In cosmogony, the nebular hypothesis is the most widely accepted model explaining the

formation and evolution of the Solar System, which suggests that the Solar System
formed from nebulous material in space. There is evidence that it was first proposed in
173 by !manuel Swedenborg.
"1#"$#"3#
%riginally applied only to our own Solar System,
this method of planetary system formation is now thought to be at wor& throughout the
universe.
"#
The widely accepted modern variant of the nebular hypothesis is the solar
nebular disk model 'SNDM( or simply solar nebular model.
")#
This nebular hypothesis
offered explanations for a variety of properties of the Solar System, including the nearly
circular and coplanar orbits of the planets, and their motion in the same direction as the
Sun*s rotation. Some elements of the nebular hypothesis are echoed in modern theories of
planetary formation, but most have been superseded.
+ccording to the nebular hypothesis, stars form in massive and dense clouds of molecular
hydrogen,giant molecular clouds '-./(. They are gravitationally unstable, and matter
coalesces within them to smaller denser clumps, which then proceed to both rotate and
collapse and form stars. Star formation is a complex process, which always produces a
gaseous protoplanetary dis& around the young star. This may give birth to planets in
certain circumstances, which are not well &nown. Thus the formation of planetary
systems is thought to be a natural result of star formation. + sun0li&e star usually ta&es
around 111 million years to form.
"#
The protoplanetary dis& is an accretion dis& which proceeds to feed the central star.
Initially very hot, the dis& later cools in what is &nown as the T tauri star stage2 here,
formation of small dust grains made of roc&s and ice is possible. The grains may
eventually coagulate into &ilometer0si3ed planetesimals. If the dis& is massive enough the
runaway accretions begin, resulting in the rapid,111,111 to 311,111 years,formation
of .oon0 to .ars0si3ed planetary embryos. 4ear the star, the planetary embryos go
through a stage of violent mergers, producing a few terrestrial planets. The last stage
ta&es around 111 million to a billion years.
"#
The formation of giant planets is a more complicated process. It is thought to occur
beyond the so0called frost line, where planetary embryos are mainly made of various
types of ice. +s a result they are several times more massive than in the inner part of the
protoplanetary dis&. 5hat follows after the embryo formation is not completely clear.
6owever, some embryos appear to continue to grow and eventually reach )711 !arth
masses,the threshold value, which is necessary to begin accretion of the hydrogen7
helium gas from the dis&. The accumulation of gas by the core is initially a slow process,
which continues for several million years, but after the forming protoplanet reaches about
31 !arth masses it accelerates and proceeds in a runaway manner. The 8upiter and
Saturn7li&e planets are thought to accumulate the bul& of their mass during only
11,111 years. The accretion stops when the gas is exhausted. The formed planets can
migrate over long distances during or after their formation. The ice giants li&e 9ranus and
4eptune are thought to be failed cores, which formed too late when the dis& had almost
disappeared.
"#
Contents
1 6istory
$ Solar nebular model: achievements and problems
o $.1 +chievements
o $.$ ;roblems and criticism
3 <ormation of stars and protoplanetary dis&s
o 3.1 ;rotostars
o 3.$ ;rotoplanetary dis&s
<ormation of planets
o .1 =oc&y planets
o .$ -iant planets
) .eaning of accretion
> See also
7 4otes
? =eferences
@ !xternal lin&s
History
.ain article: 6istory of Solar System formation and evolution hypotheses
There is evidence that the nebular hypothesis was first proposed in 173 by !manuel
Swedenborg.
"1#"$#
Immanuel Aant, who was familiar with Swedenborg*s wor&, developed
the theory further in 17)), when Aant published his Universal Natural History and
Theory of the Heavens, wherein he argued that gaseous clouds,nebulae, which slowly
rotate, gradually collapse and flatten due to gravity and eventually form stars and planets.
")#
+ similar model was developed independently and proposed in 17@> by ;ierre0Simon
Baplace.
")#
in his Exposition du systeme du monde. 6e envisioned that the Sun originally
had an extended hot atmosphere throughout the volume of the Solar System. 6is theory
featured a contracting and cooling protosolar cloud,the protosolar nebula. +s this
cooled and contracted, it flattened and spun more rapidly, throwing off 'or shedding( a
series of gaseous rings of material2 and according to him, the planets condensed from this
material. 6is model was similar to Aant*s, except more detailed and on a smaller scale.
")#

5hile the Baplacian nebular model dominated in the 1@th century, it encountered a
number of difficulties. The main problem was angular momentum distribution between
the Sun and planets. The planets have @@C of the angular momentum, and this fact could
not be explained by the nebular model.
")#
+s a result this theory of planet formation was
largely abandoned at the beginning of the $1th century.
The fall of the Baplacian model stimulated scientists to find a replacement for it. During
the $1th century many theories were proposed including the planetesimal theory of
Thomas /hamberlin and <orest .oulton '1@11(, tidal model of 8eans '1@17(, accretion
model of %tto Schmidt '1@(, protoplanet theory of 5illiam .c/rea '1@>1( and finally
capture theory of .ichael 5oolfson.
")#
In 1@7? +ndrew ;rentice resurrected the initial
Baplacian ideas about planet formation and developed the modern Laplacian theory.
")#

4one of these attempts was completely successful and many of the proposed theories
were descriptive.
The birth of the modern widely accepted theory of planetary formation,the solar nebular
dis& model 'S4D.(,can be traced to the wor&s of Soviet astronomer Eictor Safronov.
">#
6is boo& Evolution of the protoplanetary cloud and formation of the Earth and the
planets,
"7#
which was translated to !nglish in 1@7$, had a long lasting effect on the way
scientists thin& about the formation of the planets.
"?#
In this boo& almost all maFor
problems of the planetary formation process were formulated and some of them solved.
Safronov*s ideas were further developed in the wor&s of -eorge 5etherill, who
discovered runaway accretion.
")#
5hile originally applied only to our own Solar System,
the S4D. was subseGuently thought by theorists to be at wor& throughout the universe2
as of 1 September $11, 1?$1 extrasolar planets have since been discovered in our
galaxy.
"@#
Solar nebular model: achievements and problems
Achievements
The star formation process naturally results in the appearance of accretion dis&s around
young stellar obFects.
"11#
+t the age of about 1 million years, 111C of stars may have such
dis&s.
"11#
This conclusion is supported by the discovery of the gaseous and dusty dis&s
around protostars and T Tauri stars as well as by theoretical considerations.
"1$#

%bservations of these dis&s show that the dust grains inside them grow in si3e on short
'thousand0year( time scales, producing 1 centimeter si3ed particles.
"13#
The accretion process, by which 1 &m planetesimals grow into 1,111 &m si3ed bodies, is
well understood now.
"1#
This process develops inside any dis& where the number density
of planetesimals is sufficiently high, and proceeds in a runaway manner. -rowth later
slows and continues as oligarchic accretion. The end result is formation of planetary
embryos of varying si3es, which depend on the distance from the star.
"1#
Earious
simulations have demonstrated that the merger of embryos in the inner part of the
protoplanetary dis& leads to the formation of a few !arth0si3ed bodies. Thus the origin of
terrestrial planets is now considered to be an almost solved problem.
"1)#
Problems and criticism
The physics of accretion dis&s encounters some problems.
"1>#
The most important one is
how the material, which is accreted by the protostar, loses its angular momentum. %ne
possible explanation suggested by 6annes +lfvHn was that angular momentum was shed
by the solar wind during its T Tauri phase. The momentum is probably transported to the
outer parts of the dis&, but the precise mechanism of this transport is not well understood.
+nother possible process for shedding angular momentum is magnetic bra&ing, where the
spin of the star is transferred into the surrounding dis& via that star*s magnetic field.
"17#

The process or processes responsible for the disappearance of the dis&s are also poorly
&nown.
"1?#"1@#
The formation of planetesimals is the biggest unsolved problem in the nebular dis&
model. 6ow 1 cm si3ed particles coalesce into 1 &m planetesimals is a mystery. This
mechanism appears to be the &ey to the Guestion as to why some stars have planets, while
others have nothing around them, not even dust belts.
"$1#
The formation of giant planets is another unsolved problem. /urrent theories are unable
to explain how their cores can form fast enough to accumulate significant amounts of gas
from the Guic&ly disappearing protoplanetary dis&.
"1#"$1#
The mean lifetime of the dis&s,
which are less than ten million '11
7
( years, appears to be shorter than the time necessary
for the core formation.
"11#
+nother problem of giant planet formation is their migration. Some calculations show
that interaction with the dis& can cause rapid inward migration, which, if not stopped,
results in the planet reaching the Icentral regions still as a sub08ovian obFect.I
"$$#
+ maFor critiGue came during the 1@th century from 8ames /ler& .axwell who
maintained that different rotation between the inner and outer parts of a ring could not
allow condensation of material.
"$3#
It was also reFected by astronomer Sir David Jrewster
who stated that Ithose who believe in the 4ebular Theory consider it as certain that our
!arth derived its solid matter and its atmosphere from a ring thrown from the Solar
atmosphere, which afterwards contracted into a solid terraGueous sphere, from which the
.oon was thrown off by the same process.I 6e argued that under such view, Ithe .oon
must necessarily have carried off water and air from the watery and aerial parts of the
!arthy and must have an atmosphere.I
"$#
Jrewster claimed that Sir Isaac 4ewton*s
religious beliefs had previously considered nebular ideas as tending to atheism, and
Guoted him saying that Ithe growth of new systems out of old ones, without the
mediation of a Divine power, seemed to him apparently absurd.I
"$)#
ormation of stars and protoplanetary disks
Protostars
.ain article: ;rotostar
The visible0light 'left( and infrared 'right( views of the Trifid 4ebula,a giant star0
forming cloud of gas and dust located ),11 light0years away in the constellation
Sagittarius
Stars are thought to form inside giant clouds of cold molecular hydrogen,giant
molecular clouds roughly 311,111 times the mass of the Sun and $1 parsecs in diameter.
"#"$>#
%ver millions of years, giant molecular clouds are prone to collapse and
fragmentation.
"$7#
These fragments then form small, dense cores, which in turn collapse
into stars.
"$>#
The cores range in mass from a fraction to several times that of the Sun and
are called protostellar 'protosolar( nebulae.
"#
They possess diameters of 1.1171.1 pc
'$,1117$1,111 +9( and a particle number density of roughly 11,111 to 111,111 cm
K3
.
"a#"$>#
"$?#
The initial collapse of a solar0mass protostellar nebula ta&es around 111,111 years.
"#"$>#

!very nebula begins with a certain amount of angular momentum. -as in the central part
of the nebula, with relatively low angular momentum, undergoes fast compression and
forms a hot hydrostatic 'not contracting( core containing a small fraction of the mass of
the original nebula.
"$@#
This core forms the seed of what will become a star.
"#"$@#
+s the
collapse continues, conservation of angular momentum means that the rotation of the
infalling envelop accelerates,
"1@#"31#
which largely prevents the gas from directly accreting
onto the central core. The gas is instead forced to spread outwards near its eGuatorial
plane, forming a dis&, which in turn accretes onto the core.
"#"1@#"31#
The core gradually
grows in mass until it becomes a young hot protostar.
"$@#
+t this stage, the protostar and its
dis& are heavily obscured by the infalling envelope and are not directly observable.
"11#
In
fact the remaining envelope*s opacity is so high that even millimeter0wave radiation has
trouble escaping from inside it.
"#"11#
Such obFects are observed as very bright
condensations, which emit mainly millimeter0wave and submillimeter0wave radiation.
"$?#

They are classified as spectral /lass 1 protostars.
"11#
The collapse is often accompanied by
bipolar outflows,Fets,that emanate along the rotational axis of the inferred dis&. The
Fets are freGuently observed in star0forming regions 'see 6erbig76aro '66( obFects(.
"31#

The luminosity of the /lass 1 protostars is high , a solar0mass protostar may radiate at
up to 111 solar luminosities.
"11#
The source of this energy is gravitational collapse, as their
cores are not yet hot enough to begin nuclear fusion.
"$@#"3$#
Infrared image of the molecular outflow from an otherwise hidden newborn star 66
>L7
+s the envelope*s material continues to infall onto the dis&, it eventually becomes thin
and transparent and the young stellar obFect 'MS%( becomes observable, initially in far0
infrared light and later in the visible.
"$?#
+round this time the protostar begins to fuse
deuterium. If the protostar is sufficiently massive 'above ?1 8upiter masses(, hydrogen
fusion follows. %therwise, if its mass is too low, the obFect becomes a brown dwarf.
"3$#

This birth of a new star occurs approximately 111,111 years after the collapse begins.
"#

%bFects at this stage are &nown as /lass I protostars,
"11#
which are also called young T
Tauri stars, evolved protostars, or young stellar obFects.
"11#
Jy this time the forming star
has already accreted much of its mass: the total mass of the dis& and remaining envelope
does not exceed 117$1C of the mass of the central MS%.
"$?#
+t the next stage the envelope completely disappears, having been gathered up by the
dis&, and the protostar becomes a classical T !auri star.
"b#
This happens after about
1 million years.
"#
The mass of the dis& around a classical T Tauri star is about 173C of
the stellar mass, and it is accreted at a rate of 11
K7
to 11
K@
solar masses per year.
"3)#
+ pair
of bipolar Fets is usually present as well.
"3>#
The accretion explains all peculiar properties
of classical T Tauri stars: strong flux in the emission lines 'up to 111C of the intrinsic
luminosity of the star(, magnetic activity, photometric variability and Fets.
"37#
The
emission lines actually form as the accreted gas hits the IsurfaceI of the star, which
happens around its magnetic poles.
"37#
The Fets are byproducts of accretion: they carry
away excessive angular momentum. The classical T Tauri stage lasts about 11 million
years.
"#
The dis& eventually disappears due to accretion onto the central star, planet
formation, eFection by Fets and photoevaporation by 9E0radiation from the central star
and nearby stars.
"3?#
+s a result the young star becomes a wea&ly lined T Tauri star, which
slowly, over hundreds of millions of years, evolves into an ordinary sun0li&e star.
"$@#
Protoplanetary disks
See also: ;rotoplanetary dis& and planetesimal
Debris dis&s detected in 6ST archival images of young stars, HD 11!" and HD
1!1#$!, using improved imaging processes '$ +pril $11(.
"3@#
9nder certain circumstances the dis&, which can now be called protoplanetary, may give
birth to a planetary system.
"#
;rotoplanetary dis&s have been observed around a very high
fraction of stars in young star clusters.
"11#"1#
They exist from the beginning of a star*s
formation, but at the earliest stages are unobservable due to the opacity of the
surrounding envelope.
"11#
The dis& of a /lass 1 protostar is thought to be massive and hot.
It is an accretion dis&, which feeds the central protostar.
"1@#"31#
The temperature can easily
exceed 11 A inside ) +9 and 1,111 A inside 1 +9.
"1#
The heating of the dis& is
primarily caused by the viscous dissipation of turbulence in it and by the infall of the gas
from the nebula.
"1@#"31#
The high temperature in the inner dis& causes most of the volatile
material,water, organics, and some roc&s to evaporate, leaving only the most refractory
elements li&e iron. The ice can survive only in the outer part of the dis&.
"1#
+ protoplanetary dis& forming in the %rion 4ebula
The main problem in the physics of accretion dis&s is the generation of turbulence and
the mechanism responsible for the high effective viscosity.
"#
The turbulent viscosity is
thought to be responsible for the transport of the mass to the central protostar and
momentum to the periphery of the dis&. This is vital for accretion, because the gas can be
accreted by the central protostar only if it loses most of its angular momentum, which
must be carried away by the small part of the gas drifting outwards.
"1?#"1@#
The result of this
process is the growth of both the protostar and of the dis& radius, which can reach
1,111 +9 if the initial angular momentum of the nebula is large enough.
"31#
Barge dis&s
are routinely observed in many star0forming regions such as the %rion nebula.
"1$#
;lay media
+rtist*s impression of the disc and gas streams around young star 6D 1$)$7.
"$#
The lifespan of the accretion dis&s is about 11 million years.
"11#
Jy the time the star
reaches the classical T0Tauri stage, the dis& becomes thinner and cools.
"3)#
Bess volatile
materials start to condense close to its center, forming 1.171 Nm dust grains that contain
crystalline silicates.
"13#
The transport of the material from the outer dis& can mix these
newly formed dust grains with primordial ones, which contain organic matter and other
volatiles. This mixing can explain some peculiarities in the composition of solar system
bodies such as the presence of interstellar grains in the primitive meteorites and
refractory inclusions in comets.
"1#
Earious planet formation processes, including exocomets and other planetesimals, around
Jeta ;ictoris, a very young type + E star '4+S+ artist*s conception(.
Dust particles tend to stic& to each other in the dense dis& environment, leading to the
formation of larger particles up to several centimeters in si3e.
"3#
The signatures of the
dust processing and coagulation are observed in the infrared spectra of the young dis&s.
"13#
<urther aggregation can lead to the formation of planetesimals measuring 1 &m across or
larger, which are the building bloc&s of planets.
"#"3#
;lanetesimal formation is another
unsolved problem of dis& physics, as simple stic&ing becomes ineffective as dust particles
grow larger.
"$1#
The favorite hypothesis is formation by the gravitational instability.
;articles several centimeters in si3e or larger slowly settle near the middle plane of the
dis&, forming a very thin,less than 111 &m,and dense layer. This layer is
gravitationally unstable and may fragment into numerous clumps, which in turn collapse
into planetesimals.
"#"$1#
;lanetary formation can also be triggered by gravitational instability within the dis&
itself, which leads to its fragmentation into clumps. Some of them, if they are dense
enough, will collapse,
"1?#
which can lead to rapid formation of gas giant planets and even
brown dwarfs on the timescale of 1,111 years.
"#
6owever it is only possible in massive
dis&s,more massive than 1.3 solar masses. In comparison typical dis& masses are 1.117
1.13 solar masses. Jecause the massive dis&s are rare, this mechanism of the planet
formation is thought to be infreGuent.
"#"1>#
%n the other hand, this mechanism may play a
maFor role in the formation of brown dwarfs.
")#
+steroid collision,building planets 'artist concept(.
The ultimate dissipation of protoplanetary dis&s is triggered by a number of different
mechanisms. The inner part of the dis& is either accreted by the star or eFected by the
bipolar Fets,
"3)#"3>#
whereas the outer part can evaporate under the star*s powerful 9E
radiation during the T Tauri stage
">#
or by nearby stars.
"3?#
The gas in the central part can
either be accreted or eFected by the growing planets, while the small dust particles are
eFected by the radiation pressure of the central star. 5hat is finally left is either a
planetary system, a remnant dis& of dust without planets, or nothing, if planetesimals
failed to form.
"#
Jecause planetesimals are so numerous, and spread throughout the protoplanetary dis&,
some survive the formation of a planetary system. +steroids are understood to be left0
over planetesimals, gradually grinding each other down into smaller and smaller bits,
while comets are typically planetesimals from the farther reaches of a planetary system.
.eteorites are samples of planetesimals that reach a planetary surface, and provide a
great deal of information about the formation of our Solar System. ;rimitive0type
meteorites are chun&s of shattered low0mass planetesimals, where no thermal
differentiation too& place, while processed0type meteorites are chun&s from shattered
massive planetesimals.
"7#
ormation of planets
"ocky planets
+ccording to the solar nebular dis& model, roc&y planets form in the inner part of the
protoplanetary dis&, within the frost line, where the temperature is high enough to prevent
condensation of water ice and other substances into grains.
"?#
This results in coagulation
of purely roc&y grains and later in the formation of roc&y planetesimals.
"c#"?#
Such
conditions are thought to exist in the inner 37 +9 part of the dis& of a sun0li&e star.
"#
+fter small planetesimals,about 1 &m in diameter,have formed by one way or another,
runaway accretion begins.
"1#
It is called runaway because the mass growth rate is
proportional to =

O.
L3
, where = and . are the radius and mass of the growing body,
respectively.
"@#
It is obvious that the specific 'divided by mass( growth accelerates as the
mass increases. This leads to the preferential growth of larger bodies at the expense of
smaller ones.
"1#
The runaway accretion lasts between 11,111 and 111,111 years and ends
when the largest bodies exceed approximately 1,111 &m in diameter.
"1#
Slowing of the
accretion is caused by gravitational perturbations by large bodies on the remaining
planetesimals.
"1#"@#
In addition, the influence of larger bodies stops further growth of
smaller bodies.
"1#
The next stage is called oligarchic accretion.
"1#
It is characteri3ed by the dominance of
several hundred of the largest bodies,oligarchs, which continue to slowly accrete
planetesimals.
"1#
4o body other than the oligarchs can grow.
"@#
+t this stage the rate of
accretion is proportional to =
$
, which is derived from the geometrical cross0section of an
oligarch.
"@#
The specific accretion rate is proportional to .
K1L3
2 and it declines with the
mass of the body. This allows smaller oligarchs to catch up to larger ones. The oligarchs
are &ept at the distance of about 11P6r '6rQa'10e('.L3.s(
1L3
is the 6ill radius, where a is
the semimaFor axis, e is the orbital eccentricity, and .s is the mass of the central star(
from each other by the influence of the remaining planetesimals.
"1#
Their orbital
eccentricities and inclinations remain small. The oligarchs continue to accrete until
planetesimals are exhausted in the dis& around them.
"1#
Sometimes nearby oligarchs
merge. The final mass of an oligarch depends on the distance from the star and surface
density of planetesimals and is called the isolation mass.
"@#
<or the roc&y planets it is up
to 1.1 of the !arth mass, or one .ars mass.
"#
The final result of the oligarchic stage is the
formation of about 111 .oon0 to .ars0si3ed planetary embryos uniformly spaced at
about 11P6r.
"1)#
They are thought to reside inside gaps in the dis& and to be separated by
rings of remaining planetesimals. This stage is thought to last a few hundred thousand
years.
"#"1#
The last stage of roc&y planet formation is the merger stage.
"#
It begins when only a
small number of planetesimals remains and embryos become massive enough to perturb
each other, which causes their orbits to become chaotic.
"1)#
During this stage embryos
expel remaining planetesimals, and collide with each other. The result of this process,
which lasts for 11 to 111 million years, is the formation of a limited number of !arth
si3ed bodies. Simulations show that the number of surviving planets is on average from $
to ).
"#"1)#"7#")1#
In the Solar System they may be represented by !arth and Eenus.
"1)#

<ormation of both planets reGuired merging of approximately 117$1 embryos, while an
eGual number of them were thrown out of the Solar System.
"7#
Some of the embryos,
which originated in the asteroid belt, are thought to have brought water to !arth.
"?#
.ars
and .ercury may be regarded as remaining embryos that survived that rivalry.
"7#
=oc&y
planets, which have managed to coalesce, settle eventually into more or less stable orbits,
explaining why planetary systems are generally pac&ed to the limit2 or, in other words,
why they always appear to be at the brin& of instability.
"1)#
#iant planets
The dust dis& around <omalhaut,the brightest star in ;iscis +ustrinus constellation.
+symmetry of the dis& may be caused by a giant planet 'or planets( orbiting the star.
The formation of giant planets is an outstanding problem in the planetary sciences.
"1>#
In
the framewor& of the solar nebular model two theories for their formation exist. The first
one is the dis% instability model, where $iant planets form in the massive protoplanetary
dis&s as a result of its gravitational fragmentation 'see above(.
"#
The second possibility is
the core accretion model, which is also &nown as the nucleated instability model.
"1>#
The
latter scenario is thought to be the most promising one, because it can explain the
formation of the giant planets in relatively low mass dis&s 'less than 1.1 solar masses(. In
this model giant planet formation is divided into two stages: a( accretion of a core of
approximately 11 !arth masses and b( accretion of gas from the protoplanetary dis&.
"#"1>#

!ither method may also lead to the creation of brown dwarfs.
")1#
Searches as of $111 have
found that core accretion is li&ely the dominant formation mechanism.
")1#
-iant planet core formation is thought to proceed roughly along the lines of the terrestrial
planet formation.
"1#
It starts with planetesimals that undergo runaway growth, followed
by the slower oligarchic stage.
"@#
6ypotheses do not predict a merger stage, due to the
low probability of collisions between planetary embryos in the outer part of planetary
systems.
"@#
+n additional difference is the composition of the planetesimals, which in the
case of giant planets form beyond the so0called snow line and consist mainly of ice,the
ice to roc& ratio is about to 1.
"$1#
This enhances the mass of planetesimals fourfold.
6owever, the minimum mass nebula capable of terrestrial planet formation can only form
17$ !arth0mass cores at the distance of 8upiter ') +9( within 11 million years.
"@#
The
latter number represents the average lifetime of gaseous dis&s around sun0li&e stars.
"11#

The proposed solutions include enhanced mass of the dis&,a tenfold increase would
suffice2
"@#
protoplanet migration, which allows the embryo to accrete more planetesimals2
"$1#
and finally accretion enhancement due to gas drag in the gaseous envelopes of the
embryos.
"$1#")$#
Some combination of the above0mentioned ideas may explain the
formation of the cores of gas giant planets such as 8upiter and perhaps even Saturn.
"1>#

The formation of planets li&e 9ranus and 4eptune is more problematic, since no theory
has been capable of providing for the in situ formation of their cores at the distance of
$1731 +9 from the central star.
"#
%ne hypothesis is that they initially accreted in the
8upiter0Saturn region, then were scattered and migrated to their present location.
")3#
%nce the cores are of sufficient mass ')711 !arth masses(, they begin to gather gas from
the surrounding dis&.
"#
Initially it is a slow process, increasing the core masses up to 31
!arth masses in a few million years.
"$1#")$#
+fter that, the accretion rates increase
dramatically and the remaining @1C of the mass is accumulated in approximately
11,111 years.
")$#
The accretion of gas stops when it is exhausted. This happens when a gap
opens in the protoplanetary dis&.
")#
In this model ice giants,9ranus and 4eptune,are
failed cores that began gas accretion too late, when almost all gas had already
disappeared. The post0runaway0gas0accretion stage is characteri3ed by migration of the
newly formed giant planets and continued slow gas accretion.
")#
.igration is caused by
the interaction of the planet sitting in the gap with the remaining dis&. It stops when the
protoplanetary dis& disappears or when the end of the dis& is attained. The latter case
corresponds to the so0called hot 8upiters, which are li&ely to have stopped their migration
when they reached the inner hole in the protoplanetary dis&.
")#
In this artist*s conception, a planet spins through a clearing 'gap( in a nearby star*s dusty,
planet0forming disc.
-iant planets can significantly influence terrestrial planet formation. The presence of
giants tends to increase eccentricities and inclinations 'see Ao3ai mechanism( of
planetesimals and embryos in the terrestrial planet region 'inside +9 in the Solar
System(.
"7#")1#
If giant planets form too early, they can slow or prevent inner planet
accretion. If they form near the end of the oligarchic stage, as is thought to have
happened in the Solar System, they will influence the merges of planetary embryos,
ma&ing them more violent.
"7#
+s a result, the number of terrestrial planets will decrease
and they will be more massive.
"))#
In addition, the si3e of the system will shrin&, because
terrestrial planets will form closer to the central star. The influence of giant planets in the
Solar System, particularly that of 8upiter, is thought to have been limited because they are
relatively remote from the terrestrial planets.
"))#
The region of a planetary system adFacent to the giant planets will be influenced in a
different way.
")1#
In such a region, eccentricities of embryos may become so large that the
embryos pass close to a giant planet, which may cause them to be eFected from the
system.
"d#"7#")1#")1#
If all embryos are removed, then no planets will form in this region.
")1#

+n additional conseGuence is that a huge number of small planetesimals will remain,
because giant planets are incapable of clearing them all out without the help of embryos.
The total mass of remaining planetesimals will be small, because cumulative action of the
embryos before their eFection and giant planets is still strong enough to remove @@C of
the small bodies.
"7#
Such a region will eventually evolve into an asteroid belt, which is a
full analog of the asteroid belt in the Solar System, located from $ to +9 from the Sun.
"7#")1#
Meanin$ of accretion
9se of the term accretion dis& for the protoplanetary dis& leads to confusion over the
planetary accretion process. The protoplanetary dis& is sometimes referred to as an
accretion dis&, because while the young T Tauri0li&e protostar is still contracting, gaseous
material may still be falling onto it, accreting on its surface from the dis&*s inner edge.
"31#
6owever, that meaning should not be confused with the process of accretion forming the
planets. In this context, accretion refers to the process of cooled, solidified grains of dust
and ice orbiting the protostar in the protoplanetary dis&, colliding and stic&ing together
and gradually growing, up to and including the high0energy collisions between si3able
planetesimals.
"1#
In addition, the giant planets probably had accretion dis&s of their own, in the first
meaning of the word. The clouds of captured hydrogen and helium gas contracted, spun
up, flattened, and deposited gas onto the surface of each giant protoplanet, while solid
bodies within that dis& accreted into the giant planet*s regular moons.
")>#