Astron. Astrophys. 350, 685-693 (1999)
3. Dynamical friction in KB
The equation of motion of a KBO can be written as:
![[EQUATION]](img76.gif)
(Wiegert & Tremaine 1997). The term
represents the force per unit mass
from the Sun, that from planets,
that from the Galactic tide,
that from giant molecular clouds,
that from passing stars,
that from other sources (e.g.
non-gravitational forces), while R is the dissipative force
(the sum of accretion and dynamical friction terms - see Melita &
Woolfson 1996). If we consider KBOs at heliocentric distances
then
may be neglected. We also neglect
the effects of non-gravitational forces and the perturbations from
Galactic tide, GCMs or stellar perturbations, which are important only
for objects at heliocentric distances
(Brunini & Fernandez 1996). We
assume that the planetesimals travel around the Sun in circular orbits
and we study the orbital evolution of KBOs after they reach a mass
. Moreover we suppose that the role
of collisions for our KBOs at distances
can be neglected. We know that the
role of collisions would be progressively less important with
increasing distance from the Sun because the collision rate,
(
is the collision cross section), decreases due to the decrease in the
local space number density, n of KBOs and the local average
crossing velocity, v, of the target body. As stated previously,
using Eq. (1) at distances larger than
the collision time,
, is of the order of the age of the
solar system. Besides, the energy damping is not dominated by
collisional damping but by dynamical friction damping; also,
artificially increasing the collisional dampings hardly change the
dynamics of the largest bodies (Kokubo & Ida 1998).
To take account of dynamical friction we need a suitable formula
for a disk-like structure such as KB. Following Chandrasekhar &
von Neumann's (1942) method, the frictional force which is experienced
by a body of mass , moving through a
homogeneous and isotropic distribution of lighter particles of mass
, having a velocity distribution
is given by:
![[EQUATION]](img90.gif)
(Chandrasekhar 1943); where is
the Coulomb logarithm, and
are, respectively, the masses of the
test particle and that of the field one, and
and
the respective velocity,
is the number of field particles
with velocities between ,
.
If the velocity distribution is Maxwellian Eq. (5) becomes:
![[EQUATION]](img96.gif)
(Chandrasekhar 1943, Binney & Tremaine 1987),where
is the density of field particles
and ,
being the velocity dispersion.
Eq. (6) cannot be used for systems not spherically symmetric except
for the case of objects moving in the equatorial plane of an
axisymmetric distribution of matter. These objects, in fact, have no
way of perceiving that the potential in which they move is not
spherically symmetric.
We know that KB is a disc and consequently for objects moving away
from the disc plane we need a more general formula than Eq. (6).
Moreover dynamical friction in discs differs from that in spherical
isotropic three dimensional systems. First, in a disc close encounters
give a contribution to the friction that is comparable to that of
distant encounters (Donner & Sundelius 1993; Palmer et al. 1993).
Collective effects in a disc are much stronger than in a
three-dimensional system. The velocity dispersion of particles in a
disc potential is anisotropic. N-body simulations and observations
show that the radial component of the dispersion,
, and the vertical one,
, are characterized by a ratio
for planetesimals in a Keplerian
disc (Ida et al. 1993). The velocity dispersion evolves through
gravitational scattering between particles. Gravitational scattering
between particles transfers the energy of the systematic rotation to
the random motion (Stewart & Wetherill 1988). In other words the
velocity distribution of a Keplerian particle disc is ellipsoidal with
ratio 2:1 between the radial and orthogonal (z ) directions
(Stewart & Wetherill 1988). According with what previously told,
we assume that the matter-distribution is disc-shaped, having a
velocity distribution:
![[EQUATION]](img102.gif)
(Hornung & al. 1985, Stewart & Wetherill 1988) where
and
are the velocity and the velocity
dispersion in the direction parallel to the plane while
and
are the same in the perpendicular
direction. We suppose that and
are constants and their ratio is
simply taken to be 2:1. Then according to Chandrasekhar (1968) and
Binney (1977) we may write the force components as:
![[EQUATION]](img107.gif)
![[EQUATION]](img108.gif)
where
![[EQUATION]](img109.gif)
![[EQUATION]](img110.gif)
and
![[EQUATION]](img111.gif)
while is the average spatial
density. When the drag caused by
dynamical friction will tend to increase the anisotropy of the
velocity distribution of the test particles. The frictional drag on
the test particles may be written:
![[EQUATION]](img114.gif)
where and
are two unity vectors parallel and
perpendicular to the disc plane.
This result differs from the classical Chandrasekhar (1943)
formula. Chandrasekhar's result tells that dynamical friction force,
, is always directed as
. This means that if a massive body
moves, for example, in a disc in a plane different from the symmetry
plane, dynamical friction causes it to spiral through the center of
the mass distribution always remaining in its own plane. It shall
reach the disc plane only when it reaches the centre of the
distribution. Eq. (13) shows that a massive object suffers drags
and
in the directions within and
perpendicular to the equatorial plane of the distribution. This means
that the object shall find itself confined to the plane of the disc
before it reaches the centre of the distribution (this means that also
inclinations are damped). In other words the dynamical drag
experienced by an object of mass
moving through a non-spherical distribution of less massive objects of
mass is not directed in the
direction of the relative movement of the massive particle and the
centre of mass of the less massive objects (as in the case of
spherically symmetric distribution of matter). As a consequence the
already flat distribution of more massive objects will be further
flattened during the evolution of the system (Binney 1977). The
objects lying in the plane, as previously told, have no way to
perceive that they are moving in a not spherically symmetric
potential. Hence we expect that the dynamical drag is directed in the
direction opposite to the motion of the particle:
![[EQUATION]](img121.gif)
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999
Online publication: October 4, 1999
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |