1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}

2: %\documentclass{emulateapj}

3: 

4: %\usepackage{showkeys}

5: 

6: \newcommand{\etal  }{{et al.} }

7: \newcommand{\msun}{\thinspace M_\odot}

8: \newcommand{\rsun}{\thinspace R_\odot}  

9: \newcommand{\vect}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath$#1$}}

10: \newcommand{\dfrac}[2]{{\displaystyle \frac{#1}{#2}}  }

11: \newcommand{\alfven}{Alfv\'{e}n}

12: \newcommand{\eqref}[1]{(\ref{#1})}

13: 

14: \def\lesssim{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$<$}}}}

15: \def\gtrsim{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$>$}}}}

16: 

17: \slugcomment{Accepted for Publication in ApJ}

18: 

19: \shorttitle{Orbit in a Protoplanetary Disk}

20: \shortauthors{Muto and Inutsuka}

21: 

22: 

23: \begin{document}

24: 

25: 

26: \title{Orbital Evolution of a Particle

27:  Interacting with a Single Planet in a Protoplanetary Disk}

28: 

29: 

30: \author{Takayuki Muto\altaffilmark{1} and Shu-ichiro Inutsuka}

31: \affil{Department of Physics, Kyoto University, \\

32: Kitashirakawa-oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8502, Japan}

33: \email{muto@tap.scphys.kyoto-u.ac.jp}

34: 

35: \altaffiltext{1}{JSPS Research Fellow}

36: 

37: 

38: \begin{abstract}

39: We investigate the motion of a particle around a low mass planet

40:  embedded in a non-turbulent gaseous disk.  We take into account the

41:  effect of the gas

42:  structure that is modified by the gravitational

43:  interaction between the planet.  We derive an analytic formula that

44:  describes the change of the semi-major axis of the particle due to the

45:  encounter with the planet using 

46:  local approximation in distant encounter regime.  Our final formula

47:  includes the effects of steady, axisymmetric radial gas 

48:  flow, the global gas pressure gradient in the disk, planet gravity, and

49:  the structure of the gas flow

50:  modified by the planet's gravity.   We compare

51:  the analytic results with numerical calculations, and indicate

52:  that our formula well describes the secular evolution of the dust

53:  particles' semi-major axes well, especially

54:  for small particles with large drag coefficient.  We discuss the

55:  conditions for dust gap opening around a low mass planet and radial

56:  distribution of dust particles.  Our formula may provide a

57:  useful tool for calculating radial distribution of particles

58:  in a disk around the planet.

59: \end{abstract}

60: 

61: \keywords{planet and satellites: formation --- solar system: formation

62: --- celestial mechanics --- methods: analytical}

63: 

64: 

65: 

66: \section{Introduction} \label{intro}

67: 

68: The motion of small particles in a gas disk has been investigated in

69: detail since this is essential for planet formation theory.  

70: In a number of work, an axisymmetric gas disk is assumed 

71: and the effects of the structure of the gas disk on

72: particle orbit are investigated, neglecting the effects of planet's

73: gravitational force (Adachi et al. 1976, Weidenschilling 1977).  Their

74: results show that particles with 

75: stopping timescale of the order of Kepler timescale migrate towards the

76: central star rapidly, thereby imposing a serious barrier on the formation

77: of planetesimals.

78: 

79: Although this poses a serious question on the formation of

80: planetesimals, there is another aspect of this fact in the formation of

81: gas giant core. 

82: Gas giant core should reach the critical mass to accrete nearby

83: gas rapidly (Mizuno et al. 1978), and its formation timescale 

84: seems to be very long (Pollack et al. 1993). 

85: If the global pressure gradient exerted on the gas disk will

86: force the particles to migrate towards the central star, the particles

87: at outer disk may reach the orbit of an already formed core and may

88: accrete onto it.  Kary et al. (1993) have shown that this process seems

89: to be possible but most of the particles may miss the planet since they

90: migrate very rapidly.  Their discussion is based on the three-body

91: problem including the effect of axisymmetric gas disk.

92: 

93: The assumption of axisymmetric gas disk is a simplification in order to

94: make the calculation tractable.  The planet gravitationally interacts

95: with the gas disk and changes the structure of the disk around it,

96: producing the spiral density wave (see e.g., Goldreich and Tremaine

97: 1979).  Only recently does appear the 

98: investigation of particle motion around 

99: the planet embedded in a gas disk, which fully takes into account

100: the structure around the planet (Paardekooper and Mellema 2004, 2006,

101: Paardekooper 2007, Fouchet et al. 2007, Lyra et al. 2008).

102:   For instance, Paardekooper and Mellema (2004, 2006)

103: and Paardekooper (2007) numerically

104: calculated the particle motion around a high mass planet in the

105: presence of a gas disk and discussed the accretion of the particles onto

106: the planet and the formation of gap of particles of different size.

107: They concluded that minimum mass of the planet that opens up a

108: dust gap was $0.05M_J$, thereby indicating the possibility of detecting

109: a low mass planet by future observations by observing a dust gap.

110: 

111: Many of such works involve numerical studies on particle motion.  

112: In this paper, we present an analytic investigation of the motion of

113: particles around a low mass planet embedded in a gas disk, taking into

114: account of the structure around the planet.

115:  This is the

116:  full analytic solution of a particle motion around the planet in which

117:  the structure of the gas disk is fully taken into account.

118:   We consider a vertically

119: averaged disk and perform two-dimensional analysis for simplicity.

120:   We use the results of

121: (quasi-)linear calculation of the gas structure around the planet and

122: calculate the distant encounter between a particle and a planet embedded

123: in a gaseous disk.  We derive a formula which describes the secular

124: change of the semi-major axis of the particle caused by the encounter

125: with the planet using Hill's equations.  

126: It is not possible to describe the resonant capture discussed

127: by Weidenschilling and Davis (1985) or Kary et al. (1993); however, we

128: take into account the structure of the gaseous disk that is modified by

129: the planet, which is not considered in most of the previous analytic

130: works.  Our 

131: paper is complementary with previous numerical studies in two respects. 

132: Firstly, our analysis is focused on low mass planet, and secondly, our

133: treatment is analytic.  It is challenging to follow numerically the

134: motion of dust particles embedded in a gas disk for long timescale

135: (e.g., $10^5$ Kepler time), solving gas and the motion of dust

136: simultaneously. 

137: Therefore, analytic treatment may be necessary in order to understand

138: the secular motion of dust particles.  Moreover, basic physical

139: processes in the problem become clear by analytic treatment.

140: 

141: %%%%%%%Modified in Revision%%%%%%%%

142: The plan of this paper is as follows.  In Section \ref{analytic}, we

143: show analytic treatment of the problem and derive the

144: formula for the evolution of semi-major axis, equation

145: \eqref{deltab_final}.  This formula includes the effects of global

146: pressure gradient of gas disk, steady, axisymmetric mass accretion flow

147: of the gas, gravitational force from the planet, and

148: the gas velocity structure modified by the planet.  We then compare our

149: results with numerical calculations in Sections \ref{numerical} and

150: \ref{global}, and the limitations of our analytic approach are

151: discussed. 

152: In Section \ref{dustgap}, we discuss the conditions for dust gap

153: formation and long-term behavior of dust particles whose orbits are

154: close to an embedded planet.  Section

155: \ref{summary} is for summary and future prospects.

156: %%%%%%%Modified in Revision end%%%%%%%%

157: 

158: We expect that our results, equation \eqref{deltab_final}, can be used

159: as a tool for estimate radial motion of the particle

160: in a disk around the planet, since this is

161: written in an analytic form.  It may be possible to calculate the radial

162: distribution of particles of various sizes using this formula and

163: derive, for example, the opacity of the disk.  We recommend readers

164: who need only the final results of the particle motion just to refer

165: equation \eqref{deltab_final} directly and go to Section

166: \ref{discuss:dustdistribution} where we demonstrate the calculation of

167: radial dust distribution around a planet.

168: 

169: %%%%%%%Added in Revision%%%%%%%

170: Before proceeding to the details of calculations, we note that there

171: are two relevant length scales in the problem at hand: pressure scale

172: height $H$ of the gas disk and Hill's radius of the planet, $r_{\rm H}$.  

173: Pressure scale height is an important quantity for the

174: structure of gas modified by the gravitational force of the planet,

175: while Hill's radius is important for the orbit of particles.  

176:   Pressure scale height that is given by sound speed of the gas $c$

177:   divided by Keplerian 

178: angular velocity and Hill's radius of the planet are related by  

179: \begin{equation}

180:  \dfrac{r_{\rm H}}{H} 

181:   \sim \dfrac{r_{\rm p}}{H}  

182:    \left( \dfrac{M_{\rm p}}{M_{\rm c}}  \right)^{1/3}

183:   = \left( \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{Hc^2} \right)^{1/3},

184: \end{equation}

185: where $r_{\rm p}$ is the semi-major axis of the planet, $M_{\rm p}$ is

186: the mass of the planet, and $M_{\rm c}$ is the mass of the central star.

187: For low mass planets 

188: considered in this paper, $r_{\rm H}/H$ is smaller than unity.

189: %%%%%%%Added in Revision end%%%%%%%

190: 

191: 

192: \section{Analytic Consideration} \label{analytic}

193: 

194: In this section, we analytically investigate the particle motion under

195: the influence of gravitational force by the protoplanet and gas drag

196: using local approximation.  We show that particles with friction time of

197: the order Kepler time will migrate towards the planet because of the gas

198: drag, although gravitational scattering tends to repel the particle from

199: the planet.  This mechanism is different from

200: the inward migration of dust particles caused by the velocity difference

201: between the gas and dust [see e.g., Adachi et al. (1976) or

202: Weidenschilling (1977)].  We also derive the effects of the modification

203: of gas velocity due to the gravitational force of the planet.

204: 

205: \subsection{Basic Equations}

206: \label{subsec:analytic_equation}

207: 

208: We use Hill's approximation to investigate the encounter between the

209: particle and the planet.  We consider the motion only in $(x,y)$ plane

210: where $x$ is in radial direction and $y$ is in the azimuthal direction.

211: We assume the planet is fixed at the origin $(x,y)=(0,0)$ in this

212: coordinate and neglect the mass of the particle.  We write the velocity

213: of the gas $\vect{v}_{\rm g}$ by

214: \begin{equation}

215:  \vect{v}_{\rm g} = -\dfrac{3}{2} \Omega_{\rm p} x \vect{e}_{y} 

216:   + \delta \vect{v}_{\rm g},

217: \end{equation}

218: where $\Omega_{\rm p}$ is the Keplerian angular velocity of the planet

219: and $\vect{e}_y$ is the unit vector in the $y$-direction. 

220:  The first term

221: represents the Keplerian motion around the central star and the second

222: term $\delta \vect{v}_{\rm g}$ 

223: represents the deviation from this motion, which,

224: for instance, may be caused by the global pressure gradient of the

225: disk.

226: 

227: The equations of motion of the particle are

228: \begin{equation}

229:  \ddot{x} - 2\Omega_{\rm p} \dot{y} = 3 \Omega_{\rm p}^2 x - \nu \dot{x}

230:   + F_x

231:   \label{EoM_x}

232: \end{equation}

233: \begin{equation}

234:  \ddot{y} + 2\Omega_{\rm p} \dot{x} = - \nu \left( \dot{y} + \dfrac{3}{2}

235:   \Omega_{\rm p} x \right) +  F_y

236: \label{EoM_y}

237: \end{equation}

238: where $\nu$ stands for the drag coefficient. 

239: %%%%%%Added in revision%%%%%%%%

240:  The quantity $\nu$ is a reciprocal of the stopping time of a particle.

241:  Note that 

242:  there are various notations for this parameter.  In Weidenschilling

243:  (1977), stopping time is denoted by $t_e$ so $\nu$ in this paper is

244:  equal to $1/t_e$.  In Adachi et al. (1976),

245:  stopping time corresponds to their $A$ times gas density times relative

246:  velocity. 

247: %%%%%%Added in revision end%%%%%%%%

248: We write the sum of

249: the force exerted by the planet and the part of the friction force

250: caused by the non-Keplerian motion of the gas by $\vect{F}$,

251: \begin{equation}

252:  \vect{F}(x,y) = \nabla \frac{GM_{\rm p}}{\sqrt{x^2 + y^2}}

253:   + \nu \delta \vect{v}_{\rm g} (x,y) ,

254:   \label{force_general}

255: \end{equation}

256: where $G$ is the gravitational constant and $M_{\rm p}$ denotes the mass

257: of the planet.

258: 

259: We give a brief note on the relationship between the dust size and drag

260: coefficient.  In this paper, we use the constant drag coefficient $\nu$

261: for mathematical convenience.  The dust size $d$ and the drag

262: coefficient $\nu$ are related by $\nu \propto d^{-1}$ for Epstein law

263: and  $\nu \propto d^{-2}$ for Stokes law.  Simple relationship between

264: the dust size and drag coefficient may be given by

265: \begin{eqnarray}

266:  \label{draglaw}

267:  \dfrac{\nu}{\Omega_{\rm p}} =

268:   \left\{

269:   \begin{array}{cc}

270:    10^4 \left( \dfrac{\rho_0}{10^{-9} \mathrm{g/cm}^3} \right)  

271:     \left( \dfrac{d}{1\mathrm{cm}} \right)^{-1}   &

272:     \dfrac{d}{1\mathrm{cm}} < \dfrac{10^{-9} \mathrm{g/cm}^3}{\rho_0}

273:     \\[15pt] 

274:    10^4 \left( \dfrac{d}{1\mathrm{cm}} \right)^{-2}   &

275:     \dfrac{10^{-9} \mathrm{g/cm}^3}{\rho_0} < \dfrac{d}{1\mathrm{cm}}

276:   \end{array}

277:   \right.

278: \end{eqnarray}

279: where $\rho_0$ is the background density and $d$ is the size of the

280: particle.  Figure \ref{fig:size_drag} shows the relationship between

281: dust size and drag coefficient given by this equation for

282: $\rho_0=10^{-8}\mathrm{gcm}^{-3}$, $10^{-10}\mathrm{gcm}^{-3}$, and

283: $10^{-12}\mathrm{gcm}^{-3}$. 

284: 

285: The assumption of constant drag coefficient is not true for large bodies

286: whose drag force is proportional to 

287: the square of the velocity difference.  However, we expect that the

288: results are qualitatively similar even for large bodies.  

289: 

290: We neglect the effects of gravitational potential caused by gas disk.

291: It is a good approximation for non-self-gravitating disk as shown in

292: Section \ref{subsec:db_spiral}.

293: 

294: In the absence of the planet and the friction force, the particle

295: motion is the Keplerian motion around the central star.  In our setup,

296: this is represented by four orbital elements $(b,h,k,y_0)$,

297: \begin{equation}

298:  x(t) = b + r_{\rm p} h \cos (\Omega_{\rm p} t) + r_{\rm p} k \sin

299:   (\Omega_{\rm p} t)

300:   \label{orbit_x}

301: \end{equation}

302: \begin{equation}

303:  y(t) = y_0 - \dfrac{3}{2} b \Omega_{\rm p} t - 2 r_{\rm p} h \sin

304:   (\Omega_{\rm p} t) + 2 r_{\rm p} k \cos (\Omega_{\rm p} t) .

305:   \label{orbit_y}

306: \end{equation}

307: Physically, $b$ is the difference of orbital semi-major axis between the

308: planet and the particle, $h$ and $k$ are quantities related to the

309: orbital eccentricity, and $y_0$ is related to the initial azimuthal

310: position of the particle.

311: 

312: We calculate the evolution of the orbital

313: elements caused by the planet's gravitational force and the friction due

314: to the gas.  The time evolution of the osculating elements is given by

315: \begin{equation}

316:  \dot{b} = \nu r_{\rm p} \left[ h \cos (\Omega_{\rm p} t) + k \sin

317: 			  (\Omega_{\rm p} t) \right] +

318:  \dfrac{2}{\Omega_{\rm p}} F_y

319:  \label{eq_b}

320: \end{equation}

321: \begin{equation}

322:  \dot{h} = -\nu h 

323:   - \dfrac{1}{r_{\rm p} \Omega_{\rm p}} 

324:   \left[ F_x \sin (\Omega_{\rm p} t) + 2 F_y \cos (\Omega_{\rm p} t)  \right]

325:  \label{eq_h}

326: \end{equation}

327: \begin{equation}

328:  \dot{k} = -\nu k 

329:   + \dfrac{1}{r_{\rm p} \Omega_{\rm p}} 

330:   \left[ F_x \cos (\Omega_{\rm p} t) - 2 F_y \sin (\Omega_{\rm p} t)

331:   \right] .

332:  \label{eq_k}

333: \end{equation}

334: 

335: \subsection{Change of Semi-Major Axis by Distant Encounter: General

336:   Treatment}

337: \label{subsec:db_formulation}

338: 

339: We now solve equations \eqref{eq_b}-\eqref{eq_k}.  We assume that the

340: particle is in circular orbit initially:

341: $h(t=-\infty)=k(t=-\infty)=0$.  We derive the change of orbital

342: semi-major axis $\Delta b=b(t=\infty)-b(t=-\infty)$ by the encounter.

343: 

344: The formal solutions

345: of equations \eqref{eq_h} and \eqref{eq_k} are given by

346: \begin{equation}

347:  h(t) = - \dfrac{1}{r_{\rm p} \Omega_{\rm p}} \int_{0}^{\infty} du 

348:   e^{-\nu u} \left\{ F_x(t-u) \sin [ \Omega_{\rm p}(t-u) ] + 2F_y(t-u) 

349:    \cos [ \Omega_{\rm p} (t-u) ]  \right\}

350:   \label{sol_h}

351: \end{equation}

352: \begin{equation}

353:  k(t) = \dfrac{1}{r_{\rm p} \Omega_{\rm p}} \int_{0}^{\infty} du 

354:   e^{-\nu u} \left\{ F_x(t-u) \cos [ \Omega_{\rm p}(t-u) ] - 2F_y(t-u) 

355:    \sin [ \Omega_{\rm p} (t-u) ]  \right\} ,

356:   \label{sol_k}

357: \end{equation}

358: where $F_x (t)$ denotes $F_x (x(t),y(t))$ where $(x(t),y(t))$ is

359: the location of the particle at time $t$ given by equations

360: \eqref{orbit_x} and \eqref{orbit_y} and so for $F_y$.

361: Substituting equations \eqref{sol_h} and \eqref{sol_k} into equation

362: \eqref{eq_b}, we find

363: \begin{eqnarray}

364: &  \Delta b &\equiv \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dot{b}(t) dt \nonumber \\ 

365: && = \dfrac{\nu}{\Omega_{\rm p}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt

366:  \int_{0}^{\infty} du 

367:  e^{-\nu u} \left\{ F_x(t-u) \sin(\Omega_{\rm p} u) - 2F_y(t-u) \cos

368: 	     (\Omega_{\rm p} u)  \right\} \nonumber \\

369:  && \ \ \ + \dfrac{2}{\Omega_{\rm p}}

370:  \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt F_y(t)

371: \end{eqnarray}

372: Changing the integration variable $t \to t-u$ in the first integral of

373: the second line and using the formula

374: \begin{equation}

375:  \int_{0}^{\infty} du e^{-\nu u} \cos (\Omega_{\rm p} u) =

376:   \dfrac{\nu}{\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2}

377: \end{equation}

378: and

379: \begin{equation}

380:  \int_{0}^{\infty} du e^{-\nu u} \sin (\Omega_{\rm p} u) =

381:   \dfrac{\Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2},

382: \end{equation}

383: we find

384: \begin{equation}

385:  \Delta b = \dfrac{\nu}{\nu^2 + \Omega_{\rm p}^2}

386:   \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F_x(t)dt + 2 \dfrac{\Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu^2 +

387:   \Omega_{\rm p}^2} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F_y(t) dt

388:   \label{deltab_integral}

389: \end{equation}

390: 

391: This equation formally describes the amount of change of semi-major

392: axis.  We note that the integration with respect to $t$ must be

393: performed along the particle's trajectory.

394: The force $\vect{F}$ consists of two parts [see equation

395: \eqref{force_general}].

396: One is the gravitational force of the planet and the other is the

397: non-Keplerian motion of the gas velocity.  We now see these

398: effects separately.

399: 

400: \subsection{Planet Encounter}

401: \label{subsec:db_planet}

402: 

403: First, we consider the change of the semi-major axis caused by the

404: planet.  We assume that the trajectory of the particle is close to

405: circular orbit.  We approximate $F_x$ by

406: \begin{equation}

407:  F_x \sim - \mathrm{sgn}(b) \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{b^2}

408:   \dfrac{1}{( 1+(9/4)\Omega_{\rm p}t^2 )^{3/2}} .

409: \end{equation}

410: With this approximation, we obtain

411: \begin{equation}

412:  \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F_x(t) dt = - \mathrm{sgn}(b) \dfrac{4GM_{\rm

413:   p}}{3b^2}.

414:   \label{fx_integral}

415: \end{equation}

416: For the integration of $F_y$, we can use the well-known result of

417: restricted three-body problem (see e.g., Goldreich \& Tremaine 1980,

418: H\'{e}non \& Petit 1986, or Hasegawa \& Nakazawa 1990).  The result

419: is 

420: \begin{equation}

421:  \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F_y(t) dt = \dfrac{64}{243} \dfrac{G^2 M_{\rm

422:   p}^2}{b^5 \Omega_{\rm p}^3} \left[ K_1\left(\dfrac{2}{3}\right) + 2

423: 			       K_0 \left(\dfrac{2}{3}\right) \right]^2,

424:  \label{fy_integral}

425: \end{equation}

426: where $K_0$ and $K_1$ are modified Bessel function of zeroth and first

427: order.  The derivation of this equation is outlined in Appendix

428: \ref{App:fy_int}.

429: 

430: Substituting equations \eqref{fx_integral} and \eqref{fy_integral} into

431: equation \eqref{deltab_integral}, we obtain

432: \begin{equation}

433:  \Delta b = -\mathrm{sgn}(b) 4 \dfrac{r_{\rm H}^3}{b^2} \dfrac{\nu

434:   \Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2} + \alpha \dfrac{r_{\rm

435:   H}^6}{b^5} \dfrac{\Omega_{\rm p}^2}{\nu^2 + \Omega_{\rm p}^2},

436:   \label{deltab_planet}

437: \end{equation}

438: where $r_{\rm H}$ is the Hill's radius of the planet defined by

439: \begin{equation}

440:  r_{\rm H} = \left( \dfrac{M_{\rm p}}{3 M_{\ast}} \right)^{1/3}

441:   r_{\rm p} 

442: \end{equation}

443: and $\alpha$ is a numerical factor

444: \begin{equation}

445:  \alpha \equiv \dfrac{128}{27} 

446:   \left[ K_1\left(\dfrac{2}{3} \right) +

447: 	  2K_0 \left( \dfrac{2}{3} \right) \right]^2 = 30.094

448: \end{equation}

449: 

450: The second term of equation \eqref{deltab_planet} represents the effect

451: of gravitational scattering.  The particle and the planet tends to repel

452: each other by  

453: mutual gravitational interaction, which is a well-known result of

454: restricted three-body problem.  This effect remains when drag force 

455: vanishes ($\nu \to 0$).  When there is no drag force, the

456: gravitational interaction between the planet and the particle results in

457: the excitation of eccentricity and the difference in semi-major axes of

458: the two increases since Jacobi energy must be conserved in the absence

459: of any dissipative force.

460: 

461: When friction force is large, gravitational

462: scattering is ineffective since the gas drag enforces the particle to

463: move with the fluid element.  The first term of the equation

464: \eqref{deltab_planet} shows that the orbits of the 

465: planet and the particle tend to attract each other and this is most

466: efficient when $\Omega_{\rm p} \sim \nu$.  The intuitive

467: explanation of this effect is as follows.  When the particle feels the

468: gravitational force of the planet, it is attracted towards the planet's

469: position at first.  Then, when the gas drag is effective, the gas

470: enforces the particle to stay at the Kepler orbit at the location where

471: the particle is attracted, resulting in the attraction of the semi-major

472: axes of the particle and the planet.  If the drag force is taken into

473: account, the semi-major axis difference between the planet and the

474: particle can shrink since Jacobi energy is not necessarily conserved.

475: 

476: Since the attraction of the semi-major axes of the particle and

477: the planet in the presence of drag force represented by the first term

478: of equation \eqref{deltab_planet} is proportional

479: to $b^{-2}$ at large $b$,

480:  this overwhelms the effect of scattering represented by the

481: second term, which is proportional to $b^{-5}$.  Therefore, we conclude

482: that particles far away from the planet are attracted towards the planet

483: when the gas velocity equals Keplerian rotation velocity.

484: 

485: In the vicinity of the planet, it is expected that gravitational

486: scattering is more effective since this effect increases as $b^{-5}$.

487: The value of $b$ where these two effects are comparable is given by

488: $\Delta b=0$, that is

489: \begin{equation}

490:  |b| \sim 1.96 \left(\dfrac{\Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu} \right)^{1/3} 

491:   r_{\rm H}.

492:   \label{b_eq_grav}

493: \end{equation}

494: This indicates that particles with $\nu>\Omega_{\rm p}$ may move

495: towards the planet even in the absence of the global

496: pressure gradient.

497: 

498: 

499: \subsection{Non-Keplerian Rotation of Gas Disk due to Pressure Gradient}

500: \label{subsec:db_pressure}

501: 

502: In this subsection, we consider the change of the semi-major axis caused

503: by the effect of non-Keplerian rotation of the gas, which is due to the

504: presence of global pressure gradient.  The result of this

505: section is already derived by previous studies such as Adachi et

506: al. (1976) or Weidenschilling (1977), but we briefly show the results in

507: this formulation for completeness.

508: 

509: We parameterize the degree of non-Keplerian rotation by $\eta$ and write

510: the velocity difference $\delta \vect{v}_{\rm g}$ by

511: \begin{equation}

512:  \delta \vect{v}_{\rm g} = \eta v_{\rm p} \vect{e}_{y} = \mathrm{const},

513:   \label{parameter_nonkepler}

514: \end{equation}

515: where $v_{\rm p}$ is the rotation velocity of the planet around the

516: central star, $v_{\rm p} = r_{\rm p} \Omega_{\rm p}$.  The parameter

517: $\eta$ is non-dimensional and its magnitude is the order of the square

518: of the disk aspect ratio.  This is negative for the disk with negative

519: pressure gradient.

520: 

521: Since $\delta \vect{v}_{\rm g}$ is constant, it is easy to integrate

522: \eqref{deltab_integral} to obtain

523: \begin{equation}

524:  \Delta b = 2 \eta v_{\rm p} T \dfrac{\nu \Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu^2 +

525:   \Omega_{\rm p}^2},

526:   \label{deltab_nonkepler}

527: \end{equation}

528: where $T$ is the time taken for the particle to cross the box.  As

529: is well-known, this effect is most efficient for the particle with

530: $\nu\sim\Omega_{\rm p}$.

531: 

532: 

533: \subsection{Steady Accretion Flow}

534: 

535: In this subsection, we consider the change of the semi-major axis caused

536: by the steady accretion (or deccretion) flow.  This may be modeled by

537: the constant axisymmetric radial velocity $\delta v_x$.  We parameterize

538: the radial velocity by non-dimensional factor $\zeta$ as follows,

539: \begin{equation}

540:  \delta \vect{v}_{\rm g} = \zeta v_{\rm p} \vect{e}_x = \mathrm{const}.

541:   \label{parameter_accretion}

542: \end{equation}

543: The parameter $\zeta$ denotes the ratio between the radial flow velocity

544: and the Kepler velocity.  If the dissipation of the gaseous nebula is

545: due to the gas accretion, the sign of $\zeta$ is negative and its

546: magnitude is the order of $10^{-6}$, which

547: is indicated from observation (see, e.g., Haisch et al. 2001).  

548: Drag force due to the gas is given by $\nu \delta \vect{v}_{\rm g}$ and

549: therefore, using equation \eqref{deltab_integral}, we

550: find

551: \begin{equation}

552:  \Delta b = \zeta v_{\rm p} T \dfrac{\nu^2}{\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2} .

553:   \label{deltab_accretion}

554: \end{equation}

555: We note that the steady accretion flow effect is important for small

556: particles, which have large drag coefficient $\nu$, since such particles

557: move in the same way as the gas flow.

558: 

559: 

560: \subsection{Non-Keplerian Rotation of Gas due to the Presence of the

561:   Planet}

562: \label{subsec:db_spiral}

563: 

564: In this section, we consider the change of the orbital semi-major axis

565: of the particle caused by the deviation of the gas velocity from

566: Keplerian rotation velocity due to the presence of the planet. 

567: In this section, $\delta \vect{v}_{\rm g}$ is caused by the

568: gravitational interaction between gas and the embedded planet, in

569: contrast to the previous sections.  We show that only axisymmetric

570: structure of the disk causes the change of the semi-major axis of the

571: particle.  

572: 

573: In order to calculate the velocity perturbation caused by the planet, we

574: solve vertically averaged Euler equations using local shearing-sheet

575: approximation:

576: \begin{eqnarray}

577: \label{EoC_hydro}

578: & \dfrac{\partial \Sigma}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\Sigma \,

579: \vect{v}) =  0,\\

580: \label{EoM_hydro}

581: & \dfrac{\partial \vect{v}}{\partial t} + (\vect{v} \cdot \nabla)

582:  \vect{v} = 3\Omega_{\rm p}^2 x \vect{e}_x 

583: - \dfrac{c^2}{\Sigma} \nabla \Sigma 

584:  - \nabla \psi_{\rm p} - 2 \Omega_{\rm p} (\vect{e}_z \times \vect{v}), 

585: \end{eqnarray}

586: where $\Sigma$ denotes the surface density, $\vect{v}$ is the gas

587: velocity, $c$ is the sound speed, and $\Omega_{\rm p}$ is the Keplerian

588: angular velocity of the planet.  We assume an isothermal disk, where $c$

589: is constant, for simplicity.  

590: The gravitational potential of the

591: planet, $\psi_{\rm p}$ is given by

592: \begin{equation}

593:  \psi_{\rm p} = -\dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2+\epsilon^2}},

594: \end{equation}

595: where $\epsilon$ is the softening parameter.

596: Taking the rotation of the equation of motion, we obtain the equation

597: for vorticity,

598: \begin{equation}

599:  \left( \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} + \vect{v}\cdot\nabla  \right)

600:  \left[ \dfrac{1}{\Sigma} \left\{ \dfrac{\partial v_y}{\partial x}

601: 		   - \dfrac{\partial v_x}{\partial y} 

602: 		   + 2\Omega_{\rm p} \right\} \right] = 0 .

603:  \label{EoV_hydro}

604: \end{equation}

605: 

606: For small mass planets we are interested in this paper, it is possible

607: to calculate the velocity perturbation by linear analysis.  However, as

608: shown later, it is necessary to calculate the flow up to the second

609: order in order to obtain the correct results for the particle motion.

610: We assume that background surface density $\Sigma_0$ is constant and

611: background gas is rotating with Kepler velocity 

612: $\vect{v}_0=-(3/2)\Omega_{\rm p}x\vect{e}_y$.  We neglect the effect of

613: the global pressure gradient or steady mass accretion since it is

614: calculated separately in the previous subsections.

615: 

616: The first order perturbation of the flow is caused by the planet

617: gravity.  We denote the first order perturbation of physical variables

618: by superscript $(1)$.  The linearization of equations

619: \eqref{EoC_hydro} and \eqref{EoM_hydro} are

620: \begin{eqnarray}

621: \label{EoC_hydro_lin}

622: & \left(\dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} - \dfrac{3}{2}

623:   \Omega_{\rm p} x \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \right) \dfrac{\delta

624:  \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} + \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta v_x^{(1)}

625:  + \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \delta v_y^{(1)} = 0 \\

626: \label{EoMx_hydro_lin}

627: & \left(\dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} - \dfrac{3}{2}

628:   \Omega_{\rm p} x \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \right) \delta v_x^{(1)}

629: - 2 \Omega_{\rm p} \delta v_y^{(1)} = -c^2 \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x}

630: \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} 

631: - \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \psi_{\rm p} \\

632: \label{EoMy_hydro_lin}

633: & \left(\dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} - \dfrac{3}{2}

634:   \Omega_{\rm p} x \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \right) \delta v_y^{(1)}

635: + \dfrac{1}{2} \Omega_{\rm p} \delta v_x^{(1)} 

636:  = -c^2 \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \dfrac{\delta

637:  \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} 

638:  - \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \psi_{\rm p} .

639: \end{eqnarray}

640: Assuming that vorticity is not created by the formation of the planet,

641: we have

642: \begin{equation}

643:  \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \delta v_x^{(1)} -

644:   \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} 

645:   \delta v_y^{(1)} + \dfrac{1}{2} \Omega_{\rm p} \dfrac{\delta

646:   \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} =0 ,

647:   \label{vorticity}

648: \end{equation}

649: see, e.g., Narayan et al. (1987).

650: Note that $\Sigma_0$ appears only in the form of 

651: $\delta \Sigma^{(1)} / \Sigma_0$

652: and therefore, this value itself does not depend on the background

653: surface density.

654: The source term of these equations is given by planet potential,

655: $\psi_{\rm p}$ so the perturbation is proportional to the planet mass

656: $M_{\rm p}$.  For homogeneous ($\psi_{\rm p}=0$) equations, only

657: dimensional parameters are $c$ and $\Omega_{\rm p}$.  Taking 

658: $\Omega_{\rm p}^{-1}$ as a unit of time and $H=c/\Omega_{\rm p}$ as a

659: unit of length, homogeneous equations become scale free. 

660: Since the amplitude of the perturbation is proportional to the source

661: term, which is $\psi_{\rm p}$ in this set of equations, the

662: perturbation amplitude scales with $\psi_{\rm p}/c^2$, in other words, 

663: \begin{equation}

664:  \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} \propto \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{H c^2} 

665:   \label{amp_order}

666: \end{equation}

667: as shown by Tanaka et al. (2002).  Once we know the perturbation amplitude

668: of a specific value of $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2$, we can easily obtain the actual

669: amplitude of density perturbation $\delta \Sigma$ for different

670: background density, protoplanet mass, sound speed and so on.  Linear

671: calculation shows that the coefficient of proportionality of equation

672: \eqref{amp_order} is the order of unity.

673: 

674: The first order perturbation becomes a source of second order

675: perturbations through non-linear terms of basic equations.  We denote

676: the second order perturbation by superscript $(2)$.  The set of second

677: order perturbation equations is

678: \begin{eqnarray}

679: \label{EoC_hydro_2nd}

680: & \left(\dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} - \dfrac{3}{2}

681:   \Omega_{\rm p} x \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \right) \dfrac{\delta

682:  \Sigma^{(2)}}{\Sigma_0} + \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta v_x^{(2)}

683:  + \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \delta v_y^{(2)} \nonumber \\

684: & \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 

685:  = - \left[ \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \left( \delta \Sigma^{(1)}

686: 					  \delta v_x^{(1)} \right)

687:   + \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \left( \delta \Sigma^{(1)} \delta

688: 			       v_y^{(1)} \right) 

689:   \right] \\

690: \label{EoMx_hydro_2nd}

691: & \left(\dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} - \dfrac{3}{2}

692:   \Omega_{\rm p} x \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \right) \delta v_x^{(2)}

693: - 2 \Omega_{\rm p} \delta v_y^{(2)} + c^2 \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x}

694: \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(2)}}{\Sigma_0}  \nonumber \\

695: & \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 

696:  = c^2 \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x}

697: \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} - \delta v_x^{(1)}

698: \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta v_x^{(1)} - \delta v_y^{(1)}

699: \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \delta v_x^{(1)} \\

700: \label{EoMy_hydro_2nd}

701: & \left(\dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} - \dfrac{3}{2}

702:   \Omega_{\rm p} x \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \right) \delta v_y^{(2)}

703: + \dfrac{1}{2} \Omega_{\rm p} \delta v_x^{(2)} 

704:  + c^2 \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \dfrac{\delta

705:  \Sigma^{(2)}}{\Sigma_0}  \nonumber \\

706: & \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 

707:  = c^2 \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y}

708: \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} - \delta v_x^{(1)}

709: \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta v_y^{(1)} - \delta v_y^{(1)}

710: \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \delta v_y^{(1)} .

711: \end{eqnarray}

712: The second-order vorticity equation is

713: \begin{equation}

714:  \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \delta v_x^{(2)} -

715:   \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} 

716:   \delta v_y^{(2)} + \dfrac{1}{2} \Omega_{\rm p} \dfrac{\delta

717:   \Sigma^{(2)}}{\Sigma_0} =

718:  - \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} 

719:  \left[ \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta v_y^{(1)} -

720:   \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \delta v_x^{(1)}

721:   \right] + \dfrac{1}{4} \left( \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0}

722: 			 \right)^2 .

723: \label{vorticity_2nd}

724: \end{equation}

725: Since the first order perturbation scales with $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2$ (see

726: equation \eqref{amp_order}), it is clear that the second order

727: perturbation scales with $(GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2)^2$. 

728: We assume that the perturbation is stationary with respect to the planet

729: so in the corotating frame with the planet considered in this

730: subsection, $\partial/\partial t = 0$. 

731: 

732: %%%%%%%%%%%%%moved to later section in revision%%%%%%%%%

733: % In order to find the spiral

734: %pattern produced by the planet, we numerically integrate 

735: %equations \eqref{EoC_hydro_lin}-\eqref{EoMy_hydro_lin} using the Fourier

736: %transform methods presented by Goodman and Rafikov (2001).  This method

737: %is particularly useful in calculating the gravitational potential

738: %produced by the density fluctuation. 

739: %We fix the spatial resolution

740: % (therefore, the maximum wave number in Fourier space)

741: %$(\Delta x/H, \Delta y/H)$ to be 

742: %$(9.8 \times 10^{-3}, 7.8 \times 10^{-2} )$, which is enough to resolve

743: % the effective Lindblad resonance (see e.g., Artymowicz 1993).  We fix

744: % the box size in $y$-direction such that $-80H<y<80H$ and impose a

745: % periodic boundary condition.  For $x$-direction, the

746: % resolution in Fourier space in $k_x$ direction is varied from $10^4$ to

747: % $10^6$ according to $k_y$ in order 

748: % to resolve very fast oscillation at $k_x \gg k_y$.  We also use the

749: % linear window function given by Goodman and Rafikov (2001).

750: % We set softening parameter $\epsilon$ to be $0.01H$.   This numerical

751: % data is used in integrating the particle orbits in section

752: % \ref{numerical}. 

753: %%%%%%%%%%%%%moved to later section in revision end%%%%%%%%%

754: 

755: We now see equations \eqref{EoC_hydro_lin}-\eqref{EoMy_hydro_lin}

756: in more detail to find an analytic expression of $\Delta b$.  We first

757: give an order-of-magnitude discussion to show that the gravitational

758: force produced by the density fluctuation is small compared to the

759: gravitational force by the planet.  We expect that the order of

760: magnitude of the gravitational force by the spiral density fluctuation

761: is 

762: \begin{equation}

763:  F_{\rm spiral} \sim \dfrac{G \delta \Sigma H^2}{H^2},

764: \end{equation} 

765: since the characteristic length scale of the spiral is of the order

766: of the scale height.  On the other hand, the gravitational force by the

767: planet exerted on the particle at the distance of the order of the scale

768: height is 

769: \begin{equation}

770:  F_{\rm planet} \sim \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{H^2}.

771: \end{equation}

772: Using equation \eqref{amp_order}, we expect that these two forces are

773: related by

774: \begin{equation}

775:  \dfrac{F_{\rm spiral}}{F_{\rm planet}} \sim 

776:   \dfrac{G\Sigma_0}{c\Omega_{\rm p}} \equiv Q^{-1},

777: \end{equation}

778: where $Q$ is Toomre's $Q$ parameter of the disk.  Since protoplanetary

779: disks in planet forming phase are

780: expected to be gravitationally stable in general, $Q \gg 1$.

781: Therefore, we conclude that the gravitational interaction between the

782: particle and the disk is negligible.  We later confirm this

783: numerically.  In this section, we consider only

784: the effect of the velocity fluctuation of the gas disk in the presence

785: of the planet.

786: 

787: \subsubsection{First-Order Axisymmetric Mode}

788: 

789: We first consider axisymmetric modes, or azimuthally averaged

790: quantity.  For any perturbation quantities $\delta f$, we denote azimuthal

791: average by bars,

792: \begin{equation}

793:  \overline{\delta f}(x) = \dfrac{1}{L_y} \int_{-L_y/2}^{L_y/2} \delta

794:   f (x,y) dy .

795: \end{equation}

796: Using Euler equations \eqref{EoC_hydro_lin}-\eqref{EoMy_hydro_lin} and

797: vorticity equation \eqref{vorticity}, we can derive

798: \begin{eqnarray}

799: \label{dvx_asym}

800: & \overline{\delta v_x^{(1)}} = 0, \\

801: \label{dsigma_dvy}

802: & \dfrac{\overline{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}}{\Sigma_0} =

803: \dfrac{2}{\Omega_{\rm p}} 

804: \dfrac{d}{dx} \overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}}, \\

805: \label{dvy_asym_eqn} 

806: & \dfrac{d^2}{dx^2} \overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}} - \dfrac{\Omega_{\rm 

807:  p}^2}{c^2} \overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}} = -\dfrac{\Omega_{\rm p}}{2c^2} 

808:  \dfrac{d\overline{\psi}}{dx}.

809: \end{eqnarray}

810: For $x\ll L_y$, azimuthal average of $\partial \psi/\partial x$ is given

811: by 

812: \begin{equation}

813:  \dfrac{d\overline{\psi}}{dx} \sim 

814:   \dfrac{1}{L_y}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dfrac{GM_{\rm

815:   p}x}{\left(x^2+y^2\right)^{3/2}} dy = \dfrac{2GM_{\rm p}}{L_y x},

816: \end{equation}

817: where the integration range is extended to infinity.

818: The appropriate boudary condition is such that the perturbation vanishes

819: for $|x|\to\infty$.  Since homogeneous solution of equation

820: \eqref{dvy_asym_eqn} is $\exp[\pm x/H]$, Green's function of the

821: differential operater of equation \eqref{dvy_asym_eqn} is

822: \begin{equation}

823:  G(x;x^{\prime}) = -\dfrac{H}{2} 

824:   \left[ e^{-(x-x^{\prime})/H} \theta(x-x^{\prime})

825:    +  e^{(x-x^{\prime})/H} \theta(x^{\prime}-x)  \right] ,

826: \end{equation}

827: where $\theta(x)$ is step function.

828: Therefore, the solution

829: of equation \eqref{dvy_asym_eqn} is given by

830: \begin{equation}

831:  \overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}} = \dfrac{H^2 \Omega_{\rm p}}{2L_y}

832:   \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{Hc^2} 

833:   \left[ e^{-(x/H)} \mathrm{Ei}\left( \dfrac{x}{H} \right) 

834:    - e^{x/H} \mathrm{Ei}\left( -\dfrac{x}{H} \right) \right] .

835:   \label{dvy_asym}

836: \end{equation}

837: Using equation \eqref{dsigma_dvy}, the surface density perturbation is

838: given by 

839: \begin{equation}

840:  \dfrac{\overline{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}}{\Sigma_0} = - \dfrac{H}{L_y} 

841:   \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{Hc^2}

842:   \left[ e^{-(x/H)} \mathrm{Ei}\left( \dfrac{x}{H} \right) 

843:    + e^{x/H} \mathrm{Ei}\left( -\dfrac{x}{H} \right) \right],

844:   \label{dens_asym}

845: \end{equation}

846: where $\mathrm{Ei}(x)$ denotes exponential integral.  Equations

847: \eqref{dvy_asym} and \eqref{dens_asym} are valid for locations 

848: $x\ll L_y$.  Figure \ref{fig:dvy_asym_profile} shows the profile of

849: $L_y\overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}}(x)/c$ normalized by $(GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2)$

850: and compares this with analytic expression \eqref{dvy_asym}.  Difference 

851: between numerical and analytic results is about $25 \%$ at $x\sim 5H$.

852: We have checked that this error significantly decreases when box size in

853: $x$-direction is smaller than that of $y$-axis.

854: 

855: 

856: \subsubsection{Second-Order Axisymmetric Mode and Path Line of the Flow}

857: 

858: The second-order axisymmetric modes are obtained by equations

859: \eqref{EoMx_hydro_2nd}, \eqref{EoMy_hydro_2nd}, and

860: \eqref{vorticity_2nd}.  We note that equation of continuity

861: \eqref{EoC_hydro_2nd} and the $y$-component of equation of motion

862: \eqref{EoMy_hydro_2nd} is not independent for axisymmetric modes.

863: We use only $\overline{\delta v_x^{(2)}}$ later.  This is given by

864: \begin{equation}

865:  \overline{\delta v_x^{(2)}} = - \dfrac{2}{\Omega_{\rm p}}

866:  \overline{ \delta v_x^{(1)} \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta

867:  v_y^{(1)}}.

868:  \label{dvx_2nd}

869: \end{equation}

870: 

871: We then consider the path line of the flow.  This gives the motion of

872: the fluid element and therefore gives the motion of the particle with

873: $\nu\to\infty$.  Since we are interested in the change of the orbital

874: semi-major axis of the particle, we consider the motion of the fluid

875: element in the $x$-direction.  Path line is given by

876: \begin{eqnarray}

877: \label{pathline_x}

878: & \dfrac{dx}{dt} = \delta v_x (x(t),y(t))  \\

879: \label{pathline_y}

880: & \dfrac{dy}{dt} = v_c + \delta v_y(x(t),y(t))

881: \end{eqnarray}

882: where $v_c$ is the unperturbed velocity

883: \begin{equation}

884:  v_c = -\dfrac{3}{2} \Omega_p x

885: \end{equation}

886: and $\delta v_x$ and $\delta v_y$ include both first and second order

887: perturbations; for instance, 

888: $\delta v_x = \delta v_x^{(1)} + \delta v_x^{(2)}$.

889: 

890: The path line of the unperturbed flow is given by 

891: \begin{eqnarray}

892: & x_c(t) = b = \mathrm{const} \\

893: & y_c(t) = \dfrac{L_y}{2}  -\dfrac{3}{2} b \Omega_{\rm p} t

894: \end{eqnarray}

895: where we assume that the fluid element is at $(b,L_y/2)$ at $t=0$.  This

896: is simply a Keplerian circular motion.  We

897: denote the time when the particle reaches the other end of the box in

898: the unperturbed flow by $t=T$, where

899: \begin{equation}

900:  T = \dfrac{L_y}{(3/2) b \Omega_{\rm p}} .

901: \end{equation}

902: 

903: We solve equations \eqref{pathline_x} and \eqref{pathline_y} using

904: perturbation methods and obtain the change of $x$-coordinate,

905:  $\Delta x$, of the fluid element after it crosses the box

906: \begin{equation}

907:  \Delta x \equiv x(T)-x(0) = \int_0^T dt \delta v_x(x(t), y(t)) .

908:   \label{pathline_Dx_def}

909: \end{equation}

910: We divide the motion of the fluid element into the unperturbed motion

911: and perturbation

912: \begin{eqnarray}

913: & x(t) = x_c + \delta x(t) \\ 

914: & y(t) = y_c(t) + \delta y(t).

915: \end{eqnarray}

916: Expanding right hand side of equation

917: \eqref{pathline_Dx_def} upto the first order of $\delta x$ and 

918: $\delta y$ and using equations \eqref{pathline_x} and

919: \eqref{pathline_y}, we obtain

920: \begin{eqnarray}

921: & \Delta x =& \int_0^T \delta v_x^{(2)} (x_c, y_c(t)) dt

922:   + \int_0^T dt_1 \dfrac{\partial \delta v_x^{(1)}}{\partial x}

923:   (x_c,y_c(t_1))  

924:     \int_0^{t_1} dt_2 \delta v_x^{(1)} (x_c,y_c(t))  \nonumber \\ 

925: &&  + \int_0^T dt_1 \dfrac{\partial \delta v_x^{(1)}}{\partial y}

926:   (x_c,y_c(t_1))  

927:     \int_0^{t_1} dt_2 \delta v_y^{(1)} (x_c,y_c(t))

928: \label{Dx_calc}

929: \end{eqnarray}

930: where we have used $\overline{\delta v_x^{(1)}}=0$ and take the terms up

931: to the second order.  Using the first order vorticity equation

932: \eqref{vorticity} and equation of continuity, it is possible to show

933: that the right hand side of equation \eqref{Dx_calc} vanishes, see

934: Appendix \ref{app:pathline}.  Therefore, we conclude that fluid element

935: returns to the original radial position after crossing the spiral

936: density wave,

937: \begin{equation}

938:  \Delta x = 0 .

939:   \label{Dx_vanish}

940: \end{equation}

941: We note that second-order perturbation is essential to derive this

942: conclusion and therefore, it is necessary to consider the fluid motion

943: upto the second order in finding the correct motion of the particles in

944: a disk.

945: 

946: The fact that the fluid element does not move in the radial direction

947: indicates that there is no radial mass flux up to second order

948: perturbation.  It is possible to show 

949: this directly by calculating $\Sigma v_x$,

950: \begin{eqnarray}

951: & \displaystyle{\int} dy \Sigma v_x 

952:  &= \int dy \Sigma_0 \delta v_x^{(2)} + \Sigma_0

953:  \int dy \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} \delta v_x^{(1)}

954:  \nonumber \\

955: &  &= -\dfrac{2}{\Omega_{\rm p}} \Sigma_0 \int dy \delta v_x^{(1)}

956:  \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta v_y^{(1)}

957:  + \Sigma_0 \int dy \dfrac{\delta \Sigma^{(1)}}{\Sigma_0} \delta

958:  v_x^{(1)} \nonumber \\

959: &  &= -\dfrac{1}{\Omega_{\rm p}}\Sigma_0 \int dy

960:  \dfrac{\partial}{\partial y} \left( \delta v_x^{(1)} \right)^2

961: 			       \nonumber \\

962: & &= 0,

963: \label{massflux_vanish}

964: \end{eqnarray}

965: where we have used equation \eqref{dvx_2nd} in the second line,

966: vorticity equation \eqref{vorticity} in the third line, and periodic

967: boundary condition in the last equality

968: %%%%%%%%footnote added in revision%%%%%%%%

969: \footnote{It is actually possible to show that, in the shearing-sheet 

970:  approximation, the radial mass flux

971: vanishes for all orders of perturbation in the same manner as presented

972: here.}.

973: %%%%%%%%footnote added in revision end%%%%%%%%

974: This is in contrast to the case of the sound wave propagating in a

975: static, homogeneous medium, which carries the linear momentum and

976: therefore mass flux is present (Landau and Lifshitz 1959).  We

977: demonstrate this in Appendix \ref{app:soundwave}.

978: 

979: 

980: \subsubsection{$\Delta b$ Caused by Spiral Density Wave}

981: 

982: We are now in the position to calculate $\Delta b$ due to the structure

983: of the gas disk modified by the planet's gravity.  Using equation

984: \eqref{deltab_integral} and drag force is 

985: given by $\nu \delta \vect{v}_{\rm g}$, we have

986: \begin{equation}

987:  \Delta b = \dfrac{\nu^2}{\nu^2 + \Omega_{\rm p}^2}

988:   \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \delta v_x \left(x(t),y(t) \right) dt +

989:   \dfrac{2\nu\Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2}

990:   \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \delta v_y \left( x(t),y(t) \right) dt.

991:   \label{deltab_deltav_int}

992: \end{equation}

993: The integration must be performed along the path of the particle.  The

994: first term of equation \eqref{deltab_deltav_int} dominates when

995: $\nu\to\infty$.  In the perfect coupling limit, since the particle

996: traces the flow of the fluid element, this integral should vanish.  We

997: expect that this integral always remains small and set the first term of

998: equation \eqref{deltab_deltav_int} to 

999: be zero.  We expect that this approximation is valid since the second

1000: term that is proportional to  

1001: $\nu\Omega_{\rm p}/(\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2)$ dominates $\Delta b$ when

1002: $\nu$ is small.  We later confirm this numerically.

1003: 

1004: We then consider the second term of equation

1005: \eqref{deltab_deltav_int}.  The leading order of this integration is

1006: obtained by approximating that the particle orbit is circular.  Since

1007: $\overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}}\neq 0$, it is enough to consider this

1008: contribution.  Therefore, we arrive at the following expression of the

1009: change of orbital semi-major axis caused by the spiral structure of the

1010: gas

1011: \begin{equation}

1012:  \Delta b = \mathrm{sgn}(b) \dfrac{4}{3} \dfrac{1}{b\Omega_{\rm p}} 

1013:  \dfrac{\nu \Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2} 

1014:  L_y \overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}},

1015:   \label{deltab_spiral}

1016: \end{equation} 

1017: where $\overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}}$ is given by equation \eqref{dvy_asym}.

1018: 

1019: We note that in deriving equation \eqref{deltab_spiral}, we have

1020: repeatedly used the assumption of no vorticity source, equation

1021: \eqref{vorticity}.  In the presence of vorticity source,

1022:  $\overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}}$ may be different and the mass flux may be

1023:  present.

1024: 

1025: 

1026: 

1027: \subsection{Analytic Expression of the Change of the Orbital Semi-Major

1028:   Axis}

1029:   \label{subsec:db_anal}

1030: 

1031: Adding equations \eqref{deltab_planet}, \eqref{deltab_nonkepler},

1032: \eqref{deltab_accretion}, and \eqref{deltab_spiral}, we

1033: obtain the expression for the secular evolution of the orbital

1034: semi-major axis of the particle.  We write in the

1035: form of the rate of the change by dividing $\Delta b$ by

1036: $T=L_y/(3/2)\Omega_{\rm p} |b|$, where $L_y$ is the box size of the

1037: $y$-direction of the coordinate system considered.  

1038: Time $T$ may be interpreted as the time interval between successive

1039: conjunctions between the particle and the planet.

1040: The result is

1041: \begin{eqnarray}

1042: & \dfrac{\Delta b}{T} =& 2\eta v_{\rm p} \dfrac{\nu \Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu^2

1043:   + \Omega_{\rm p}^2} 

1044:   + \zeta v_{\rm p} \dfrac{\nu^2}{\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2} \nonumber \\

1045: &&  - \mathrm{sgn}(b) \dfrac{4}{T} \dfrac{r_{\rm H}^3}{b^2} \dfrac{\nu

1046:   \Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu^2 + \Omega_{\rm p}^2}

1047:   + \dfrac{\alpha}{T} \dfrac{r_{\rm H}^6}{b^5} 

1048:   \dfrac{\Omega_{\rm p}^2}{\nu^2 + \Omega_{\rm p}^2} \nonumber \\ 

1049: && + \mathrm{sgn}(b) \dfrac{2}{T} \dfrac{r_{\rm H}^3}{bH} 

1050:   \left[ e^{-(b/H)} \mathrm{Ei}\left( \dfrac{b}{H} \right) 

1051:    - e^{b/H} \mathrm{Ei}\left( -\dfrac{b}{H} \right) \right]

1052:   \dfrac{\nu \Omega_{\rm p}}{\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2},

1053:   \label{deltab_final}

1054: \end{eqnarray}

1055: where $r_{\rm H}$ is Hill's radius of the planet, the definitions of

1056: $\eta$ and $\zeta$ are given by equations \eqref{parameter_nonkepler}

1057: and \eqref{parameter_accretion} respectively, and the value of $\alpha$

1058: is $30.094$.

1059: 

1060: If the planet mass is sufficiently small, the leading contribution comes

1061: from the first term, which is due to the global pressure gradient

1062: exerted on the gas disk.  Comparing the order of magnitude of the first

1063: and the third term of equation \eqref{deltab_final}, the third term

1064: becomes dominant for particles with

1065: \begin{equation}

1066:  \dfrac{|b|}{H} \lesssim \left( \dfrac{r_{\rm H}}{H} \right)^{3/2},

1067: \end{equation}

1068: where we have assumed $L_y\sim r_{\rm p}$, $\eta\sim (H/r_{\rm p})^2$

1069: and all the numerical coefficients are neglected.  For low mass planets

1070: which does not form a gap in the gas disk, Hill's radius is generally

1071: smaller than the scale height.  Therefore, the motion of the particle is 

1072: predominated by the effect of global pressure gradient.  However, for

1073: large planets with mass of order Jupiter, the effect of the global

1074: pressure gradient is small compared to the gravitational interaction

1075: between the planet, and equation \eqref{deltab_final} indicates that if

1076: the profile of the gas disk is neglected, the particles may be attracted

1077: towards the planet.  This seems to be consistent with what is found by

1078: Paardekooper (2007).  He found that when axisymmetric gas disk profile

1079: is considered, plants with the mass of the order of Jupiter would

1080: accrete the 

1081: particles with stopping time comparable to Kepler time, while accretion

1082: of such particles around planets with 0.1 times Jupiter mass would be

1083: inefficient (see figures 7 and 11 of Paardekooper 2007).  When global

1084: pressure gradient of gas disk drives the 

1085: particles to migrate towards the central star, a part of particles with  

1086: $\nu\sim\Omega_{\rm p}$ may pass the orbit of the planet without

1087: accumulating onto it, since the particle migration rate

1088: is very fast and the perturbation of the orbital elements of the

1089: particles is not related to the planet location (Kary et al. 1993).  If

1090: the third term of equation

1091: \eqref{deltab_final} dominates over the global pressure effect, on the

1092: other hand, particles will accumulate onto the planet since their

1093: orbital elements are strongly perturbed at the location of the planet. 

1094: 

1095: If the disk model with flat pressure profile is 

1096: considered, the behavior of the particle around the planet is

1097: complicated. Figure \ref{fig:db_contour} shows the contour plot of equation

1098: \eqref{deltab_final} for the planet mass $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2=10^{-2}$,

1099: flat pressure profile ($\eta=0$), and no mass accretion onto the central

1100: star ($\zeta=0$).  

1101: For small particles ($\nu\to\infty$), there is no

1102: secular motion of 

1103: particles since all the terms of equation \eqref{deltab_final} vanishes

1104: if $\zeta=0$.  The motion of small particles is determined by the

1105: strength of accretion of the background flow.

1106: For large particles ($\nu\to 0$),

1107: on the other hand, the fourth term, which is the gravitational scattering

1108: by the planet, is dominant and the particles are always repeled away

1109: from the planet.  

1110: For particles with intermediate size

1111: ($\nu\sim\Omega_{\rm p}$), all the terms must be considered.  

1112:  Particles located sufficiently far away from the planet are

1113: scattered away because of the contribution from the last term of

1114: equation \eqref{deltab_final}, which is due to the axisymmetric mode of

1115: the perturbed flow structure caused by the planet gravity.  Particles at

1116: the intermediate distance 

1117: ($b/H\sim 1$), on the other hand, are attracted towards the planet

1118: because of the third term.  If the particles are close to the planet,

1119: they are again scattered away because of the contribution from

1120: gravitational scattering. 

1121: 

1122: The equilibrium distance between the

1123: third and fourth term is given by equation \eqref{b_eq_grav}, and this

1124: becomes close to the planet with increasing $\nu$, and it eventually

1125: becomes smaller than the Hill's radius, where we expect that the

1126: particle motion is largely dominated by the planet's gravity and our

1127: treatment of distant encounter breaks down.  Therefore, we conclude that

1128: the particles with intermediate but still smaller drag coefficient, on

1129: one hand, will

1130: accumulate around the planet, but not fully accrete onto the planet.

1131: On the other hand, particles with larger drag coefficient will accrete

1132: onto the 

1133: planet since gravitational scattering is ineffective in this case.

1134: Equating the equilibrium distance given by equation \eqref{b_eq_grav}

1135: to Hill's radius, the critical drag coefficient 

1136: separating these two regimes is of order $10 \Omega_{\rm p}$.

1137: 

1138: We note that since equation \eqref{deltab_final} is obtained under the

1139: assumption of distant encounter, it does not accurately describe the

1140: dynamics of 

1141: particles located within the Hill's sphere of the planet.

1142: %%%%%%Added in revision%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1143: In Section \ref{numerical}, we perform a numerical calculation of Hill's

1144: equations and investigate the validity of assumptions in the

1145: derivation of equation \eqref{deltab_final}.

1146: %%%%%%Added in revision end%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 

1147: It needs to be checked whether particles will really

1148: accrete onto the planet when they approach towards the planet.  For

1149: close encounter, the detailed structure of the gas around the planet

1150: must be considered.  Inaba \& Ikoma (2003) have shown that the capture

1151: cross section of particles by the planet may be enhanced when the

1152: atmospheric structure is considered.  

1153: 

1154: 

1155: \section{Numerical Calculation in Local Coordinate}

1156: \label{numerical}

1157: 

1158: %\textbf{

1159: %Note: This section is completely rewritten in revision

1160: %}

1161: 

1162: \subsection{Numerical Methods}

1163: 

1164: To investigate the accuracy of the description by equation

1165: \eqref{deltab_final} for the evolution of 

1166: orbital element of a particle whose semi-major axis is close to the

1167: planet embedded in a gaseous disk, we  

1168: perform a series of numerical calculations and compare the results with

1169: equation \eqref{deltab_final}.

1170: 

1171: In our calculation, we solve Hill's equations \eqref{EoM_x} and

1172: \eqref{EoM_y} using fifth-order Runge-Kutta method with variable time

1173: step.  We are primarily interested in the effects of

1174: spiral density wave and the gravitational force by the planet centered

1175: at the coordinate system: we neglect the effect of the global pressure

1176: gradient and mass accretion, $\eta=\zeta=0$.

1177: %%%%%%%%Added in revision%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1178:   The velocity field of the gas is therefore

1179: \begin{equation}

1180:  \delta \vect{v}_g = \delta \vect{v}^{(1)} + \delta \vect{v}^{(2)},

1181: \end{equation}

1182: where $\delta \vect{v}^{(1)}$ and $\delta \vect{v}^{(2)}$ are 

1183: first and second order perturbations, respectively, described in section 

1184: \ref{subsec:db_spiral}.  We also 

1185: note that for gravitational force exerted by the planet, we use

1186: \begin{equation}

1187:  \nabla \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}.

1188: \end{equation}

1189: We do not use the time-averaged force given by equations \eqref{app_fx}

1190: and \eqref{app_fy}.

1191: %%%%%%%%Added in revision end%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1192: 

1193: %%%%%%%%Added in revision (moved from previous section)%%%%

1194: The modification of gas velocity due to the gravitational force by the

1195:  planet is obtained by second-order perturbation analysis.  

1196: We numerically integrate 

1197: equations \eqref{EoC_hydro_lin}-\eqref{EoMy_hydro_lin} for the first

1198:  order solution and \eqref{EoC_hydro_2nd}-\eqref{EoMy_hydro_2nd} for

1199:  the second order solutions.

1200: We make use of Fourier

1201: transform methods presented by Goodman and Rafikov (2001).  This method

1202: is particularly useful in calculating the gravitational potential

1203: produced by the density fluctuation. 

1204: We fix the spatial resolution

1205:  (therefore, the maximum wave number in Fourier space)

1206: $(\Delta x/H, \Delta y/H)$ to be 

1207: $(9.8 \times 10^{-3}, 7.8 \times 10^{-2} )$, which is enough to resolve

1208:  the effective Lindblad resonance (see e.g., Artymowicz 1993).  We fix

1209:  the box size in the $y$-direction such that $-80H<y<80H$ and impose a

1210:  periodic boundary condition.  For the $x$-direction, the

1211:  resolution in Fourier space in $k_x$ direction is varied from $10^4$ to

1212:  $10^6$ according to $k_y$ in order 

1213:  to resolve very fast oscillation at $k_x \gg k_y$.  We also use the

1214:  linear window function given by Goodman and Rafikov (2001).

1215:  We set softening parameter $\epsilon$ to be $0.01H$.

1216: %%%%%%%%Added in revision (moved from previous section end)%%%%

1217: 

1218:   The box size of our calculation in $y$-direction is

1219: $-80H<y<80H$, to be consistent with the calculation 

1220: of the modification of the velocity field.

1221:   In integrating Hill's equations, we impose

1222: a periodic boundary condition in the $y$-direction and integrate the

1223: equations of motion until $t=5000\Omega_{\rm p}^{-1}$.

1224: %%%%%%%%%Added in revision%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1225: By periodic boundary condition, we mean that when the particle has

1226: reached the boundary of the box in $y$-direction, $y=\pm 80H$, it is

1227: reintroduced into the other end of the box, $y=\mp 80H$, while the

1228: values of $x$, $v_x$, and $v_y$ are kept unchanged.

1229: In principle, Hill's equations describe the motion of the particle only

1230: in the vicinity of the planet, and hence there is no reason that the

1231: phase of the epicyclic motion is conserved when it is reintroduced.

1232: However, we 

1233: expect that if the box size is the same as $2\pi r_{\rm p}$, which is

1234: the circumference of the disk at the orbit of the planet, this

1235: periodic boundary treatment may simulate qualitative properties of

1236: the orbit in the global calculations.  The condition

1237: \begin{equation}

1238:  L_y = 2\pi r_{\rm p}

1239: \end{equation}

1240: is realized, in the parameter of our calculations, if we consider a disk

1241: with the aspect ratio $H/r_{\rm p}=2\pi/160 \sim 0.04$.

1242: %%%%%%%%%Added in revision end%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1243: 

1244: %%%%%%%%Added in revision%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1245: Once we know the data of $(x,\dot{x},y,\dot{y})$, we can calculate the

1246: osculating elements $(b,h,k)$ by, using equations \eqref{orbit_x} and

1247: \eqref{orbit_y}, 

1248: \begin{equation}

1249:  b = 4x + \dfrac{2}{\Omega_{\rm p}} \dot{y},

1250:   \label{b_instant}

1251: \end{equation}

1252: \begin{equation}

1253:  h = - \dfrac{1}{r_{\rm p} \Omega_{\rm p}} \left[  

1254: 	 \dot{x}\sin (\Omega_{\rm p} t) + 2 \left(

1255: 	\dot{y}+\dfrac{3}{2}x\Omega_{\rm p} \cos (\Omega_{\rm p} t)

1256: 	\right)

1257:  \right],

1258:   \label{h_instant}

1259: \end{equation}

1260: \begin{equation}

1261:  k = \dfrac{1}{r_{\rm p} \Omega_{\rm p}} \left[  

1262: 	 \dot{x}\cos (\Omega_{\rm p} t) - 2 \left(

1263: 	\dot{y}+\dfrac{3}{2}x\Omega_{\rm p} \sin (\Omega_{\rm p} t)

1264: 	\right)

1265:  \right].

1266:   \label{k_instant}

1267: \end{equation}

1268: In the following sections showing results of calculations, we refer to

1269: $(b,h,k)$ using these relations.  These values are not averaged over the

1270: encounter, but are defined at any time of the orbit.

1271: %%%%%%%%Added in revision end%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1272: 

1273:   The initial condition

1274: of the calculation is that the particles are located at the edge of the

1275: box and moving in a circular

1276: motion.  When a particle

1277: approaches to the planet and the mutual distance becomes smaller than

1278: half of the Hill's radius of the planet, we stop the calculation since

1279: we are primarily interested in the distant encounter.  Such particles

1280: should be trapped by the planet's gravity and eventually accrete onto

1281: the planet.  In order to obtain a smooth results in the runs with large

1282: drag coefficient, we make use of smoothing methods 

1283: described in Appendix \ref{app:sphint} in calculating the perturbed gas

1284: velocity at the location of the particle from the data obtained by

1285: hydrodynamic equations.

1286: We fix the

1287: background density to be $10^{-10} \mathrm{g/cm}^3$, which is an order of

1288: magnitude smaller than the Minimum Mass Solar Nebula (Hayashi et

1289: al. 1985).  Toomre's $Q$ parameter of the disk at $1 \mathrm{AU}$ with

1290: is

1291: \begin{equation}

1292:  Q^{-1} \sim \dfrac{G\rho}{\Omega_{\rm p}^2} \sim 10^{-4}

1293: \end{equation}

1294:   We assume the mass of the planet as 

1295: $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2=10^{-2}$ that corresponds to $0.2M_{\oplus}$ for

1296: $c=10^5\mathrm{cm/s}$ and $H=0.05\mathrm{AU}$.

1297: In the following sections, we show the results without the gravitational

1298: force by gas.  We have checked that gas gravity does not affect the

1299: results in our parameter range.  We also neglect the effect

1300: of global pressure gradient and steady mass accretion in our

1301: calculation, $\eta=\zeta=0$, in order to see the effect of spiral wave 

1302: and planet's gravity.

1303: 

1304: 

1305: 

1306: \subsection{Results}

1307: \label{subsec:numericalresults}

1308: 

1309: \subsubsection{Properties of Orbital Evolution}

1310: 

1311: %%%%%%%%%%Added in revision%%%%%%%%%%%%

1312: We first review the properties of orbital evolution of a particle with

1313: zero friction force, which is obtained by setting $\nu=0$.  Figure

1314: \ref{fig:threebody_b1} shows the evolution of $b$ for a particle

1315: initially located at $b=H$.  The values of $b$ are obtained according to

1316: equations \eqref{b_instant} when the particle is at the box boundary.

1317: Also indicated in Figure \ref{fig:threebody_b1} is the variation of

1318: $b$ for $0<t<250\Omega^{-1}$.  The values of $b$ varies rapidly when the

1319: particle encounters with the planet, when $y\sim0$.  We note that since

1320: the box size is $160H$, time taken for the particle to cross the box is

1321: $\sim 160/(3/2) \sim 100$ Kepler times. 

1322: 

1323: It is indicated that the semi-major axis difference $b$ first increases

1324: but then shows an oscillation with the period $\sim 1200$ Kepler times.

1325: This oscillation is caused by the excitation of eccentricity by the

1326: perturbation due to the planet.  If the particle comes into the box with 

1327: finite eccentricity, the distance between the particle and the planet at

1328: the closest approach is different depending on the phase of the

1329: epicyclic motion, and the semi-major axis of the particle can increase

1330: or decrease.  The period and amplitude of this oscillation depend on the

1331: location of the particle.  If the phase of the epicyclic motion among

1332: successive encounters between the 

1333: planet and the particle matches, the period of the oscillation becomes

1334: longer and the amplitude becomes larger.  The condition for strong

1335: amplification is given by

1336: \begin{equation}

1337:  \Omega_{\rm p}T=2\pi l, 

1338:   \label{resonance_cond}

1339: \end{equation} 

1340: where $l$ is an integer and $T$ is the time taken to cross the box in

1341: $y$-direction 

1342: \begin{equation}

1343:  T = \dfrac{L_y}{(3/2)b\Omega_{\rm p}}.

1344: \end{equation}

1345: Figure \ref{fig:threebody_res} compares the evolution of semi-major axis

1346: of the particle starting at $l=5$ position ($b=3.4H$) and at

1347: $b=3.8H$.  It is clear that the particle at $l=5$ position experiences

1348: the long-term, strong oscillation of semi-major axis.

1349: 

1350: Equation \eqref{resonance_cond} indicates that there is a resonance

1351: between 

1352: the box crossing time and the epicyclic motion of the particle, and this

1353: appears as a result of our treatment of periodic boundary in Hill's

1354: coordinate.

1355:   Thus, in general, we should not consider this resonance to be physical

1356:   if we arbitrary choose the box size in the y-direction.  

1357: However, if we take the box size $L_y$ as the circumference of

1358: the disk, $2\pi r_{\rm p}$, the crossing time $T$ corresponds

1359: to the period of synodic encounter.  Therefore, it may be possible to 

1360: interpret this resonance as $j/(j+1)$ resonances in global

1361: problems.  In section \ref{global}, we explore the

1362: correspondence between the Hill's approximation and the full global

1363: problem. 

1364: %%%%%%%%%%Added in revision end%%%%%%%%%%%%

1365: 

1366: %%%%%%%%%Modified in revision%%%%%%%%%%%

1367: We now consider the problem with gas drag.  

1368: Figure \ref{fig:bevol_nu} shows the evolution of $b$ for particles with

1369: various drag coefficients initially located at $b/H=1$ as a function of

1370: time.  The values of $b$ when the particles reach at the edge of the box

1371: are plotted.

1372:   Particles with drag coefficient larger than 

1373: $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{-2}$ shows a systematic change of semi-major

1374: axis while that with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{-4}$ shows a systematic

1375: change plus oscillation.  In a simple restricted three-body problem,

1376: where drag coefficient $\nu$ equals zero, semi-major

1377: axis does not show 

1378: a systematic change but only oscillation, as discussed in previous

1379: paragraphs (see also Figures \ref{fig:threebody_b1} and

1380: \ref{fig:threebody_res}).  The gas drag 

1381: causes a systematic change of Jacobi energy 

1382: and thereby results in a systematic change of particle's angular

1383: momentum.  The timescale during which the oscillation of semi-major

1384: axis damps is given by $\sim \nu^{-1}$.

1385: Since the oscillation of the semi-major axis comes from the excitation

1386: of eccentricity during the synodic encounter, this oscillation does not

1387: appear when the eccentricity is damped during successive encounters.  

1388: If the eccentricity is damped during successive encounters, the

1389: assumption of initially circular orbit in deriving equation

1390: \eqref{deltab_final} is valid for every encounter.  Therefore, although

1391: we have computed only one encounter, it is possible to use equation

1392: \eqref{deltab_final} to predict the

1393: long-term evolution of the orbital semi-major axis 

1394: especially for small bodies with large drag coefficient.

1395: %%%%%%%%%Modified in revision end%%%%%%%%%%%

1396: 

1397: 

1398: \subsubsection{Comparison between Analytic and Numerical Calculations}

1399: 

1400: %%%%%%%%%Added in revision%%%%%%%%%%%%

1401: We now show to what extent equation \eqref{deltab_final} describes 

1402: the evolution of the orbit of a particle encountering with a planet

1403: embedded in a gaseous nebula.  Since the particles show a systematic

1404: change of semi-major axis, we take the average radial velocity of the

1405: particle by calculating

1406: \begin{equation}

1407:  \dfrac{b(t_{\rm fin}) - b(t_{\rm ini})}{t_{\rm calc}},

1408:   \label{average_db_calc}

1409: \end{equation}

1410: where $t_{\rm ini}=0$ is the initial time,

1411: $t_{\rm fin}$ is the last time when the particle reaches

1412: the box boundary before the calculation is stopped at

1413: $t=5000\Omega^{-1}$, and $t_{\rm calc}=t_{\rm fin}-t_{\rm ini}$.  The

1414: precise value of $t_{\rm fin}$ is obtained by numerical calculation, and

1415: it varies with the value of $b$.

1416: Semi-major axis of the particle at each time is calculated by equation

1417: \eqref{b_instant}.

1418: %%%%%%%%%Added in revision end%%%%%%%%%%%%

1419: 

1420: Figures \ref{fig:bdecay_Hill_d10m}-\ref{fig:bdecay_Hill_d10cm} show

1421: the results of long-term evolution of semi-major axis of particles

1422: initially located at various position with 

1423: $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{-2}$, $1$, and $10^2$ respectively.  Horizontal

1424: axes of Figures \ref{fig:bdecay_Hill_d10m}-\ref{fig:bdecay_Hill_d10cm}

1425: are the initial semi-major axis of the particle, $b(t_{\rm ini})$, and

1426: the vertical axes show the average rate of change of semi-major axes

1427: obtained by equation \eqref{average_db_calc}.

1428:   We also

1429: plot our analytic formula given by \eqref{deltab_final}.

1430:  It is clear

1431: that the analytic formula \eqref{deltab_final} describes the results of

1432: numerical calculations well, at least quantitatively, for all values 

1433: of drag coefficient.  Deviation from the analytic value for

1434: $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=1$ at $b/H \gtrsim 2$ comes from the deviation of

1435: the data of $\overline{\delta v_y^{(1)}}$ from the analytic value shown

1436: in Figure \ref{fig:dvy_asym_profile} while for small $b$, we expect that

1437: the numerical results deviate from the analytic calculation since

1438: eccentricity effect is not negligible.

1439:   The match between numerical calculation and 

1440: analytic formula is better for particles with large drag coefficient,

1441: since their eccentricities remain smaller.   We think that the

1442: deviation from the analytic value for $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^2$ at

1443: $b/H\gtrsim 3$ is due to smoothing. 

1444: 

1445: One significant difference between analytic results and numerical

1446: calculation is the spike-like structures that appear in the calculations

1447: with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{-2}$.

1448: This structure is due to the resonance effect given by equation

1449: \eqref{resonance_cond}.  

1450:  We show in Figure

1451: \ref{fig:bdecay_Hill_d10m} the location of resonance with $l=4$, $5$,

1452: and $6$.  It is clear that $\Delta b/T$ shows a spike at this location.

1453: We have not found such resonance structure for calculations with 

1454: $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p} \gtrsim 1$.  This is because eccentricity is

1455: sufficiently damped between successive encounters.

1456:    

1457: %%%%%%%%Modified in revision%%%%%%%%%%

1458: Another interesting result is the motion of the particle with 

1459: $\Omega_{\rm p}\sim \nu$.

1460:  Figure \ref{fig:long_nu1}

1461: shows the evolution of the semi-major axes of the particles with 

1462: $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=1$.  It is clear that the particles migrate

1463: towards the planet and stagnate at $b\sim 0.35H$.

1464: Since we set $\eta=\zeta=0$ in our calculation, the orbital change of

1465: the particle is caused by the third, fourth, and fifth terms of equation 

1466: \eqref{deltab_final}.  The last term is negligible for small $b$

1467: compared to the third term.  

1468:   Equation \eqref{deltab_final} indicates that

1469: these particles accumulate near the planet's orbit where

1470: gravitational 

1471: scattering represented by the fourth term of equation

1472: \eqref{deltab_final} balances with the attraction towards the planet

1473: represented by the third term, which is the result of combination of the 

1474: planet's gravity and the gas drag, as

1475: discussed in Section \ref{subsec:db_planet}. 

1476:   The condition for the balance between these two effects is given by

1477:   equation \eqref{b_eq_grav}.  For chosen parameters in numerical

1478:   calculations, $r_{\rm H}=0.15H$ so the equilibrium distance is given

1479:   by $\sim 0.3 H$, which is close to the value obtained in numerical

1480:   calculation $\sim 0.35H$. 

1481:  We consider that the small difference comes from the effect of

1482:   eccentricity and close encounter.

1483:   This effect seems analogous to ``the shepherding effect''.  

1484: We note that this effect

1485: appears when the first term of equation

1486: \eqref{deltab_final}, $\Delta b$ by global

1487: pressure gradient, is small compared to the third term.  This condition

1488: is expressed in terms of $\eta$:

1489: \begin{equation}

1490:  |\eta| < \dfrac{r_{\rm p}}{b} \dfrac{r_{\rm H}^3}{r_{\rm p}^3} 

1491:   \sim \dfrac{r_{\rm p}}{b} \dfrac{M_{\rm p}}{M_{\ast}} .

1492: \end{equation}

1493:   If $\eta$ is of the order of square of disk aspect ratio, as in

1494:   standard parameters, this condition is rewritten as

1495: \begin{equation}

1496:  \dfrac{b}{r_{\rm H}} \lesssim 

1497:   \left( \dfrac{M_{\rm p}}{M_{\ast}} \right)^{2/3}

1498:   \left( \dfrac{r_{\rm p}}{H} \right)^2.

1499: \end{equation}

1500: For $M_{\rm p}/M_{\ast}=10^{-6}$ and $H/r_{\rm p}=0.05$, this gives

1501: $b/r_{\rm H}\lesssim 0.2$, which is too close to the planet and the

1502: assumption of distant encounter is violated.  Kary et al. (1993) has

1503: shown that, in the presence of global pressure gradient, a particle with 

1504: $\nu \sim \Omega_{\rm p}$ falls onto the 

1505: central star so rapidly that it bypasses the planet without being

1506: trapped.

1507: %%%%%%%%Modified in revision end%%%%%%%%%%

1508:  

1509: %%%%%%%%%section added in revision%%%%%%%%%

1510: \subsection{Limitation of Analytic Formula}

1511: \label{subsec:limitation_local}

1512: 

1513: %\textbf{

1514: %Note: This section is added in revision

1515: %}

1516: 

1517: 

1518: Equation \eqref{deltab_final} is derived by assuming that the

1519: deflection angle of the particle by each encounter with the planet is

1520: small (distant encounter) and that the particle returns to a circular

1521: orbit before the next encounter.  

1522: 

1523: First, the assumption of initially circular orbit breaks down if we

1524: consider the particle with small friction.  The oscillation of

1525: semi-major axis observed in figure \ref{fig:bevol_nu} for particles with

1526: $\nu=10^{-4}\Omega_{\rm p}$ indicates that the damping of eccentricity

1527: between successive encounters is insignificant for these particles and

1528: that the finite eccentricity effect should be taken into account.

1529: Quantitatively, the period of synodic encounter must be longer than the

1530: particle's stopping time.  Therefore, our treatment is limited in the

1531: cases with

1532: \begin{equation}

1533:  \dfrac{2\pi r_{\rm p}}{(3/2) b \Omega_{\rm p}} \gtrsim \dfrac{1}{\nu}, 

1534: \end{equation}

1535: where the left hand side is the synodic period and the right hand side

1536: is stopping time.  Rearranging this condition, we have

1537: \begin{equation}

1538:  \dfrac{b}{H} \lesssim \dfrac{4\pi}{3} \dfrac{r_{\rm p}}{H}

1539:   \dfrac{\nu}{\Omega_{\rm p}}.

1540: \end{equation}

1541: Adopting standard parameters, we have

1542: \begin{equation}

1543:  \dfrac{b}{H} \lesssim 80 

1544:   \left( \dfrac{0.05}{H/r_{\rm p}} \right)^{-1}

1545:   \left( \dfrac{\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}}{1} \right) .

1546:   \label{condition_e}

1547: \end{equation}

1548: 

1549: We now consider the assumption of distant encounter.  If the particle's 

1550: semi-major axis is too close to the planet, the assumption of small

1551: deflection angle, or distant encounter, breaks down.

1552: In Figure \ref{fig:size_deflection}, we plot the amount of deflection

1553: of the particle's semi-major axis after the very first encounter with

1554: the planet.  We quantify the amount of deflection by

1555: \begin{equation}

1556:  \dfrac{|b(t_1) - b(t_2)|}{|b(t_1)|},

1557:   \label{deflection_rate}

1558: \end{equation}

1559: where $t_1=t_{\rm ini}=0$ is the initial time, and

1560: $t_2 \sim L_y/(3/2)b\Omega_{\rm p}$ is the time when the particle

1561: reaches the box boundary after the first encounter.  The precise value

1562: of $t_2$ is obtained by numerical calculations.  Particles

1563: in black regions are trapped by the planet, that is, in our criterion,

1564: mutual distance between the planet and the particle becomes smaller than

1565: half of the Hill's radius, or in horseshoe orbit.  Note the similarity

1566: of the shape of the contour of 1\% deflection with the contour shown in

1567: Figure \ref{fig:db_contour}.

1568: 

1569: In three-body problem with zero drag force, it is known that the

1570: assumption of small encounter is violated for particles with 

1571: $b\lesssim 2.5 r_{\rm H}$ if we consider the very first encounter.  Our

1572: calculation is 

1573: consistent with this for particles with small drag, 

1574: $\nu \ll \Omega_{\rm p}$.  However, for particles with large drag,

1575: $\nu\gg\Omega_{\rm p}$, it can be seen that this condition is relaxed

1576: and it is indicated that the assumption of small deflection angle can be

1577: used even down to $b \sim r_{\rm H}$.  Figure \ref{fig:orbit_2hill}

1578: shows the orbits of particles initially located at $b=2r_{\rm H}$.

1579: Orbits of particles with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{-4}$ and $10^3$ are

1580: shown.  Particles with very large drag coefficient can remain in the

1581: orbit close to the initial semi-major axis since gas drag prevents it

1582: from falling onto the planet.

1583: 

1584: After multiple encounters, the condition of distant encounter is

1585: violated for particles with $b\lesssim2.5-2\sqrt{3}r_{\rm H}$ in

1586: three-body problem without gas drag.  The contour of 1\% deflection in

1587: Figure \ref{fig:size_deflection} passes close to $2\sqrt{3}r_{\rm H}$ in

1588: the limit of small drag.  Therefore, we infer that this line gives the

1589: limitation of our analytic treatment assuming small deflection.  This

1590: assumption is better for particles in wider range of semi-major axes for

1591: larger drag.

1592: 

1593: %%%%%%%%%section added in revision end%%%%%%%%%

1594: 

1595: 

1596: %%%%%section rearranged in revision%%%%%

1597: \section{Comparison between Local and Global Calculation}

1598: \label{global}

1599: 

1600: %\textbf{

1601: %Note: This section is completely rewritten in revision

1602: %}

1603: 

1604: 

1605: %%%%%%%This section is completely rewritten in revision%%%%%%

1606: So far we have performed analytic and numerical calculations of the

1607: orbits of particles using local coordinate systems.  It remains to be

1608: checked how our local treatment simulates the real orbit in global

1609: coordinate.  

1610: 

1611: We have performed a global calculation with the gas rotating at

1612: Keplerian rotation velocity where we have neglected 

1613: the effect of the spiral pattern around the planet, global pressure

1614: gradient, and gas accretion towards the central star, $\eta=\zeta=0$.

1615:   We solved the equations of 

1616: motion in a frame rotating with the planet and integrate until

1617: the particle encounters with the planet for 100 times.  We calculated

1618: the evolution of the semi-major 

1619: axis of a particle at various initial semi-major axes and obtain

1620:  $\Delta b/T$ over the calculation time. 

1621:  In the

1622: following, we show calculations in which the particle is located at the

1623: opposition point initially, but we have checked that the initial

1624: locations do not affect the results as long as we consider particles

1625: with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p} \geq 10^{-2}$.

1626: Particles that reach the distance with the planet less than Hill's

1627: radius are removed.  We set disk aspect ratio $H/r_{\rm p}=0.04$, which

1628: gives $2\pi r_{\rm p}=L_y$, where $L_y=160H$ is the box size we have

1629: used in calculations with Hill's equation.  For planet mass, we assumed 

1630: $M_{\rm p}/M_{\ast}=6\times 10^{-7}$, which corresponds to 

1631: $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2=10^{-2}$, the value we have adopted in calculations

1632: with Hill's equations.  In order to compare the results of global

1633: calculations with Hill's equations, we also integrate Hill's equations

1634: \eqref{EoM_x} and \eqref{EoM_y} by setting $\delta \vect{v}_{\rm g}=0$.  

1635: 

1636: Figures \ref{fig:globalHill_d10m}-\ref{fig:globalHill_d10cm} compare the

1637: results of $\Delta b/T$ obtained by global and local calculations.

1638: Horizontal axes of Figures

1639: \ref{fig:globalHill_d10m}-\ref{fig:globalHill_d10cm} show the initial

1640: semi-major axes of the particle and the vertical axes show the average

1641: rate of change calculated by equation \eqref{average_db_calc}.  In

1642: global calculations, $b(t_{\rm fin})$ is the semi-major axis difference

1643: between the particle and the particle calculated when

1644: the particle has reached the opposition point after 100 encounters.

1645: 

1646:   For all parameters, global and local calculations show a reasonably

1647:   good agreement.  Relative difference between global and local runs

1648: is most significant for particles with 

1649: ${\nu}/{\Omega_{\rm p}}=1$.  We infer that this is because in the case

1650: of ${\nu}/{\Omega_{\rm p}}=1$, the radial motion of the particle is the 

1651: fastest, and the effect of curvature is most effective.  In runs with

1652: ${\nu}/{\Omega}_{\rm p}=10^{2}$ and ${\nu}/{\Omega}_{\rm p}=10^{-2}$,

1653: radial motion of the particle is smaller by one or two orders of

1654: magnitude than calculations with ${\nu}/{\Omega}_{\rm p}=1$.

1655: 

1656: In runs with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{-2}$, we

1657: observe a disagreement in resonance locations, since curvature effects

1658: are not taken into account.  However, since the disagreement is

1659: less than 10\%, it may be still possible to say, for example, that $l=4$ 

1660: resonance in Hill's coordinate mimics $4:5$ resonance in global

1661: coordinate.  Note that the relative strength of the resonance matches

1662: well with global runs.

1663: 

1664: Global analysis of $j/(j+1)$ resonances including drag force is done by 

1665: Greenberg (1978).  It

1666: is shown that eccentricity and the angle between the longitude of

1667: conjunction and the longitude of pericenter of the particle converges to

1668: a fixed value  with the timescale of $\nu^{-1}$, but depends on the

1669: particle's semi-major axis.  The value of eccentricity is maximum at the

1670: resonance.  We have observed similar behavior in local calculations.

1671: It is actually possible to do analytic calculation similar to Greenberg 

1672: (1978) in Hill's system and derive orbital evolution including the

1673: effect of resonance.  We do not show it here since it is necessary to

1674: do all the analyses presented in Section \ref{analytic} again including

1675: the effect of finite box size.  We simply note here that this resonance

1676: effect does not appear in our formulation presented in Section

1677: \ref{analytic} since we have neglected the effect of finite length in

1678: the $y$-direction in deriving equation \eqref{deltab_final}.

1679: 

1680: In runs with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=1$, particles initially at

1681:  $b\lesssim 1.4H$ shows the decrease of the average rate of semi-major

1682:  axis decay.  This is because the particle is trapped in the orbit in

1683:  the vicinity of the planet as a result of shepherding effect discussed

1684:   for calculations with Hill's

1685:  equation in Section \ref{subsec:numericalresults}.  Figure

1686:  \ref{fig:long_nu1_global} shows the evolution of the 

1687:  semi-major axis of the particle.  Osculating elements at the opposition 

1688:  points are plotted.  Comparing with Figure \ref{fig:long_nu1}, it is

1689:  clear that the shepherding effect discussed in local calculations also

1690:  exists in global runs.  We note that the amplitude of oscillation after

1691:  particles are trapped is larger in global runs than local calculations,

1692:  and the location of the shepherding orbit is slightly closer to the

1693:  planet than the local calculations.  Note in passing that in

1694:  equation (4.11) of Adachi et al. (1976), it is indicated that for

1695:  $\eta=0$, damping of eccentricity causes a decrease in semi-major axis.

1696:  However, Adachi et al. (1976) do not take into account

1697:  the effects of the planet's gravity.  The shepherding presented here is

1698:  entirely caused by the presence of the planet.

1699: 

1700: By comparing global calculations with local runs, it is indicated that

1701: as long as the orbits close enough to the planet are considered, local

1702: calculations reproduce the results of global calculations well even if

1703: curvature effect is neglected.  However, the effect of constant box size

1704:  in the $y$-direction causes the small difference between the

1705: global and local runs.  This is indicated by the mismatch between the

1706: locations of the resonances.  It is also indicated that the local

1707: calculations reproduce the results of global calculations most

1708: efficiently for small particles,

1709:  such as $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p} \lesssim 10^{-1} - 10^{-2}$. 

1710:  Local approach that is used in Section \ref{analytic} is valid when

1711:  semi-major axis difference $b$ is much smaller than the scale of the

1712:  semi-major axis of the planet:

1713: \begin{equation}

1714:  \dfrac{b}{r_{\rm p}} \ll 1,

1715: \end{equation}

1716: which is equivalent to

1717: \begin{equation}

1718:  \dfrac{b}{H} \ll \dfrac{r_{\rm p}}{H} .

1719:   \label{condition_local}

1720: \end{equation}

1721: Note that in the usage of equation \eqref{deltab_final} there is another

1722: limitation of close encounter, which has already been addressed in

1723: Section \ref{subsec:limitation_local}.

1724: %%%%%%%This subsection is completely rewritten in revision%%%%%%

1725: 

1726: 

1727: %%%%%%%section rearranged in revision%%%%%%

1728: \section{Discussion: Dust Gap Opening}

1729: \label{dustgap}

1730: 

1731: \subsection{Order-of-Magnitude Estimate of Dust Gap Opening Criterion}

1732: 

1733: Paardekooper and Mellema (2004, 2006) showed that dust gap may be opened

1734: up even

1735: if the planet mass is too small to open up a gap in a gas disk using

1736: numerical calculation.  We reconsider this result from the analytical

1737: point of view in this section.

1738: 

1739: Since there is no long-term radial motion of fluid elements, it is

1740: essential in dust gap formation that gas and dust moves in a different

1741: velocity.  Terms that are important in equation \eqref{deltab_final} are

1742: therefore those proportional to 

1743: $\nu\Omega_{\rm p}/(\nu^2 + \Omega_{\rm p}^2)$ for small particles.  

1744: 

1745: We first consider the disk without global pressure gradient.  

1746: In this case, the motion of small dust particles are mainly dominated by

1747: the third term of equation \eqref{deltab_final} when they are as close

1748: to the planet as $b\lesssim2H$ and by the last term when $b$ is larger.

1749: The third term is the attraction of particles by the planet's gravity

1750: and they migrate towards the planet.  The last term on the other hand 

1751: originates from the axisymmetric flow structure

1752: around the planet.  This term causes dust particles migrate away from

1753: the planet.  In either case, dust particles around the planet with

1754: $b \sim H$ forms a gap around the planet.  Taking $b\sim H$, very rough

1755: order-of-magnitude estimate (neglecting numerical coefficients of order

1756: unity) gives the migration timescale of dust particles as

1757: \begin{equation}

1758:  \tau_{\rm gap} \equiv b \dfrac{T}{\Delta b} \sim 10^{4-5} T_{\rm K}

1759:   \left(\dfrac{10^{-5}}{M_{\rm p}/M_{\rm c}}  \right)

1760:   \left( \dfrac{H/r_{\rm p}}{0.05} \right)^2

1761:   \left( \dfrac{(\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2)/\nu \Omega_{\rm p}}{10^2}

1762:   \right) 

1763: \end{equation}  

1764: where $T_{\rm K}$ denotes the Kepler timescale and $M_{\rm c}$ is the

1765: mass of the central star.  This is the timescale

1766: of dust particles changing its orbit by the order of scale height and

1767: gives the timescale of the formation of dust gap with width of the

1768: order of the scale height.

1769: 

1770: If there is global pressure gradient, the first term of equation

1771: \eqref{deltab_final} may dominate over the

1772: terms considered above.  Since global pressure gradient causes

1773: systematic inward or outward motion of particles, dust gap around the

1774: planet is not expected to form if this term dominates.

1775: The timescale of orbital change of dust

1776: particles by the order of scale height due to the first term of equation

1777: \eqref{deltab_final} is

1778: \begin{equation}

1779:  \tau_{\eta} \sim 10^{3-4} T_{\rm K}

1780:   \left( \dfrac{10^{-3}}{|\eta|} \right) 

1781:   \left( \dfrac{H/r_{\rm p}}{0.05} \right)

1782:   \left( \dfrac{(\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2)/\nu \Omega_{\rm p}}{10^2}

1783:   \right) .

1784: \end{equation}

1785: If the magnitude of $\eta$ is of order $(H/r_{\rm p})^2 \sim 10^{-3}$,

1786: which is a 

1787: standard value, dust gap may not appear around the planet since 

1788: $\tau_{\eta}<\tau_{\rm gap}$.

1789: However if $\eta$ is as small as $10^{-5}$, dust gap formation may be

1790: possible.  The value of $\eta$ depends on disk model and can take values

1791: of wide range.  From theoretical point of view, small value of $\eta$ is

1792: preferable in order for meter-size particles to survive in a Minimum

1793: Mass Solar Nebula.  One mechanism of decreasing $\eta$ around ice line

1794: is suggested by Kretke and Lin (2007).

1795: 

1796: Comparing the first and the third term of equation \eqref{deltab_final},

1797: we obtain the criterion of dust gap formation.  Again, for $b\sim H$,

1798: and neglecting numerical coefficients of order unity, we have, for the

1799: gap formation criterion,

1800: \begin{equation}

1801:  |\eta| \dfrac{M_{\rm c}}{M_{\rm p}} \dfrac{H}{r_{\rm p}} \lesssim 1 .

1802: \end{equation}

1803: We note that this criterion does not depend on drag coefficient of the

1804: particles.  However, the implicit assumption is that gravitational

1805: scattering, which is the fourth term of equation \eqref{deltab_final},

1806: is ineffective, which is proportianl to 

1807: $\Omega_{\rm p}^2/(\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2)$.  Therefore, this condition

1808: applies to particles with $\nu\gtrsim \Omega_{\rm p}$.

1809: Taking $\eta \sim (H/r_{\rm p})^2$ and $H/r_{\rm p} \sim 0.05$, this

1810: gives $M_{\rm p}/M_{\rm c} \gtrsim 10^{-4}$, which explains the

1811: condition obtained by Paardekooper and Mellema (2004, 2006).

1812: 

1813: Timescale constraint of dust gap formation may be obtained by comparing

1814: the above obtained timescale with the timescale of planet migration or

1815: gas dispersal timescale.  Timescale of the type I planet migration of

1816: the radial distance comparable to the scale height is given by

1817: Tanaka et al. (2002) as 

1818: \begin{equation}

1819:  \tau_{\rm mig I} \sim \Omega_{\rm p} \dfrac{M_{\rm c}}{M_{\rm p}}

1820:   \dfrac{M_{\rm c}}{\Sigma r_{\rm p}^2} 

1821:   \left( \dfrac{H}{r_{\rm p}} \right)^3 .

1822: \end{equation}

1823: Therefore, comparing this with $\tau_{\rm gap}$, we have

1824: \begin{equation}

1825:  \dfrac{r_{\rm p}}{H}

1826:  \dfrac{\Sigma r_{\rm p}^2}{M_{\rm c}}

1827:  \dfrac{\nu^2+\Omega_{\rm p}^2}{\nu \Omega_{\rm p}} \lesssim 1 .

1828: \end{equation}

1829: Dust gap formation is efficient at late stage of planet formation when

1830: gas starts to dissipate and type I migration timescale becomes long.

1831: If $H/r_{\rm p}=0.05$ and $\Sigma r_{\rm p}^2/M_{\rm c}=10^{-3}$, this

1832: criterion gives $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p} \lesssim 50$.  

1833: If there is no type I migration, on the other hand,  this

1834: constraint is relaxed and dust gap formation constraint is given by the

1835: timescale of disk gas dispersal, $\tau_{\rm gas}$.  If $\tau_{\rm gas}$

1836: is of the order of $10^6$ years, gap of particles with 

1837: $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p} \lesssim 10^4$ may be opened up.

1838: 

1839: 

1840: 

1841: \subsection{Model of Radial Distribution of Dust

1842:    Particles}

1843: \label{discuss:dustdistribution}

1844: 

1845: In order to investigate the qualitative behavior of dust particles

1846: around the planet in long time, we model the motion of particles in the

1847: disk by one-dimensional advection equation

1848: \begin{equation}

1849:  \dfrac{\partial N(t,b)}{\partial t} + \dfrac{\partial}{\partial b} 

1850:   \left[ v_b (b) N(t,b) \right] = 0

1851:   \label{dustadvection_eqn}

1852: \end{equation} 

1853: where $v_b (b)$ is the radial velocity of the dust particles whose

1854: semi-major axis difference with the planet is $b$

1855: and $N(t,b)$ is the appropriately normalized number of the particles

1856: with semi-major axis difference $b$ at time $t$.  We use equation

1857: \eqref{deltab_final} for $v_b$ and solve \eqref{dustadvection_eqn} for

1858: $10^6 \mathrm{yr}$ for particles with various drag coefficients.  We

1859: have used second-order scheme with monotonicity

1860: condition (van Leer 1977).  We fix $H$ and $c$ for simplicity in our

1861: computational domain and a planet with $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2=10^{-1}$ is

1862: fixed at the origin.

1863:    Planet mass corresponds to $2M_{\oplus}$ for

1864: $H=0.05\mathrm{AU}$ and $c=10^5\mathrm{cm/s}$.

1865: The computational domain is $r_{H}<b<10H$ 

1866: and dust particles are homogeneously distributed initially:

1867: $N_0\equiv N(t=0,x)=1$ in this region.  We have assumed that there is no

1868: dust particle out of this domain.  For $T$ that appears in equation

1869: \eqref{deltab_final}, we have assumed

1870: \begin{equation}

1871:  T = 2\pi / |\Omega_K(r_p+b) - \Omega_K(r_p)|

1872: \end{equation} 

1873: where $\Omega_K$ is Keplerian angular velocity and $r_p$ is the location

1874: of the planet. 

1875: 

1876: Figures \ref{fig:advection} shows the snapshots of the distribution of

1877: dust particles of various drag coefficients at 

1878: $t\Omega_{\rm p}=5\times10^{3}$, $t\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{5}$, and  

1879: $t\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{6}$ for $\eta=0$.

1880:   The gap of particles with $\nu \sim 10 \Omega_{\rm p}$

1881: has been opened up after several $10^5$

1882: Kepler time.  The gap of particles $\nu\lesssim \Omega_{\rm p}$

1883:  may be the artefact

1884: of boundary condition, since the radial velocity of particles at the

1885: nearest edge of the planet is positive but we have assumed there is no

1886: dust particles outside the calculation domain.  However, there is no

1887: boundary effect for small particles with large drag coefficient, since

1888: radial velocity of dust particle is negative at the inner edge and

1889: positive at the outer edge.  We note that since it takes about $10^5$

1890: years for dust gap formation for the planet 

1891: with $2M_{\oplus}$, this effect is small

1892:  if the gas pressure gradient is significantly large, $\eta>0$.

1893:   However,

1894: for larger mass planets, planet perturbation on the dust motion is large

1895: and dust gap formation is possible even in the presence of pressure

1896: gradient, as seen in the order-of-magnitude estimate provided in the

1897: previous section.  

1898: 

1899: Finally, we briefly discuss the observational implication of dust gap

1900: in the disk with zero pressure gradient. 

1901: The width of the dust gap that forms around a low mass planet is 

1902: several times the scale height.  

1903: Therefore, it might be challenging to detect

1904: a low mass planet embedded in a gas disk at $1\mathrm{AU}$.  However, if

1905: there is a planet at several tens of AU, the width of

1906: the gap can be of the order of several AU, which can be resolved in 

1907: near future.  The gap formation timescale

1908: in this case is of order $10^{5-6}$ years, 

1909: which might be comparable to disk

1910: life time.  Therefore, it may be possible to find a low mass planet by

1911: observing a dust gap in a gaseous nebula, even if the planet itself is

1912: too small to be observable.

1913: 

1914: 

1915: \section{Summary and Future Prospects} \label{summary}

1916: 

1917: In this paper, we have investigated the motion of particles embedded in

1918: a gas disk in the presence of a small mass planet.  This is the 

1919: full analytic calculation of the particle motion including the gas disk

1920: and the planet considering the non-axisymmetric pattern of the gas around

1921: the planet produced by the gravitational interaction between the planet

1922: and the gas.

1923: 

1924: Our main result is equation \eqref{deltab_final} which

1925: describes the change of the particle semi-major axis, which has been in

1926: circular motion initially, after one distant encounter with the planet.

1927: In addition to well-known particle migration towards the central star

1928: due to the pressure gradient (the first term) and the gravitational

1929: scattering by the planet (fourth term), 

1930: we have derived (1) the effect of steady mass accretion (the second term), 

1931: (2) attraction of particles towards the planet due to the planet's

1932: gravity (the third term), and (3) contribution of the  

1933: structure of the gas disk produced by the planet's gravity (the fifth

1934: term).

1935: We find that only the axisymmetric structure of the gas

1936: contributes to the semi-major axis evolution of particles and the spiral

1937: structure is ineffective in the absence of vorticity source.

1938: 

1939: All the terms considered, in the absence of the global

1940: pressure gradient and steady accretion flow towards the central star, we

1941: find that (see Figure \ref{fig:db_contour})

1942:  (1) particles with

1943:  $\nu \gtrsim \Omega_{\rm p}$ will migrate towards the 

1944:  planet if they are close to the planet because of the gravitational

1945:  attraction by the planet, but they migrate away from the planet

1946:  if they are far away, primarily due to the effect of the gas

1947:  structure,

1948:  (2) large particles with 

1949: $\nu \ll \Omega_{\rm p}$ will be scattered away from the planet because

1950: of the gravitational scattering, and

1951: (3) there is a parameter range where particles are scattered away from

1952: the planet when they are close to the planet while attracted towards the

1953: planet if they are located at far away, thereby particles are

1954: accumulated at an equilibrium distance from the planet (i.e.,

1955: shepherding by gas drag and gravitational scattering). 

1956: %%%%%%%Added in revision%%%%%%%%

1957:  This shepherding

1958: mechanism acts for particles in both interior and exterior orbits as

1959: long as the radial pressure gradient of the gas is negligible.

1960: %%%%%%%Added in revision%%%%%%%%

1961: 

1962: %%%%%%%modified in revision%%%%%%

1963: We have checked the validity of our formula by solving three-body

1964: problem with and without Hill's approximations.  Our main assumptions in

1965: deriving equation 

1966: \eqref{deltab_final} are (1) initially circular orbit, (2) distant

1967: encounter, and (3) local approximation. 

1968: Validity of the first assumption is justified when the eccentricity of

1969: the particle is damped within the time taken for each synodic encounter

1970: that is given by equation \eqref{condition_e}.  The valid region for the

1971: second 

1972: assumption is shown by the contour of small deflection in Figure

1973: \ref{fig:size_deflection}.  The condition for the third assumption is

1974: simply given by equation \eqref{condition_local}.  

1975: Hill's approximation is good 

1976: as long as we consider the orbits in the vicinity of the planet. 

1977: In short, our formula is especially useful in predicting the motions of

1978: dust particles with stopping time $t_e \Omega_{\rm p} \lesssim 10^{2}$.

1979: For particles with smaller drag, our treatment predicts only

1980: quantitative behavior of non-resonant orbital evolution of particles

1981: whose semi-major axis is close to that of the planet.

1982: We also note that since we have made use of linear calculation for the

1983: flow, our treatment is 

1984: restricted to low mass planets with the mass up to the orders of several

1985: tens of Earth mass.

1986: %%%%%%%modified in revision end%%%%%

1987: 

1988: Using equation \eqref{deltab_final}, we have discussed the criterion for

1989: dust gap formation.  The condition depends on the value of global

1990: pressure gradient, mass of the planet, and disk scale height.  It is

1991: possible to derive the condition suggested by Paardekooper and Mellema

1992: (2004, 2006), and we have derived more general criteria.

1993: We have calculated the qualitative

1994: long-term behavior of dust particles around a planet with

1995: $2M_{\oplus}$.

1996: It is indicated that the gap of small dust particles with width of the

1997: order of several scale height may be opened up

1998: after several $10^5$ Kepler time. This long timescale has not been

1999: reached by full numerical simulations yet.

2000: 

2001: We have simplified the description of the drag force by assuming the

2002: force proportional to relative velocity with the gas.  For large particles,

2003: however, the drag force is proportional to the square of the relative

2004: velocity, which is not treated in our calculation.  We have also made a

2005: simplification by considering two-dimensional problem.  In considering

2006: the vertical motion of particles, it is necessary to do

2007: three-dimensional calculations.  The effects of magnetic field, 

2008: self gravity, and turbulence of the disk will be the subjects in this

2009: line of analytical study.

2010: It is also of interest to extend our formulation to include the

2011: finite box size and investigate how the resonance effect is described in

2012: Hill's system. 

2013: 

2014: \acknowledgments

2015: The authors thank T. Takeuchi, E. Kokubo, S. Ida, and T. Tanigawa for

2016: helpful discussions. 

2017: %%%%%%%Added in Revision%%%%%%%%%

2018:   We also thank the referee of this paper, Dr. Stuart Weidenschilling,

2019:   for useful comments that improved this paper.  

2020: %%%%%%%Added in Revision end%%%%%%%%%

2021: This work was supported by the Grant-in-Aid for the Global COE Program

2022: ``The Next Generation of Physics, Spun from Universality and Emergence''

2023: from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

2024: (MEXT) of Japan.

2025: The numerical calculations were carried out on Altix3700 BX2 at YITP in

2026: Kyoto University. 

2027: T. M. is supported by Grants-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows (19$\cdot$2409)

2028: from MEXT of Japan.

2029: S. I. is

2030: supported by Grants-in-Aid (15740118, 16077202, and 18540238) from MEXT

2031: of Japan.

2032: 

2033: 

2034: 

2035: \appendix

2036: 

2037: \section{Derivation of Equation \eqref{fy_integral}}

2038: \label{App:fy_int}

2039: 

2040: In this section, we briefly show the derivation of \eqref{fy_integral}.

2041: The method is the same as that of Goldreich and Tremaine (1980),

2042: H\'{e}non and Petit (1986), or Hasegawa \& Nakazawa (1990).

2043: 

2044: We consider the restricted three-body problem.  In other words, we

2045: consider the problem with $\nu=0$.  In this case, 

2046: Jacobi energy $E_J$ conserves throughout the particle orbit.  Jacobi

2047: energy is given by

2048: \begin{equation}

2049:  E_J = \dfrac{1}{2} r_{\rm p}^2 \Omega_{\rm p}^2 (h^2 + k^2) -

2050:   \dfrac{3}{8} \Omega_{\rm p}^2 b^2 + \psi_{\rm p},

2051: \end{equation}

2052: where $\psi_{\rm p}$ is the gravitational potential of the planet.

2053: Therefore, orbital elements before and after the encounter with the

2054: planet are related by

2055: \begin{equation}

2056:  - \dfrac{3}{8} \Omega_{\rm p}^2 b^2 = \dfrac{1}{2} r_{\rm p}^2

2057:   \Omega_{\rm p}^2 (h(\infty)^2 + k(\infty)^2) - \dfrac{3}{8}

2058:   \Omega_{\rm p}^2 (b+\Delta b)^2.

2059: \end{equation}

2060: Assuming $\Delta b \ll b$, we obtain

2061: \begin{equation}

2062:  \Delta b \sim \dfrac{2 r_{\rm p}^2}{3b}

2063:   \left( h(\infty)^2 + k(\infty)^2 \right).

2064: \end{equation}

2065: On the other hand, from equation \eqref{eq_b}, $\Delta b$ is given by

2066: \begin{equation}

2067:  \Delta b = \dfrac{2}{\Omega_{\rm p}} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F_y(t) dt.

2068:   \label{db_fy}

2069: \end{equation}

2070: Therefore, we obtain

2071: \begin{equation}

2072:  \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F_y(t) dt = \dfrac{r_{\rm p}^2 \Omega_{\rm

2073:   p}}{3b} ( h(\infty)^2 + k(\infty)^2).

2074:   \label{fyderive}

2075: \end{equation}

2076: 

2077: From equation \eqref{sol_h} and \eqref{sol_k}, 

2078: the elements $h$ and $k$ after the encounter are given by

2079: \begin{equation}

2080:  h(\infty) = - \dfrac{1}{r_{\rm p} \Omega_{\rm p}} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} du 

2081:   \left\{ F_x(u) \sin [ \Omega_{\rm p}u ] + 2F_y(u) 

2082:    \cos [ \Omega_{\rm p} u ]  \right\}

2083:   \label{app_h}

2084: \end{equation}

2085: \begin{equation}

2086:  k(\infty) = \dfrac{1}{r_{\rm p} \Omega_{\rm p}} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} du 

2087:   \left\{ F_x(u) \cos [ \Omega_{\rm p}u ] - 2F_y(u) 

2088:    \sin [ \Omega_{\rm p} u ]  \right\} .

2089:   \label{app_k}

2090: \end{equation}

2091: Approximating the trajectory of the particle by circular orbit, we have

2092: \begin{equation}

2093:  F_x(t) \sim - \mathrm{sgn}(b) \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{b^2} 

2094:   \dfrac{1}{\left( 1+(9/4)(\Omega_{\rm p}t)^2 \right)^{3/2}}

2095:   \label{app_fx}

2096: \end{equation}

2097: \begin{equation}

2098:  F_y(t) \sim \mathrm{sgn}(b) \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{b^2} 

2099:   \dfrac{(3/2)\Omega_{\rm p}t}{\left( 1+(9/4)(\Omega_{\rm p}t)^2

2100: 			       \right)^{3/2}}.

2101:   \label{app_fy}

2102: \end{equation}

2103: Integrating \eqref{app_h} and \eqref{app_k}, we have

2104: \begin{equation}

2105:  h(\infty) = 0

2106: \end{equation}

2107: \begin{equation}

2108:  k(\infty) = - \mathrm{sgn}(b) \dfrac{8}{9} \dfrac{1}{r_{\rm

2109:   p}\Omega_{\rm p}^2} \dfrac{GM_{\rm p}}{b^2} 

2110:   \left[K_1\left(\dfrac{2}{3}\right) + 2 K_0 \left( \dfrac{2}{3} \right)

2111:   \right].

2112: \end{equation}

2113: Substituting these results into equation \eqref{fyderive}, we finally

2114: obtain

2115: \begin{equation}

2116:  \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F_y(t) dt = \dfrac{64}{243} \dfrac{G^2 M_{\rm

2117:   p}^2}{b^5 \Omega_{\rm p}^3} \left[ K_1\left( \dfrac{2}{3} \right) + 2

2118: 			      K_0 \left( \dfrac{2}{3} \right)\right]^2

2119: \end{equation}

2120: We note that direct substitution of equation \eqref{app_fy} into

2121: equation \eqref{db_fy}  results in

2122: zero, indicating that higher order of the expansion is essential.

2123: 

2124: 

2125: \section{Proof of Equation \eqref{Dx_vanish}}

2126: \label{app:pathline}

2127: 

2128: In this section, we show that the right hand side of equation

2129: \eqref{Dx_calc} vanishes up to second order perturbation and prove

2130: equation \eqref{Dx_vanish}.   The equation we prove is

2131: \begin{eqnarray}

2132: &  -\dfrac{2}{\Omega_{\rm p}} \displaystyle{\int_0^T} dt 

2133:  \delta v_x^{(1)} \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta v_y^{(1)} 

2134:   + \displaystyle{\int_0^T} dt_1 \dfrac{\partial 

2135:   \delta v_x^{(1)}}{\partial x} (x_c,y_c(t_1))  

2136:     \displaystyle{\int_0^{t_1}} dt_2 \delta v_x^{(1)} (x_c,y_c(t_2)) 

2137:     \nonumber \\ 

2138: &  + \displaystyle{\int_0^T} dt_1 \dfrac{\partial 

2139:  \delta v_x^{(1)}}{\partial y} (x_c,y_c(t_1))  

2140:     \displaystyle{\int_0^{t_1}} dt_2 \delta v_y^{(1)} (x_c,y_c(t_2)) = 0 

2141: \label{Dx_calc_app}

2142: \end{eqnarray}

2143: We Fourier transform the perturbation in the $y$-direction,

2144: \begin{equation}

2145:  \delta f (x,y) = \overline{\delta f} + 

2146:   \sum_{k_y \neq 0} \tilde{\delta f}_{k_y}(x) e^{ik_y y}

2147: \end{equation}

2148: where $\delta f$ denotes any perturbation quantity, 

2149: $\overline{\delta f}$ is the average over $y$, and $\tilde{f}_{k_y}$ is

2150: the Fourier component of non-axisymmetric modes.  Since physical

2151: quantities are real, 

2152: $\tilde{\delta f}_{k_y} = \tilde{\delta f}_{-k_y}^{\ast}$. 

2153: In this section, we

2154: drop superscript $(1)$ since all the perturbed values refer to first

2155: order values.

2156: 

2157: Since we integrate over the circular orbit, integration with respect to

2158: $t$ is converted to that with respect to $y$ by

2159: \begin{equation}

2160:  y = -\dfrac{3}{2} x_c \Omega_{\rm p} t.

2161: \end{equation}

2162: It is possible to show that the right hand side of equation

2163: \eqref{Dx_calc_app} is equal to

2164: \begin{eqnarray}

2165: & -\dfrac{8L_y}{3\Omega_{\rm p}x_c} \sum_{k_y>0}

2166:   \mathrm{Re} \left[ \tilde{d\delta v_x}_{k_y} \dfrac{\tilde{\delta 

2167: 	       v_y}_{k_y}^{\ast}}{dx} \right] 

2168:  - \dfrac{8L_y}{9\Omega_{\rm p}^2 x_c^2} \sum_{k_y>0}

2169:  \dfrac{1}{k_y} \mathrm{Im} \left[\dfrac{d \tilde{\delta

2170: 			     v_x}_{k_y}^{\ast}}{dx} \tilde{\delta

2171: 			     v_x}_{k_y} \right] \nonumber \\

2172: & + \dfrac{8L_y}{9 \Omega_{\rm p}^2 x_c^2} \sum_{k_y>0}

2173:  \left[ \tilde{\delta v_x}_{k_y}^{\ast} \tilde{\delta v_y}_{k_y}

2174:  \right]

2175:  + \dfrac{4L_y}{9\Omega_{\rm p}^2 x_c^2}

2176:  \overline{\delta v_y} \delta v_x (x_c, L_y/2) .

2177: \end{eqnarray}

2178: The last term is zero as long as the box size is large enough.  Using

2179: equation of continuity

2180: \begin{equation}

2181:  -\dfrac{3}{2}ik_y x \Omega_{\rm p} \dfrac{\tilde{\delta

2182:   \Sigma}_{k_y}}{\Sigma_0} 

2183:  + \dfrac{d}{dx}\tilde{\delta v_x}_{k_y} + ik_y \tilde{\delta v_y} =0 

2184: \end{equation}

2185: and conservation of vorticity

2186: \begin{equation}

2187:  \dfrac{d}{dx} \tilde{\delta v_y}_{k_y} - ik_y \tilde{\delta v_x}_{k_y}

2188:   - \dfrac{1}{2} \Omega_{\rm p} \dfrac{\tilde{\delta

2189:   \Sigma}_{k_y}}{\Sigma_0} = 0,

2190: \end{equation}

2191: we can show that the first three terms cancel.  Hence,

2192: equation \eqref{Dx_vanish} is proved.

2193: 

2194: 

2195: 

2196: \section{Mass Flux of Sound Wave Propagating in a Homogeneous,

2197:  Static Medium}

2198: \label{app:soundwave}

2199: 

2200: In this section, we demonstrate that the sound wave that propagates in a

2201: homogeneous, non-rotating medium carries mass flux, and therefore, show

2202: that the vanishing mass flux given by equation \eqref{massflux_vanish}

2203: is not a general conclusion but specific to the problem in

2204: consideration.  We consider one-dimensional system which extends in

2205: $x>0$, and at $x=0$, there is a forcing that creates a sound wave, which

2206: is turned on at $t=0$.  The full system of equations are the equation of

2207: continuity and Euler equation in one-dimensional system

2208: \begin{eqnarray}

2209: & \dfrac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x}(\rho

2210:  x) = 0 \\

2211: & \dfrac{\partial v}{\partial t} + v\dfrac{\partial v}{\partial x} =

2212:  - \dfrac{c^2}{\rho} \dfrac{\partial \rho}{\partial x} + S\cos(\Omega t)

2213:  \delta_D(x)\theta(t) ,

2214: \end{eqnarray} 

2215: where $\rho$ is density, $v$ is velocity, $c$ is sound speed, $S$ is the

2216: amplitude of the source, $\Omega$ is the frequency of the forcing,

2217: $\delta_D(x)$ is the Dirac's delta function, and $\theta(t)$ is step

2218: function.  We consider background state with constant density $\rho_0$

2219: and vanishing velocity.

2220: 

2221: The first order fluctuation caused by the forcing is given by

2222: \begin{eqnarray}

2223: & \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} \dfrac{\delta \rho^{(1)}}{\rho_0} +

2224:   \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta v^{(1)} = 0 \\

2225: & \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} \delta v^{(1)} + c^2

2226:  \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \dfrac{\delta \rho}{\rho_0} = S

2227:  \cos(\Omega t) \delta(x) \theta(t)

2228: \end{eqnarray} 

2229: and the second order perturbation is caused by the first order

2230: perturbation as follows

2231: \begin{eqnarray}

2232: & \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} \dfrac{\delta \rho^{(1)}}{\rho_0} +

2233:  \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \delta v^{(1)} =  

2234:  - \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \left[ \dfrac{\delta \rho^{(1)}}{\rho_0}

2235: 				\delta v^{(1)} \right] \\

2236: & \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} \delta v^{(1)} + c^2

2237:  \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x} \dfrac{\delta \rho}{\rho_0} = 

2238:  \dfrac{1}{2}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial x}

2239: \left[  

2240:  c^2 \left(\dfrac{\delta \rho^{(1)}}{\rho_0}\right)^2 

2241:  - \delta v^{(1)^2}  \right].

2242: \end{eqnarray}

2243: Mass flux $F_M=\rho v$ is given by, up to the second order,

2244: \begin{equation}

2245:  F_M = \rho_0 \delta v^{(1)} + \rho_0 \delta v^{(2)} 

2246:   + \delta \rho^{(1)} \delta v^{(1)}

2247: \end{equation}

2248: 

2249: Since the sound wave propagates to $x\to\infty$ and there is no

2250: reflection, the appropriate solution for the first order is given by

2251: \begin{eqnarray}

2252: & \dfrac{\delta \rho^{(1)}}{\rho_0} 

2253:  = \dfrac{S}{c^2} \cos(\Omega t - kx),   \\

2254: & \delta v^{(1)} = \dfrac{S}{c} \cos (\Omega t - kx)

2255: \end{eqnarray}

2256: where $k=\Omega/c$ and the boundary condition at $x=0$ is considered.

2257: 

2258: Equation for second order velocity fluctuation is given by

2259: \begin{equation}

2260:  \left[ -\dfrac{1}{c^2} \dfrac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2} +

2261: 			 \dfrac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} \right] 

2262:  \delta v^{(2)} = 

2263:  2\dfrac{k^2 S^2}{c^3} \cos \left[ 2(\Omega t - kx) \right].

2264: \end{equation}

2265: Since all the perturbation must vanish at $t=0$, we obtain

2266: \begin{equation}

2267:  \delta v^{(2)} = - \dfrac{S^2}{2c^3} \Omega t 

2268:   \sin \left[2(\Omega t - kx)  \right] .

2269: \end{equation}

2270: Therefore, mass flux is given by

2271: \begin{equation}

2272:  F_M = \dfrac{\rho_0 S^2}{2c^3} 

2273:   + \dfrac{\rho_0 S}{c} \cos \left[ \Omega t - kx \right]

2274:   + \dfrac{\rho_0 S^2}{2c^3} \Omega t 

2275:     \sin \left[2(\Omega t -kx) \right]

2276:   + \dfrac{\rho_0 S^2}{2c^3} \cos \left[ 2(\Omega t - kx) \right] .

2277: \end{equation}

2278: Therefore, there is a positive and finite mass

2279: flux $\rho_0 S^2/2c^3$ remains even after spatial and temporal averages 

2280: are taken.  It is also possible to show that

2281: a fluid element move to $x>0$ on average by calculating path line. 

2282: 

2283: 

2284: \section{Interpolation Methods }

2285: \label{app:sphint}

2286: 

2287: In the numerical calculation of large drag coefficient, stopping time of

2288: the particle $\nu^{-1}$ is very small that the particle remains in the

2289: same grid cell of the hydrodynamic calculation for several time steps.

2290: In this situation, it is necessary to have a smooth data of gas velocity

2291: even in sub-grid scale in order to obtain a smooth results.  In this

2292: section, we describe how this can be realized.

2293: 

2294: Our method of interpolation is to consider the value of one

2295: grid cell as a representative value of physical data around the grid

2296: cell with a certain width, and add the contribution from nearby grid

2297: cells to find the value of physical quantities at a location of

2298: interest.  Let $f(x)$ be the value of a physical quantity of interest

2299: and the data of $f(x)$ is given at discrete set of grid cells at

2300: $x=x_i$.  We denote the data of $f(x)$ at $x=x_i$ by $f_i=f(x_i)$ and

2301: $\Delta$ by grid size $\Delta=x_{i+1}-x_{i}$.  Let

2302: the grid cell which is closest to the location of interest $x$ be

2303: $x_{i0}$.  Our method of interpolation approximate the value of

2304: $f$ at $x$ by

2305: \begin{equation}

2306:  f(x) \sim \dfrac{\sum_{i=i0-I}^{i=i0+I} f_i \exp[-(x_i/\eta

2307:   \Delta)^2]}{\sum_{i=i0-I}^{i=i0+I}\exp[-(x_i/\eta \Delta)^2]}

2308: \end{equation}

2309: where $I$ is an integer and $\eta$ is a numerical factor.  If $\eta$ is

2310: large, we have a more smoothed but more damped value.  We find

2311: $I=20$ and $\eta=4$ gives a reasonably smooth results.  

2312: 

2313: 

2314: 

2315: \begin{thebibliography}{}

2316: 

2317: \bibitem[Adachi et al. 1976]{AHN76} Adachi, I, Hayashi, C \& Nakazawa, K.

2318: 		  1976, Prog. Theo. Phys.,   56, 1756

2319: 

2320: \bibitem[Artymowicz 1993]{Art93} Artymowicz, P.  1993, \apj,

2321:     419, 155

2322: 

2323: \bibitem[Fouchet et al. 2008]{F08} Fouchet, L., Maddison, S. T.,

2324: 		Gonzalez, J.-F., \& Murray, J.R., 2007, A\&A 474, 1037

2325: 

2326: \bibitem[Goldreich and Tremaine 1979]{GT79} Goldreich, P. \& Tremaine, S.

2327: 		  1979, \apj,   233, 857

2328: 

2329: \bibitem[Goldreich and Tremaine 1980]{GT80} Goldreich, P. \& Tremaine, S.

2330: 		  1980, \apj,   241, 425

2331: 

2332: \bibitem[Goodman and Rafikov 2001]{GR01} Goodman, J \& Rafikov, R. R.

2333: 		  2001, \apj,   552, 793

2334: 

2335: \bibitem[Greenberg 1978]{Gre78} Greenberg, R.

2336: 		1978, Icarus,   33, 62

2337: 

2338: 

2339: \bibitem[Haisch et al. 2001]{HLL01} Haisch, K., E., Lada, E., A., \&

2340: 		Lada, C. J.  2001, \apj,   553, L153

2341: 

2342: \bibitem[Hasegawa and Nalazawa 1990]{HN90} Hasegawa, M. \& Nakazawa, K.

2343: 		  1990, A\&A,   227, 619

2344: 

2345: \bibitem[Hayashi et al. 1985]{HNN85} Hayashi, C.,  Nakazawa, K.,

2346: 		\& Nakagawa, Y.  1985, in Protostars and Planets II,

2347: 		ed. Black \& Matthews (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press)

2348: 

2349: \bibitem[H\'{e}non and Petit 1986]{HP86} H\'{e}non, M. \& Petit, J-M.

2350: 		  1986, Celes. Mech,   38, 67

2351: 

2352: \bibitem[Inaba and Ikoma 2003]{II03} Inaba, S. \& Ikoma, M.

2353: 		  2003, A\&A,   410, 711

2354: 

2355: \bibitem[Kary et al. 1993]{KLG93} Kary, D. M., Lissauer, J. J., \&

2356: 		Greenzweig, Y. 1993, Icarus,   106, 288

2357: 

2358: \bibitem[Kretke and Lin 2007]{KL07} Kretke, A. K. \& Lin, D. N. C.

2359: 		  2007, \apj,   664, L55

2360: 

2361: 

2362: \bibitem[Landau and Lifshitz 1959]{LL59} Landau, L. D. \& Lifshitz

2363: 		E. M., 1959, Fluid Mechanics, Course of Theoretical

2364: 		Physics (Oxford: Pergamon Press)

2365: 

2366: \bibitem[Lyra et al. 2008]{L08} Lyra, W, Johansen, A., Klahr, H., \&

2367: 		Piskunov, N. preprint (arXiv:0810.3192)

2368: 

2369: \bibitem[van Leer 1977]{Leer77} van Leer, B.

2370: 		1977, J. Comp. Phys.,   23, 276

2371: 

2372: \bibitem[Mizuno et al. 1978]{MNH78} Mizuno, H., Nakazawa, K., \&

2373: 		Hayashi, C. 1978, Prog. Theo. Phys, 60, 699

2374: 

2375: 

2376: \bibitem[Narayan et al. 1987]{NGG87} Narayan, R., Goldreich, P.,  \&

2377: 		Goodman, J.  1987, \mnras,  228, 1

2378: 

2379: \bibitem[Paardekooper 2007]{P07} Paardekooper, S.-J. 

2380: 		  2007, A\&A,   462, 355

2381: 

2382: \bibitem[Paardekooper and Mellema 2004]{PM04} Paardekooper, S.-J. \&

2383: 		Mellema, G.  2004, A\&A, 425, L9

2384: 

2385: \bibitem[Paardekooper and Mellema 2006]{PM06} Paardekooper, S.-J. \&

2386: 		Mellema, G.  2006, A\&A, 453, 1129

2387: 

2388: 

2389: \bibitem[Pollack et al. 1996]{PHBL96} Pollack, J. B., Hubickyj, O.,

2390: 		Bodenheimer, P., \& Lissauer, J. J.

2391: 		1996, Icarus,   124, 62

2392: 

2393: 

2394: %\bibitem[Press et al. 1992]{NumRecipe} Press, W. H., Flannery, B. P.,

2395: %	Teukolsky, S. A., \& Vetterling, W. T., 1992, Numerical Recipes

2396: %		in Fortran 90: The Art of Scientific Computing ,

2397: %		(Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

2398: 

2399: \bibitem[Tanaka et al. 2002]{TTW02} Tanaka, H., Takeuchi, T. \& Ward,

2400: 		W. R.  2002, \apj,  565, 1257

2401: 

2402: 

2403: \bibitem[Weidenschilling 1977]{W77} Weidenschilling, S. J.

2404: 		  1977, \mnras, 180, 57

2405: 

2406: \bibitem[Weidenschilling and Davis 1985]{WD85} Weidenschilling, S. J. \&

2407: 		Davis, D. R.  1985, Icarus, 62, 16

2408: 

2409: 

2410: \end{thebibliography}

2411: 

2412: 

2413: \clearpage

2414: 

2415: 

2416: %%%%%%%%%%Figure changed in revision%%%%%%%%%%

2417: \begin{figure}

2418:  \plotone{f1.eps}

2419:  \caption{An example of the relationship between the dust size and the

2420:  drag coefficient 

2421:  $\nu$ used in our numerical calculations, given by equation

2422:  \eqref{draglaw}.  Reciprocal of stopping time, $\nu=t_e^{-1}$ is shown

2423:  as a function of dust size in centimeters for gas densities 

2424:  with $\rho=10^{-8}\mathrm{g/cm}^3$, $\rho=10^{-10}\mathrm{g/cm}^3$, and

2425:  $\rho=10^{-12}\mathrm{g/cm}^3$.}

2426:  \label{fig:size_drag}

2427: \end{figure}

2428: %%%%%%%%%%Figure changed in revision end%%%%%%%%%%

2429: 

2430: 

2431: \begin{figure}

2432:  \plotone{f2.eps}

2433:  \caption{Comparison between the azimuthally averaged profile of 

2434: $L_y \delta v_y/c$ obtained by the

2435:  numerical calculation (solid line) and analytic expression

2436:  \eqref{dvy_asym} (dotted line).  

2437: The results of the numerical calculation is normalized by 

2438: $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2$.}

2439:  \label{fig:dvy_asym_profile}

2440: \end{figure}

2441: 

2442: 

2443: \begin{figure}

2444:  \plotone{f3.eps}

2445:  \caption{Contour plot of $\Delta b/T$ given by equation

2446:  \eqref{deltab_final} normalized by $H\Omega_{\rm p}$ for a planet with 

2447: $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2=10^{-2}$.  The horizontal axis shows the distance from

2448:  the planet and the vertical axis shows the drag coefficient of the

2449:  particle. Global pressure gradient and steady mass accretion is

2450:  neglected ($\eta=\zeta=0$).  We note that our analytic approach is

2451:  limited by assumptions of local approximation, initially circular orbit

2452:  of the particle, and distant encounter.  This figure has only

2453:  qualitative meanings for particles with 

2454:  $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}\lesssim10^{-2}$, with initial semi-major axis

2455:  difference $b \lesssim 3r_{\rm H}$ for 

2456:  $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p} \lesssim 1-10$, or with 

2457:  $b \lesssim r_{\rm H}$ for $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p} \gtrsim 10$.  Detailed

2458:  discussions in the limitation of analytic calculations are given in

2459:  Sections \ref{subsec:limitation_local} and \ref{global}, and are

2460:  summarized in Section \ref{summary}.}

2461:  \label{fig:db_contour}

2462: \end{figure}

2463: 

2464: %%%%%%%figure added in revision%%%%%%%%

2465: \begin{figure}

2466:  \plotone{f4.eps}

2467:  \caption{Evolution of $b$ for a particle with zero drag coefficient

2468:  initially located at $b=H$.  Symbols show the values of $b$

2469:  obtained at the box boundary.  The

2470:  value of $b$ during the encounter is also indicated by dashed line upto

2471:  $t=250\Omega_{\rm p}^{-1}$.}

2472:  \label{fig:threebody_b1}

2473: \end{figure}

2474: %%%%%%%figure added in revision end%%%%%%%%

2475: 

2476: %%%%%%%figure added in revision%%%%%%%%

2477: \begin{figure}

2478:  \plotone{f5.eps}

2479:  \caption{Evolution of $b$ for a particle with zero drag coefficient

2480:  initially located at $b_{\rm ini}=3.4H$ (plus) that corresponds

2481:  to $l=5$ case in equation \eqref{resonance_cond} and 

2482:  $b_{\rm ini}=3.8H$ (cross) that does not satisfy equation

2483:  \eqref{resonance_cond}.  Vertical axis indicates the value of

2484:  $(b(t)-b_{\rm ini})/H$.  The value of $b(t)$ is obtained when the

2485:  particle reaches the box boundary.  Note that vertical axis of this

2486:  figure is in logarithmic scale and the values smaller than $10^{-9}$

2487:  are not plotted.  Horizontal axis shows time.}

2488:  \label{fig:threebody_res}

2489: \end{figure}

2490: %%%%%%%figure added in revision end%%%%%%%%

2491: 

2492: \begin{figure}

2493:  \plotone{f6.eps}

2494:  \caption{Evolution of $b$ for particles initially located at $x=H$ with

2495:  different drag 

2496:  coefficient.  Planet mass corresponds to $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2=10^{-2}$.

2497: Particles with small drag coefficients shows oscillation,

2498:  while particles with large drag coefficient shows a systematic decrease

2499:  or increase of semi-major axis.}

2500:  \label{fig:bevol_nu}

2501: \end{figure}

2502: 

2503: 

2504: 

2505: \begin{figure}

2506:  \plotone{f7.eps}

2507:  \caption{Comparison between the local numerical calculation (solid

2508:  line) and analytical formula (dashed line) of $\Delta b / T$ for

2509:  particles with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{-2}$.  

2510:  The value of $\Delta b/T$ is the average of a number of encounters and

2511:  calculated using equation \eqref{average_db_calc}.

2512:  The gravitational force by the planet and the

2513:  spiral pattern of the gas around the planet are both considered.}

2514:  \label{fig:bdecay_Hill_d10m}

2515: \end{figure}

2516: 

2517: \begin{figure}

2518:  \plotone{f8.eps}

2519:  \caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:bdecay_Hill_d10m} but for

2520:  particles with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=1$.}

2521:  \label{fig:bdecay_Hill_d1m}

2522: \end{figure}

2523: 

2524: \begin{figure}

2525:  \plotone{f9.eps}

2526:  \caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:bdecay_Hill_d10m} but for

2527:  particles with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^2$.}

2528:  \label{fig:bdecay_Hill_d10cm}

2529: \end{figure}

2530: 

2531: 

2532: \begin{figure}

2533:  \plotone{f10.eps}

2534:  \caption{Long-term evolution of the semi-major axis of the particles

2535:  with $\nu=\Omega_{\rm p}$.  The mass of the planet corresponds to  

2536: $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2=10^{-2}$.  The calculations are done for the disk model

2537:  with zero pressure gradient and zero accretion flow, $\eta=\zeta=0$.}

2538:  \label{fig:long_nu1}

2539: \end{figure}

2540: 

2541: %%%%%%%figures added in revision%%%%%%%

2542: \begin{figure}

2543:  \plotone{f11.eps}

2544:  \caption{Deflection of the particle's semi-major axis after the first

2545:  encounter with the planet.  The amount of deflection is quantified by

2546:  equation \eqref{deflection_rate}.  Horizontal axis denotes

2547:  the particle's initial semi-major axis and vertical axis denotes the

2548:  particle's drag, or equivalently, size.  Initial semi-major axes are

2549:  shown in terms of scale height (bottom axis) and Hill's radius (top

2550:  axis).  Gray scale shows the amount of deflection, and the contours of

2551:  10\% (solid line) and 1\% (dashed line) deflection are shown.

2552:  Particles in black regions are trapped by the planet (that is, mutual

2553:  distance between the particle and the planet becomes smaller than half

2554:  of Hill's radius) or in horseshoe orbit.}

2555:  \label{fig:size_deflection}

2556: \end{figure}

2557: %%%%%%%figures added in revision end%%%%%%%

2558: 

2559: %%%%%%%figures added in revision%%%%%%%

2560: \begin{figure}

2561:  \plotone{f12.eps}

2562:  \caption{Examples of the orbit of the particle when they encounter with

2563:  the planet.  Particles with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{-4}$ (solid line)

2564:  and $\nu / \Omega_{\rm p}=10^3$ (dashed line) are shown.  Both

2565:  particles are initially located at $b=2r_{\rm H}$.  Only the region

2566:  $(1r_{\rm H}<x<2r_{\rm H},-50r_{\rm H}<y<50r_{\rm H})$ is shown.  The

2567:  particle with small drag is strongly perturbed by the planet and

2568:  eventually captured within the Hill's radius, while that with large

2569:  drag can escape owing to the drag by the background gas.} 

2570:  \label{fig:orbit_2hill}

2571: \end{figure}

2572: %%%%%%%figures added in revision end%%%%%%%

2573: 

2574: 

2575: %%%%%figures added in revision%%%%%%

2576: \begin{figure}

2577:  \plotone{f13.eps}

2578:  \caption{Comparison between the global numerical calculation (solid

2579:  line) and local calculation (dashed line) of

2580:  $\Delta b / T$ for 

2581:  particles with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{-2}$.  The average of the change

2582:  of the semi-major axis of the particle after 100

2583:  encounters with the planet is shown.

2584:   Horizontal axis shows the initial location of the particle normalized

2585:  by disk scale height, $b/H=(r-r_{\rm p})/H$.

2586:  We use disk aspect ratio $H/r_{\rm p}=0.04$ and the mass ratio between

2587:  the planet and the central star is $M_{\rm p}/M_{\ast}=6\times10^{-7}$.

2588:  The disk aspect ratio is chosen in such a way that the value of $L_y$

2589:  we have adopted in the integration of Hill's equation corresponds to

2590:  $2\pi r_{\rm p}$, and the planet mass is chosen in such a way that

2591:  $GM_{\rm p}/Hc^2=10^{-2}$, which is also the value we have used in

2592:  local calculations.  Keplerian rotation of the gas is assumed so

2593:  $\eta=\zeta=0$ and there is no modification of the gas structure by the

2594:  planet's gravity.  Note that global calculations and local calculations

2595:  are in good agreement except for the location of the resonances.  The

2596:  position of $4:5$, $5:6$, and $6:7$ resonances are indicated by arrows. 

2597: }

2598:  \label{fig:globalHill_d10m}

2599: \end{figure}

2600: %%%%%figures added in revision end%%%%%%

2601: 

2602: %%%%%figures added in revision%%%%%%

2603: \begin{figure}

2604:  \plotone{f14.eps}

2605:  \caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:globalHill_d10m} but for

2606:  particles with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=1$.  Particles initially located at

2607:  $b/H < 1.4$ has been trapped in the vicinity of the resonance so the

2608:  average rate of orbital change over 100 encounters is small.  See also

2609:  Figures \ref{fig:long_nu1} and \ref{fig:long_nu1_global} for the time

2610:  evolution of semi-major axis difference $b$ 

2611:  for particles with $b/H \lesssim 1.4$.}

2612:  \label{fig:globalHill_d1m}

2613: \end{figure}

2614: %%%%%figures added in revision end%%%%%%

2615: 

2616: %%%%%figures added in revision%%%%%%

2617: \begin{figure}

2618:  \plotone{f15.eps}

2619:  \caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:globalHill_d10m} but for

2620:  particles with $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=10^{2}$.}

2621:  \label{fig:globalHill_d10cm}

2622: \end{figure}

2623: %%%%%figures added in revision end%%%%%%

2624: 

2625: %%%%%figures added in revision%%%%%%

2626: \begin{figure}

2627:  \plotone{f16.eps}

2628:  \caption{Evolution of semi-major axis of particles with

2629:  $\nu/\Omega_{\rm p}=1$ in global run with $\eta=\zeta=0$ and the

2630:  gas is assumed to rotate at Kepler velocity.  Osculating elements of

2631:  the particle at the opposition point is plotted.  Particles in both

2632:  interior and exterior orbits migrate towards the planet and trapped in

2633:  the orbit of $\sim 0.3H$.   This figure corresponds to Figure

2634:  \ref{fig:long_nu1} that shows the results of local calculations.}

2635:  \label{fig:long_nu1_global}

2636: \end{figure}

2637: %%%%%figures added in revision end%%%%%%

2638: 

2639: \begin{figure}

2640:  \plotone{f17.eps}

2641:  \epsscale{0.95}

2642:  \caption{Time evolution of the distribution of dust particles around

2643:  $2M_{\oplus}$ embedded

2644:  in a solar nebula at $t\Omega_{\rm p}=5\times 10^3$ (top left),

2645:  $t\Omega_{\rm p}=10^5$ (top right), and

2646:  $t\Omega_{\rm p}=10^6$ (bottom left) with various $\nu$.

2647:  The horizontal axis denotes the semi-major axis difference between

2648:  the planet and the particle.  Gray scale indicates the fraction of

2649:  the remaining particles.  The

2650:  pressure gradient factor $\eta$ is set to be zero.}

2651:  \label{fig:advection}

2652: \end{figure}

2653: 

2654: 

2655: \end{document}

2656: