Terrestrial and Habitable Planet Formation in Binary and Multi-star
  Systems
White Paper 
(Submitted to ExoPlanet Task Force) 
Terrestrial and Habitable Planet Formation in  
Binary and Multi-star Systems 
Authors 
Nader Haghighipour  
Institute for Astronomy and NASA Astrobiology Institute, University of Hawaii-Manoa 
Steinn Sigurdsson   
Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics and NASA Astrobiology Institute, Penn State University 
Jack Lissauer 
Space Science and Astrobiology Division, NASA-Ames Research Center 
Sean Raymond 
Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, and Center for Astrobiology, University of Colorado 
Introduction 
The discovery of extrasolar planets during the past decade has confronted astronomers with 
many new challenges. The diverse and surprising dynamical characteristics of many of these 
objects have made scientists wonder to what extent the current theories of planet formation can 
be applied to other planetary systems. A major challenge of planetary science is now to explain 
how such planets were formed, how they acquired their unfamiliar dynamical state, whether 
there are habitable extrasolar planets, and how to detect such habitable worlds. 
 In this respect, one of the most surprising discoveries is the detection of planets in binary star 
systems. Among the currently known extrasolar planet-hosting stars approximately 25% are 
members of binaries (Table 1). With the exception of the pulsar planetary system PSR B1620-26 
(Sigurdsson et al. 2003; Richer et al. 2003; Beer et al. 2004), and possibly the system of 
HD202206 (Correia et al. 2005), planets in these binary systems revolve only around one of the 
stars. While the majority of these binaries are wide (i.e., with separations between 250 and 6500 
AU, where the perturbative effect of the stellar companion on planet formation around the other 
star is negligible), the detection of Jovian-type planets in the two binaries γ Cephei (separation of 
18.5 AU, see Hatzes et al. 2003) and GJ 86 (separation of 21 AU, see Els et al. 2001) have 
brought to the forefront questions on the formation of giant planets and the possibility of the 
existence of smaller bodies in moderately close binary and multiple star systems. Given that 
more than half of main sequence stars are members of binaries/multiples (Duquennoy & Mayor 
1991; Mathieu et al. 2000), and the frequency of planets in binary/multiple systems is 
comparable to those around single stars (Bonavita & Desidera 2007), such questions have 
realistic grounds. 
 At present, the sensitivity of the detection techniques does not allow routine discovery of 
Earth-sized objects around binary and multi-star systems. However, with the advancement of 
new techniques, and with the recent launch of CoRoT and the launch of Kepler in late 2008, the 
detection of more planets (possibly terrestrial-class objects) in such systems is on the horizon.  
Table 1- Binary and multi-star systems with extrasolar planets (Haghighipour 2006) 
Star Star Star Star 
HD142 (GJ 9002) HD3651 HD9826 (υAnd) HD13445 (GJ 86) 
HD19994 HD22049 (εEri) HD27442 HD40979 
HD41004 HD75732 (55 Cnc) HD80606 HD89744 
HD114762 HD117176 (70 Vir) HD120136 (τBoo) HD121504 
HD137759 HD143761 (ρCrb) HD178911 HD186472 (16 Cyg) 
HD190360 (GJ 777 A) HD192263 HD195019 HD213240 
HD217107 HD219449 HD219542 HD222404 (γCeph) 
HD178911 PSR B1257-20 PSR B1620-26 HD202206 
See http://www.obspm.fr/planets for complete list of extrasolar planets with their corresponding 
references. 
                       
Fig 1. The time of ejection, vs. the initial semimajor axis of an Earth-like planet in a co-planar arrangement in 
the γ Cephei system. The binary consists of a 1.59 solar-masses K1 IV subgiant as its primary (Fuhrmann 
2003) and a probable red M dwarf with a mass of 0.41 solar-masses (Neuhauser et al 2007) as its secondary. 
The semimajor axis and eccentricity of the binary are 18.5 AU and 0.36, respectively (Hatzes et al. 2003). The 
primary star is host to a 1.7 Jupiter-masses object in an orbit with a semimajor axis of 2.13 AU and eccentricity 
of 0.12. The habitable zone of the primary is within 3 AU to 3.7 AU from this star (Haghighipour 2006). As 
shown here, the orbit of an Earth-sized object in the primary’s habitable zone is unstable. However, such an 
object can have a log-term stable orbit in distances closer to the primary star. 
Theoretical studies and numerical modeling of terrestrial and habitable planet formation in such 
dynamically complex environments are, therefore, necessary to gain fundamental insights into 
the prospects for life in such systems and have great strategic impact on NASA science and 
missions.  
 Several lines of investigations are needed to ensure progress in understanding the formation 
of terrestrial and habitable planets in binary and multi-star systems. 
                   
Fig 2. Results of simulations of the formation of Earth-like objects in the habitable zone of the 
primary of a binary star system. The stars of the binary are Sun-like and the primary is host to a 
Jupiter-sized object on a circular orbit at 5 AU. Simulations show the results for different values 
of the eccentricity and semimajor axis of the stellar companion (Haghighipour & Raymond 2007). 
As shown here, the orbital motion of the secondary star disturbs the orbit of the giant planet, 
which in turn affects the final assembly and water contents of the terrestrial objects. This figure 
also shows that binary systems with larger perihelia are more favorable for forming and harboring 
habitable planets. The quantities ab  and eb represent the seimmajor axis and eccentricity of the 
binary. 
1) Computational Modeling 
Extensive numerical studies are necessary to  
i) map the parameter-space of binary and/or multiple star systems to identify  
    regions where giant and terrestrial planets can have long-term stable orbits, 
ii) simulate the  collision and growth of planetesimals to form protoplanetary objects, 
iii) simulate the formation of planetesimals in circumbinary and circumstellar disks, 
iii) develop models of protoplanet disk chemistry that ensure delivery of water to  
      terrestrial-class planets in the habitable zone, 
iv) simulate the interaction of planetary embryos and the late stage of terrestrial  
      planet formation. 
The parameter-space is large and includes the masses and orbital parameters of the stars and 
planets. It is, therefore, necessary to develop a systematic approach, based on the results of  
                     
Fig 3. Histograms of the number of final terrestrial planets formed in binary star systems with periastron 
distances of 5 AU (top), 7.5 AU (middle), and 10 AU (bottom). The color red corresponds to simulations in a 
binary in which the primary and secondary stars are 0.5 solar-masses. The color blue represents a binary with 
1 solar-mass stars, and the color yellow corresponds to a binary with a 0.5 solar-masses primary and a 1 solar-
mass secondary. The black line in the middle panel shows the results of simulations when the primary star is 
1 solar-mass and the secondary is 0.5 solar-masses. As shown here, the typical number of final planets clearly 
increases in systems with larger stellar periastra, and also when the companion star is less massive than the 
primary (Quintana et al. 2007). 
current research, to avoid un-necessary simulations, particularly if the computational resources 
are limited.  
 Current research has indicated that terrestrial-class planets can have long-term stable orbits as 
long as they are closer to their host stars and their orbits lie outside the influence zone of the 
giant planet of the system (figure 1, also see Holman & Wiegert 1999; David et al. 2003; 
Haghighipour 2006). This implies, in order for such systems to be habitable, the habitable zone 
of the planet-hosting star has to be considerably closer to it than orbit of its giant planet(s). Given 
that the location of the habitable zone is a function of the luminosity of a star, the above-
mentioned criterion can be used to constrain stellar properties. Recent numerical simulations 
have also shown that (1) water-delivery is more efficient when the perihelion of the binary is 
large and the orbit of the giant planet is close to a circle (figures 2 and 3, also see Quintana et al. 
2007, Haghighipour & Raymond 2007), and (2) habitable planets can form in the habitable zone 
of a star during the migration of giant planets (figure 4, see Raymond, Mandell & Sigurdsson, 
2006). Since many stars are formed in clusters, their mutual interactions may change their orbital 
configurations and cause their giant planets to revolve around their host starts in un-conventional 
orbits. Theoretical studies are essential to identify systems capable of forming and harboring 
habitable planets. 
                                 
Fig 4. Habitable planet formation at presence of giant planet migration (Raymond, Mandell & Sigurdsson 
2006). The system consists of a Sun-like star and a Jupiter-sized giant planet. The figure shows snapshots in 
time of the evolution of one simulation. Each panel plots the orbital eccentricity versus semimajor axis for 
each surviving body. The size of each body is proportional to its physical size (except for the giant planet, 
shown in black). The vertical "error bars" represent the sine of each body's inclination on the y-axis scale. The 
color of each dot corresponds to its water content (as per the color bar), and the dark inner dot represents the 
relative size of its iron core. For scale, the Earth's water content is roughly 10-3. As shown here, an Earth-like 
object can form in the habitable zone of the star while the giant planet migrates to closer distances.  
2) Theoretical Analysis of Observation Data 
Recent observations of binary star systems, using Spitzer Space Telescope, show evidence of 
debris disks in these environments (Trilling et al. 2007). As shown by these authors, 
approximately 60% of their observed close binary systems (separation smaller than 3 AU) have 
excess in their thermal emissions, implying on-going collisions in their planetesimal regions.  
Future space-, air-, and ground-based telescopes such as ALMA, SOFIA and JWST will be able 
to detect more of such disks and will also be able to resolve their fine structures. Numerical 
simulations, similar to those for debris disks around single stars (Telesco et al. 2005), will be 
necessary in order to understand the dynamics of such planet-forming environments, and also 
identify the source of their disks features (e.g., embedded planets, and/or on-going planetesimals 
collision). Due to the complex nature of these systems, such numerical studies require more 
advanced computational codes, and more powerful computers. Developing theories of disk 
evolution in close binary systems is also essential. 
3) Computational Resources 
Given the extent and complexity of simulations of planet formation in multi-star systems, and the 
high dimensionality of the parameter space of initial conditions, supports for developing 
computational resources with the primary focus of conducting numerical analysis of terrestrial 
planet formation are essential. Reliable simulations of collisional growth of planetesimals and 
planetary embryos require integration of the orbits of several hundred thousands of such objects. 
With the current technology, such simulations may take several months to a year to complete. It 
is therefore necessary to develop (i) faster integration routines, and (ii) major computational 
facilities with the primary focus of simulating terrestrial planet formation.     
Strategic Impact to NASA Missions 
Understanding terrestrial and habitable planet formation in binary and multiple star systems has 
implications for investigating the habitability of extra-solar planets. It ties directly into near 
future NASA missions, in particular Kepler, and JWST as well as complementary ongoing and 
planned NSF and privately funded surveys that include transit, and radial velocity. It is also 
closely coupled with the scientific aspect of the Space Exploration Vision and aligns with the 
2006 NASA Science Program implementation of the Strategic sub-goal 3D: 
“Discover the origin, structure, evolution, and destiny of the universe and search for earth-like 
planets.” 
The strategic relevance to the NASA missions is in the prospects for detection of habitable 
Earth-like planets. Studies such as those presented here underlie hypotheses regarding the 
likelihood of the existence of such planets, the origin of life in the habitable zones of their host 
stars, and theories of evolution and persistence of life after initiation, at the presence of a stellar 
companion. Earth-like objects in and around binary star systems allow testing of theories of 
extrasolar habitability and origin of life. Prospects for testing of extrasolar life are intrinsically 
exciting and valuable to the NASA community and the public, and the systems to be explored, 
once found, provide calibration targets for future NASA missions.  
References  
Beer, M. E., King, A. P., &  Pringle, J. E. 2004, MNRAS, 355, 1244 
Bonavita, M., & Desidera, S. 2007, submitted to A&A (astro-ph/0703754) 
Correia, A. C. M., Udry, S., Mayor, M., Laskar, J., Naef, D., Pepe, F., Queloz, D.,  
& Santos, N. C., 2005, A&A, 440, 751 
David, E., Quintana, E. V., Fatuzzo, M., Adams, F. C., 2003, PASP, 115, 825 
Duquennoy, A., & Mayor, M. 1991, A&A, 248, 485 
Els, S. G., Sterzik, M. F., Marchis, F., Pantin, E., Endl, M., & Kurster, M. 2001,  
A&A, 370, L1 
Fuhrmann, K. 2003, Astron.Nachr. 323, 392 
Haghighipour, N. 2006, ApJ, 644, 543 
Haghighipour, N., & Raymond, S. N., to appear in ApJ (astro-ph/0702706) 
Holman, M. J., & Wiegert, P. A. 1999, AJ, 117, 621 
Hatzes, A. P., Cochran, W. D., Endl, M., McArthur, B., Paulson, D. B., Walker, G. A. H., 
Campbell, B., & Yang, S. 2003, ApJ, 599, 1383 
Mathieu, R. D., Ghez, A. M., Jensen, E. L. N., & Simon, M. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, 
ed. V. Mannings, A. P. Boss, & S. S. Russell (Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press), 703 
Neuhauser, R., Mugrauer, M., Fukagawa, M., Torres, G., Schmidt, T., 2007, A&A, 462, 777 
Quintana, E. V., Adams, F. C., Lissauer, J. J., Chambers, J. E. 2007, ApJ, to appear in vol. 660 
Raymond, S. N., Mandell, A. M., & Sigurdsson, S., 2006, Science, 313, 1413 
Richer, H. B., Ibata, R., Fahlman, G., G., & Huber, M. 2003, ApJ, 597, L45 
Sigurdsson, S., Richer, H. B., Hansen, B., M., Stairs, I. H., & Thorsett, S. E. 2003,  
Science, 301, 103 
Telesco, C. M., Fisher, R. S., Wyatt, M. C., Dermott, S. F., Kehoe, T. J. J., Novotny. S., 
Mariñas, N., Radomski, J. T., Packham, C., De Buizer, J., Hayward, T. L., 2005,  
Nature, 433, 133 
Trilling, D. E., Stansberry, J. A., Stapelfeldt, K. R., Rieke, G. H., Su, K. Y. L., Gray, R. O., 
Corbally, C. J., Bryden, G., Chen, C. H., Boden, A., Beichman, C. A. 2007, 658, 1289
