Detached but Not Alone

Microlensing surveys have discovered plenty of regular exoplanets, but more surprisingly, they’ve also turned up many solo Neptunes with no star nearby. New research suggests that first impressions might be deceiving, however, and that at least some of these planets might not be so alone: they just have a complicated family history.

An Abundance of Exo-Neptunes

There are simply too many Neptune-like exoplanets in our galaxy. Or at least that’s the current feeling astronomers get from gravitational microlensing surveys, which look for exoplanets during short-lived magnification events caused by chance alignments between stars. These surveys have now found about a dozen so-called “free-floating” planets, and while this doesn’t sound like that many, running the numbers reveals that this tiny sample implies that there are about two free-floating Neptune-size planets for every star in the galaxy.

The idea that there are more free-ranging Neptunes than stars is unsettling, and astronomers aren’t yet sure how this many planets ended up so isolated. It’s possible that these objects simply formed disconnected from any planetary system, but it’s unclear how something so small could collapse from the interstellar clouds that usually produce stellar-mass objects. It’s also possible that the planets formed around stars in the usual way, only to be later kicked out by some violent dynamical process — but this would either require too much time or too many giant planets capable of ejecting the lower-mass ones.

However, new research by Sam Hadden (Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics) and Yanqin Wu (University of Toronto) presents an alternative idea: what if at least some of these free-floating planets aren’t fully on their own, but instead remain estranged but weakly bound to their parent stars?

Simulated Scattering

Two celestial objects need to align nearly perfectly in order to create a microlensing pulse that we can detect. For an exoplanet orbiting a star, we should observe two of these pulses: one when the host star drifts in and out of alignment with a background star, and one when the nearby bound planet does the same. In the case of a free-floating planet, there’s only one pulse, and we therefore assume that there is no host star. Hadden and Wu noticed that since the alignment has to be so precise for microlensing to occur, it’s possible that a seemingly free-floating planet is simply widely separated from its host star, and the star managed to dodge the magnification effect. In other words, these planets might not be free floating at all, just on wide and eccentric orbits.

The researchers decided to test whether it’s possible to create these kinds of orbits via a known dynamical process called planet–planet scattering. As the name implies, during this process, planets that begin on orderly orbits around their parent star undergo a dramatic rearrangement as they jostle each other around through gravitational interactions. The researchers created two types of simulations: one with a collection of equal-mass planets, and another in which one planet dominates over a brood of smaller ones. After setting up the systems, they let the “dynamical havoc” proceed for a few hundred million years, then surveyed the aftermath.

They found that both types of simulations readily created the “detached” objects needed to mimic free-floating planets. In fact, the most common outcome was for two or three planets to be bullied into far-out orbits by a planet that then plunges onto a tight inner orbit extremely close to the star.

Though the authors caution that this process likely doesn’t explain all of the free-floating planets observed to date, this is an exciting model that would dramatically lower our estimates of the number of Neptunes roaming alone between the stars.

Citation

“Free Floating or Merely Detached?,” Sam Hadden and Yanqin Wu 2026 ApJ 1000 70. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae6508