similarities of encounter hypothesis and protoplanet hypothesis

These droplets could account for some asteroids. Montmerle T, Augereau J-C, Chaussidon M, et al (2006) Solar System Formation and Early Evolution: the First 100 Million Years. On the other hand, evolutionists have adhered to the theory the world was formed from clouds of dust and gases. Spectroscopic observations show that all planetary nebulae are expanding, and so the idea arose that planetary nebulae were caused by a star's outer layers being thrown into space at the end of its life. The first bodies of dust and gas brought together by gravity encounter other, smaller bodies and add them to their mass. 6: 185- 97. Reasoning of this sort led to the realization, puzzling to astronomers at the time, that Sirius B and 40 Eridani B must be very dense. Both rocky and gaseous planets have a similar growth model. According to scientist the Solar System started out as an enormous cloud of gas and dust. Herndon, J. Marvin. . Also, the Sun, although containing most of the mass in the solar system, has only a small fraction of the angular momentum. The null hypothesis is the default position that there is no association between the variables. There is also about 150 million asteroids and 3,406 comets also in the solar system. 6. He suggested the Moon was such a surviving core. Jupiters massive gravity further shaped the solar system and growth of the inner rocky planets. At any rate, in simple terms, the clumping together of protoplanets (planets in formation) eventually formed the planets. [dubious - discuss] Believed to have formed in the Solar System about 4.6 billion years ago, they aid study of its formation. The Encounter Hypothesis. Copernicus on the other hand held the belief that the universe revolved around the sun, or that the universe was heliocentric. [49] There was, however, no known method by which carbon-12 could be produced. [33] In this book, almost all major problems of the planetary formation process were formulated, and some of them were solved. The Sun, though it contains almost 99.9 percent of the system's mass, contains just 1 percent of its angular momentum,[9] meaning that the Sun should be spinning much more rapidly. The formation of terrestrial planets, comets, and asteroids involved disintegration, heating, melting, and solidification. The nebula then had an uneven distribution of gasses. Without a more detailed understanding of how planets actually form, it cannot be assumed that the events within the Orion Nebula are analogous to the events that led to the formation of the planets in the solar system. Stellar evolution stars exist because of gravity. Mars was a moon of Maldek. Dermot, ed, pp. This near-miss would have drawn large amounts of matter out of the Sun and the other star by their mutual tidal forces, which could have then condensed into planets. Lyttleton showed that terrestrial planets were too small to condense on their own and suggested that one very large proto-planet broke in two because of rotational instability, forming Jupiter and Saturn, with a connecting filament from which the other planets formed. 1734, (Principia) Latin: Opera Philosophica et Mineralia (English: Philosophical and Mineralogical Works), (Principia, Volume 1). It is one of the theories that explain how the planets were formed. In the disc, mass accumulated in multiple whirlpools due to friction. To early observers with low-resolution telescopes, M27 and subsequently discovered planetary nebulae somewhat resembled the gas giants, and William Herschel, the discoverer of Uranus, eventually coined the term 'planetary nebula' for them, although, as we now know, they are very different from planets. In addition to both being proposed in the 20th century, these hypotheses both involve a passing star. 2) In the field of astronomy, the earth-centered description of the planetary orbits was overthrown by the Copernican system, in which the sun was placed at the center of a series of concentric, circular planetary orbits. Icarus 153:338347. Isotopes of beryllium produced via fusion were too unstable to form carbon, and for three helium atoms to form carbon-12 was so unlikely as to have been impossible over the age of the Universe. Copernicus also only considered there to only be six planets, as he didnt count the moon like Ptolemy. Mercury was incompletely condensed, and a portion of its gases was stripped away and transported to the region between Mars and Jupiter, where it fused with in-falling oxidized condensate from the outer reaches of the Solar System and formed the parent material for ordinary chondrite meteorites, the Main-Belt asteroids, and veneer for the inner planets, especially Mars. , Which of the following statements is true about horizontal motion of a projectile motion? You also probably know that planets other than our own have moons, and the way to test to see whether or not something is true is by experimenting. Copernicus thought that the Sun was. Larger bodies (planetesimals) accrete rapidly with the aid of gravity. In this scheme, there are six principal planets: two terrestrial, Venus and Earth; two major, Jupiter and Saturn; and two outer, Uranus and Neptune, along with three lesser planets: Mercury, Mars, and Pluto. The nebular hypothesis is the idea that a spinning cloud of dust made of mostly light elements, called a nebula, flattened into a protoplanetary disk, and became a solar system consisting of a star with orbiting planets [12]. . We also acknowledge previous National Science Foundation support under grant numbers 1246120, 1525057, and 1413739. protoplanet, in astronomical theory, a hypothetical eddy in a whirling cloud of gas or dust that becomes a planet by condensation during formation of a solar system. The Protoplanet Hypothesis. In Fred Whipple's 1948 scenario,[4] a smoke cloud about 60,000 AU in diameter and with 1 solar mass (M) contracted and produced the Sun. Second, the stronger gravitational pull of these giant planets allowed them to collect large quantities of hydrogen and helium, which could not be collected by the weaker gravity of the smaller planets. The Protoplanet Hypothesis. Many stars, including the Sun, were formed within this collapsing cloud. Jupiters gravity may also explain Mars smaller mass, with the larger planet consuming material as it migrated from the inner to the outer edge of the solar system [15]. It differs from Laplace in that a magnetic torque occurred between the disk and the Sun, which came into effect immediately; otherwise, more and more matter would have been ejected, resulting in a massive planetary system exceeding the size of the existing one and comparable to the Sun. The star eventually grew larger and collected more dust and gas that collapsed into it. The ice giants Uranus and Neptune are composed of mostly methane ices and only about 20% hydrogen and helium gases. The solar system was created 4.6 billion years ago by a gravitational collapse. The Nebular Hypothesis is a theory that states that the solar system originated as a primeval nebula. While most of the material would have fallen back, part of it would remain in orbit. If the star's distance is known, its overall luminosity can also be estimated. Springer New York, pp 3995, 13. A later model, from 1940 and 1941, involved a triple star system, a binary plus the Sun, in which the binary merged and later split because of rotational instability and escaped from the system, leaving a filament that formed between them to be captured by the Sun. c. Horizontal motion is dependent on vertical motion. American chemist Harold Urey, who founded cosmochemistry, put forward a scenario[4] in 1951, 1952, 1956, and 1966 based largely on meteorites. As time passed, the cloud shrank under the pull of its own gravitation or was made to. The protoplanetary disk is a dense, rotating disk of gas and dust that surrounds a newborn star. The Jeans-Jeffreys tidal hypothesis, championed by James Jeans and Harold Jeffreys, explained the origin of the Solar System as a result of a close encounter between the Sun and a second star. There are two types of responses to decompression-driven planetary volume increases: cracks, which were formed to increase surface area, and folding, which created mountain ranges to accommodate changes in curvature. The moons, like the planets, originated as equatorial expulsions from their parent planets, with some shattering, leaving the rings, and the Earth was supposed to eventually expel another moon. Though having many things in common with nebular hypothesis this hypothesis has modern implement of states of matter and fluid. Following Apollo, in 1984, the giant impact hypothesis was composed, replacing the already-disproven binary accretion model as the most common explanation for the formation of the Moon.[3]. Jacot explained the differences between inner and outer planets and inner and outer moons through vortex behavior. To explain that volatile elements like mercury could be retained by the terrestrial planets, he postulated a moderately thick gas and dust halo shielding the planets from the Sun. The history of scientific thought about the formation and evolution of the Solar System began with the Copernican Revolution. Moulton and Chamberlin in 1904 originated the planetesimal hypothesis. These two locations are where most comets form and continue to orbit, and objects found here have relatively irregular orbits compared to the rest of the solar system. c. 0 m/s Later, this theory was modified, as measurements of the planets motions were found to be compatible with elliptical, not circular, orbits, and still later planetary motion was found to be derivable from Newton's laws. The reaction gave birth to our Sun. Pressure fell as gas was lost and diamonds were converted to graphite, while the gas became illuminated by the Sun. However, this scenario was weak in that practically all the final regularities are introduced as a prior assumption, and quantitative calculations did not support most of the hypothesizing. Another, the fission model, was developed by George Darwin (son of Charles Darwin), who noted that, as the Moon is gradually receding from the Earth at a rate of about 4 cm per year, so at one point in the distant past, it must have been part of the Earth but was flung outward by the momentum of Earth's thenmuch faster rotation. The impact would have melted Earth's crust, and the other planet's heavy core would have sunk inward and merged with Earth's. Bull. Protoplanets theory is the most popular theory that explained how the solar system formed. - studystoph.com b. compare and contrast nebular hypothesis and protoplanet hypothesis. A secondtheoryis called thenebular hypothesis. However, this was before the knowledge of Newton's theory of gravity, which explains that matter does not behave in this way. In a version a year later it was a supernova. [4], In 1937 and 1940, Raymond Lyttleton postulated that a companion star to the Sun collided with a passing star. Another issue with this hypothesis is that it does, The Protoplanet hypothesis and the Planetesimal hypothesis are different from this. The gas that formed the Solar System was slightly more massive than the Sun itself. Together, they created a hypothesis that begins with a cloud comprised of gas and dust. The Encounter Hypothesis suggests that the Solar System formed as a result of a near collision between a passing star and the Sun.. It is one of the theories that explain how the planets were formed. Immanuel Kant developed the nebular theory and was published in the universal natural history and theory of the heavens in 1755. The Protoplanet Hypothesis. [8] By the early 1980s, the nebular hypothesis in the form of SNDM had come back into favor, led by two major discoveries in astronomy. One of the earliest theories for the formation of the planets was called theencounter hypothesis. [52][53] In 1910, Henry Norris Russell, Edward Charles Pickering, and Williamina Fleming discovered that, despite being a dim star, 40 Eridani B was of spectral type A, or white. [59] This paradox was resolved by R. H. Fowler in 1926 by an application of newly devised quantum mechanics. In: Origin of the Solar System, Robert Jastrow and A. G. W. Cameron, eds., pp. About a hundred years later the protoplanet . The smaller part, moving faster relative to the centre of mass, could escape from the solar system, with most of the angular momentum. A few such floccules agglomerated, reached a critical mass . Van Flandern, T. 2007. While the unusual spectra of red giant stars had been known since the 19th century,[48] it was George Gamow who, in the 1940s, first understood that they were stars of roughly solar mass that had run out of hydrogen in their cores and had resorted to burning the hydrogen in their outer shells. 1963. The large cloud in the center eventually became the sun while the smaller clumps formed the planets, moons, comets and, In inspiring people to have the passion in understanding the universal laws that govern us all, Professor Stephen Hawking reminds us on his speech for his 70th birthday to remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet (enoch, 2012). There is therefore no obstacle to placing nuclei closer to each other than electron orbitalsthe regions occupied by electrons bound to an atomwould normally allow. In this scenario, a rogue star passes close to the Sun about 5 billion years ago. He also concluded that if a planet was closer to the sun the great the orbital speed it would have. In 1954, 1975, and 1978,[12] Swedish astrophysicist Hannes Alfvn included electromagnetic effects in equations of particle motions, and angular momentum distribution and compositional differences were explained. MetaRes. Safronov's ideas were further developed in the works of George Wetherill, who discovered runaway accretion. Academic Press. . Mon Not R Aston Soc Lett 425:L6L9, 14. Another flaw is the mechanism from which the disk turns into individual planets. For around 400-500 million years, these lithium, hydrogen, and helium particles floated around with other particles that either decayed or stuck . What's the difference and similarity between Nebular, Protoplanet, and Encounter hypothesis? The first one is the nebular hypothesis, created by Pierre-Simon de Laplace in 1796. As the solar condensation temperature when the disk was ejected could not be much more than 1,000K (730C; 1,340F), numerous refractories must have been solid, probably as fine smoke particles, which would have grown with condensation and accretion. However, in 1952, physicist Ed Salpeter showed that a short enough time existed between the formation and the decay of the beryllium isotope that another helium had a small chance to form carbon, but only if their combined mass/energy amounts were equal to that of carbon-12. [40][41][42], One other problem is the detailed features of the planets. [11] Along with many astronomers of the time, they came to believe the pictures of "spiral nebulas" from the Lick Observatory were direct evidence of the formation of planetary systems, which later turned out to be galaxies. In American astronomer Alastair G. W. Cameron's hypothesis from 1962 and 1963,[4] the protosun, with a mass of about 12 Suns and a diameter of around 100,000 AU, was gravitationally unstable, collapsed, and broke into smaller subunits. Also, oxygen isotopes in lunar rocks showed a marked similarity to those on Earth, suggesting that they formed at a similar location in the solar nebula. Planets form from compact masses made in whirlpools in the Protoplanet hypothesis, and planets are created from collisions of planetesimals in the Planetesimal hypothesis. The Solar System is located in the Milky Way Galaxy, which is a part of a galactic group under the Virgo Supercluster. Whereas, in protoplanet Hypothesis we get to know the present solar system and universe working. The Sun's gravity would have drawn material from the diffuse atmosphere of the protostar, which would then have collapsed to form the planets.[14]. Then, at a conference in Kona, Hawaii in 1984, a compromise model was composed that accounted for all of the observed discrepancies. what did nasa see on january 23 2021 encounter hypothesis proposed by. For comparison, 99% of the Solar System's mass is in the Sun, but 99% of its angular momentum is in the planets. Now, scattered materials are comets, asteroids, and meteoroids. << /Length 4 0 R /Filter /FlateDecode >> Wiley. a A part of the hypothesis, planetesimal accretion, was retained. Van Flandern, T. 1999. As the clumps of dust became bigger, they interacted with each othercolliding, sticking, and forming proto-planets. Instead, the orbits of the classical planets have various small inclinations with respect to the ecliptic. The method whereby the disk transforms into distinct planets. However, the Sun only has enough gravitational potential energy to power its luminosity by this mechanism for about 30 million yearsfar less than the age of the Earth. This model received favorable support for about 3 decades, but passed out of favor by the late '30s and was discarded in the '40s due to the realization it was incompatible with the angular momentum of Jupiter. Their luminosity, though, is very low, implying that they must be very small. The reason is because of inertia, the effect of an item of matter not changing without an outside force. However, it does not explain twinning, the low mass of Mars and Mercury, and the planetoid belts. Whereas, in protoplanet Hypothesis we get to know the present solar system and universe working. Planetesimals / p l n t s m l z / are solid objects thought to exist in protoplanetary disks and debris disks.Per the Chamberlin-Moulton planetesimal hypothesis, they are believed to form out of cosmic dust grains. However, it differed significantly from the other major catastrophic hypothesis of the twentieth century, the Chamberlin-Moulton planetesimal hypothesis.. As a result of a detailed mathematical analysis . Iwan P. Williams and Alan William Cremin[4] split the models between two categories: those that regard the origin and formation of the planets as being essentially related to the Sun, with the two formation processes taking place concurrently or consecutively, and those that regard the formation of the planets as being independent of the formation process of the Sun, the planets forming after the Sun becomes a normal star. Many theories have been proposed on how the Solar System existed, but none has been completely successful. The Nebular Hypothesis & Protoplanets The Sun forms from a collapsing cloud of cold interstellar gas and dust. Nature 475:206209. Some of the most intelligent astronomers have been discovering more and more since before the time of 500 B.C. Legal. Solar Nebular Hypothesis: our solar system formed out of the remains of a nebula that condensed into the sun, planets, and moons of our solar system . [8] American astronomer Henry Norris Russell also objected to the hypothesis by showing that it ran into problems with angular momentum for the outer planets, with the planets struggling to avoid being reabsorbed by the Sun.[10]. In Weizscker's model, a combination of the clockwise rotation of each vortex and the anti-clockwise rotation of the whole system could lead to individual elements moving around the central mass in Keplerian orbits, reducing energy dissipation due to overall motion. The challenge of the exploded planet hypothesis. [4], The vortex model of 1944,[4] formulated by the German physicist and philosopher Carl Friedrich von Weizscker, hearkens back to the Cartesian model by involving a pattern of turbulence-induced eddies in a Laplacian nebular disc. By the 16th century, astronomers began to note irregularities in the accepted model of the solar system. In Origin of the Solar System, S.F. To Hoyle, this indicated that they must have originated within the stars themselves. Four of these were helium-dominated, fluid, and unstable. Because of this, gravitational pull condensed. Impurities in the A-cloud formed Mars and the Moon (later captured by Earth), impurities in the B-cloud collapsed to form the outer planets, the C-cloud condensed into Mercury, Venus, Earth, the asteroid belt, moons of Jupiter, and Saturn's rings, while Pluto, Triton, the outer satellites of Saturn, the moons of Uranus, the Kuiper Belt, and the Oort cloud formed from the D-cloud. Encounter Hypothesis: . stream [3], While the co-accretion and capture models are not currently accepted as valid explanations for the existence of the Moon, they have been employed to explain the formation of other natural satellites in the Solar System. The first recorded use of the term "Solar System" dates from 1704. 137. [3] The rocks brought back from the Moon showed a marked decrease in water relative to rocks elsewhere in the Solar System and evidence of an ocean of magma early in its history, indicating that its formation must have produced a great deal of energy. Figure 1 shows the location of our Solar System in the Universe. Many also claim that much of the material from the impactor would have ended up in the Moon, meaning that the isotope levels would be different, but they are not. The filaments cooled into numerous, tiny, solid planetesimals and a few larger protoplanets. The abundance of elements peaked around the atomic number for iron, an element that could only have been formed under intense pressures and temperatures. Question: compare and contrast nebular hypothesis and protoplanet hypothesis. As the six were fluid, they left no trace. The Protoplanet and Planetesimal hypothesis also have similarities such as the date they were proposed. Urey postulated that these lunar-size bodies were destroyed by collisions, with the gas dissipating, leaving behind solids collected at the core, with the resulting smaller fragments pushed far out into space and the larger fragments staying behind and accreting into planets. a. The cloud began to spin because of the gravity. In J. Marvin Herndon's model,[24] How can ground water be a part of the water cycle, Examples of climate change in everyday life. xKs68&x,^hI\|QdfK)EoXx?$?.w?\r[ g>/.%~}XR_r^K&Aq+<=_s|C wu{g7]V_M.WVD_,u|yi+OjX];KKHeTkkn5=oxr8)L_qkVk Ia /,hK%BS$D+dY+W`t+c( C-eq0yl%f^ov=2*X-".O75V A collision happened and huge amount of . Later, particularly in the twentieth century, a variety of hypotheses began to build up, including the now-commonly accepted nebular hypothesis. Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like A hypothesis for the origin of the solar system in which rings of matter were spun off a contracting solar nebula is the: nebular hypothesis collision hypothesis protoplanet hypothesis asteroid hypothesis, The origin of the solar system began with a solar nebula that was: initially hot, but later cooled and contracted initially . An Introduction to Geology (Johnson, Affolter, Inkenbrandt, and Mosher), { "8.01:_Origin_of_the_Universe" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "8.02:_Origin_of_the_Solar_SystemThe_Nebular_Hypothesis" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "8.03:_Hadean_Eon" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "8.04:_Archean_Eon" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "8.05:_Proterozoic_Eon" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "8.06:_Paleozoic" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "8.07:_Mesozoic" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "8.08:_Cenozoic" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()" }, { "00:_Front_Matter" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "01:_Understanding_Science" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "02:_Plate_Tectonics" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "03:_Minerals" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "04:_Igneous_Processes_and_Volcanoes" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "05:_Weathering_Erosion_and_Sedimentary_Rocks" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "06:_Metamorphic_Rocks" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "07:_Geologic_Time" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "08:_Earth_History" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "09:_Crustal_Deformation_and_Earthquakes" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "10:_Mass_Wasting" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "11:_Water" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "12:__Coastlines" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "13:_Deserts" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "14:_Glaciers" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "15:_Global_Climate_Change" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "16:_Energy_and_Mineral_Resources" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()", "zz:_Back_Matter" : "property get [Map MindTouch.Deki.Logic.ExtensionProcessorQueryProvider+<>c__DisplayClass228_0.b__1]()" }, 8.2: Origin of the Solar SystemThe Nebular Hypothesis, [ "article:topic", "showtoc:no", "license:ccbyncsa", "authorname:johnsonaffolterinkenbmosher" ], https://geo.libretexts.org/@app/auth/3/login?returnto=https%3A%2F%2Fgeo.libretexts.org%2FBookshelves%2FGeology%2FBook%253A_An_Introduction_to_Geology_(Johnson_Affolter_Inkenbrandt_and_Mosher)%2F08%253A_Earth_History%2F8.02%253A_Origin_of_the_Solar_SystemThe_Nebular_Hypothesis, $ \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}}}$ $ \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{#1}}} $$\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}$ $ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$ $ \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}$ $ \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}$ $ \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}$ $ \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}$ $ \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}$ $ \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}$ $ \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}$ $ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$ $\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}$ $ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$ $ \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}$ $ \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}$ $ \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}$ $ \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}$ $ \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}$ $ \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}$ $ \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}$ $ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$$\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}$, Chris Johnson, Matthew D. Affolter, Paul Inkenbrandt, & Cam Mosher, Enough mass to have gravitational forces that force it to be rounded, Large enough to be in a cleared orbit, free of other planetesimals that should have been incorporated at the time the planet formed.