, 781 (2007) Tsiganis, K., Gomes, R., Morbidelli, A., Levison, H.F.: Origin of the orbital architecture of the giant planets of the solar system. Nature 435, 459461 (2005) Williams, D.M., Pollard, D.: Earth-like worlds on eccentric orbits: excursions beyond the habitable zone. Int. J. Astrobiol. 1, 6169 (2002)

123