Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Are the Jovian Planets “Failed” Stars?

Abstract

THERE are three distinct types of object in the Solar System—the Sun is a star ; the terrestrial planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth/Moon, Mars) are solid bodies ; and the Jovian planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune) are cold gaseous bodies. The nature of Pluto is not established and Pluto will be discounted for my purposes here. It is surely no accident that the solid members of the planetary system lie nearer the Sun than the gaseous members. The most distant terrestrial planet (Mars) is 1.52 AU from the Sun whereas the nearest Jovian planet (Jupiter) is 5.20 AU from the Sun (1 AU = 1.496 × 108 km). As yet no agreed view of planetary formation exists. Most theories involve a single process for all the planets (see, for example, ref. 1). I suggest that the division of the planetary bodies into solid and gaseous types may imply different formation mechanisms. In particular I suggest that the terrestrial planets formed in a high density shell surrounding the proto-Sun and that the Jovian planets are the remnants of other attempts to form stars contemporaneously with the Sun.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Williams, I. P., and Cremin, A. W., Q. Jl R. astr. Soc. 9, 40 (1968).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Disney, M. J., McNally, D., and Wright, A. E., Man. Not. R. astr. Soc. 146 123 (1969).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hunter, J. H., jun., Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc., 142, 473 (1969).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Larson, R. B., Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc., 145, 271 (1969).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  5. Penston, M. V., Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc., 145, 457 (1969).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. McNally, D., Proc. Albany Conf. Interstellar Dust and Related Topics (in the press)

  7. McNally, D., Adv. atom. molec. Phys., 8, 1 (1973).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Allen, C. W., Astrophysical Quantities (Athlone Press, London, 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lin, C. C., Mestel, L., and Shu, F. H., Astrophys. J., 142, 1431 (1965).

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

MCNALLY, D. Are the Jovian Planets “Failed” Stars?. Nature 244, 424–426 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1038/244424a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/244424a0

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing