A super-Earth beyond Mars would have made Earth nearly uninhabitable

an array of planetary bodies and an asteroid belt stretch from left to right across space.
An artist's impression of some of the solar system. Note the space rocks between Mars and Jupiter. What if a super-Earth existed there? (Image credit: NASA)

Planetary scientists recently simulated an alternate version of our solar system: one with a super-Earth causing climate chaos on Earth, Mars and Venus.

One of the most common types of planets in our galaxy are worlds larger than Earth, but not quite as massive as Neptune. These super-Earths, as they're called, are nearly everywhere we look in the Milky Way — except, oddly enough, in our own solar system. However, according to Florida Institute of Technology planetary scientists Emily Simpson and Howard Chen, it's no surprise that we're sitting in a cosmic neighborhood without one of these planets.

If our solar system had a super-Earth, it's very possible we wouldn't be here in this article together at all.

By studying an alternate version of our own solar system, Simpson and Chen hoped to investigate how exoplanets might influence one another's orbits. Certain orbits of planets, for instance, may make their neighbors more habitable. As it turns out, if the inner reaches of a star system are home to a planet very much larger than Earth, the other planets are likely to experience weird orbits and wild climate extremes.

Related: NASA exoplanet telescope discovers 'super-Earth' in its star's Goldilocks zone

Simpson and Chen built computer simulations of what would happen if a super-Earth orbited the sun somewhere between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter. It's technically possible that our solar system might have turned out that way if something had gone just a tiny bit differently during its formative years, when the seeds of planets were just starting to coalesce out of the disk of dusty debris around the newborn sun. If, for example, the gas giants had grown slightly less — well, giant — there might have been room and material for a super-Earth just beyond Mars.


"The configuration that we end up with within the solar system is definitely not something that is indeed common," Chen told Space.com, but he adds, "While the chances of this happening in our own solar system is small, it could very well happen in many exoplanet systems."

What's the worst that could happen?

A super-Earth just beyond Mars would throw all the smaller rocky worlds of the inner solar system completely out of whack; the super-Earth's gravity would push and pull the other planets into eccentric (long and narrow) orbits, or even wildly tilted ones. Some of those orbits would also be constantly changing, never stable. On the surfaces of those planets, conditions would be tumultuous: tilted and eccentric orbits could both cause extreme summers and winters, and worlds with unstable orbits might swing rapidly in and out of ice ages.

Any life on such a world would need to be hardy and able to adapt quickly to dramatic changes in the environment. This may suggest that even rocky, Earth-size worlds in the habitable zones (the area around a star where temperatures are right for liquid water to exist on a planet’s surface) of other stars might be less than hospitable to life if they share their neighborhood with a super-Earth or two, because their climates may be dramatically unstable. And one thing life needs to evolve is at least a little stability — but also not too much. (Yeah, life is complicated.)

Simpson and Chen simulated several different versions of a hypothetical super-Earth called Phaedra — ranging from just slightly heftier than Earth to more than 10 times more massive — with a handful of different orbital trajectories. According to their results, the worst-case scenario for life in the inner solar system involves a planet between 10 and 20 times more massive than Earth.

"The more massive it is, the worse it gets," says Chen. "The highest mass was the worst in terms of changing the stability of the orbits of Earth and Venus and Mars, particularly the Earth." A super-Earth on a highly eccentric orbit would also be especially bad news for the inner planets, because it would be more likely to push or pull Earth, Mars and Venus into eccentric or tilted orbits.

Even a planet slightly larger than Earth in the space between Mars and Jupiter would make life on Earth very difficult — but not impossible.

"We might imagine that we have another planet between Mars and Jupiter that's maybe slightly above Earth's, maybe two Earth masses. We might experience more drastic weather. We might have more extreme summers and winters, but it still would remain, on average, quite habitable."

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Kiona N. Smith
Space.com Contributor

Kiona Smith is a science writer based in the Midwest, where they write about space and archaeology. They've written for Inverse, Ars Technica, Forbes and authored the book, Peeing and Pooping in Space: A 100% Factual Illustrated History. They attended Texas A&M University and have a degree in anthropology. 

  • Unclear Engineer
    The video in this article is interesting. It shows small rocky planets sublimating from dust at a particular radius in the protoplanetary disk and migrating inward toward the star, making room for another planet to form at the original radius and then also move inward. The concept is that the process makes smaller rocky planets from a less dense disk and larger rocky planets from more dense disk.

    Which gets me to thinking about the difference between that and the development of the giant gas ball planets farther out.

    In our solar system, there is an asteroid belt between the 2 classes of planets. I am wondering if that is not actually a demarcation of the transition in the formation processes between the 2 types of planets. I doubt we could detect an asteroid belt around even the closest star to us, with current technology. So, I am wondering how common some sort of asteroid belt really is.

    The video also shows part of a graphic depicting the relative sizes of planets in the systems we have found (for the planets in them that we have been able to detect, so far). That part of the graphic displayed in the video does not show any mix of small and large planets at all, not even one like our own solar system, with small rocky inner planets surrounded by larger gas giants.

    So, I am wondering if we are even detecting all of what is our there around each star.

    And, I am wondering why a rocky "super earth" would for outside a batch of smaller rocky planets, anyway. As the dust disk is depleted, I would expect smaller planets, not larger ones.

    And, if the largest gas giant forms outside of the zone where rocky planets tend to form, then that might well disrupt the development of a rocky planet near its orbit, just like the simulations suggest a large planet in the location of our asteroid belt would disrupt the inner planets.

    Questions:
    1. Does anybody know where I can find the full graphic for exoplanet sizes in each star system?
    2. What is the total mass of the asteroids in our system? How many "Earths" would that make?

    Answer for Q2: "The total mass of the asteroid belt is estimated to be 2.39\00d71021 kg, which is just 3% of the mass of the Moon." from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid

    So, it seems that the rocky planet material in the inner disk was scant at that radius. Was that because it was accumulated into Jupiter? Do we know how much rocky material lies in the center of Jupiter?
    Reply
  • Elad
    Has anyone ever simulated our solar system *without* the presence of Mars?
    What effect would that have on Earth's climate, make it milder to the point that life does not evolve?
    Reply
  • Helio
    The giants are formed past the Frost Line, where gas density is much higher in ice form, as I understand it. The protonsun was about 25% cooler, so the frost line was not as far out.

    But migration seems to be likely in all systems. Gas and dust are held out by stellar radiation and winds, so they revolve slower. But as they form into planetismals, these pressures aren’t so effective, thus inward migration occurs.

    Even the more distant giants can migrate very close to their host (e.g. Hot Jupiters).

    IIRC, Nice (France) has a Monte Carlo model that models our solar system fairly well, except for Pluto. Serious migrations took place, according to the model. Jupiter migrated inward until resonant with Saturn, when they both moved outward, I think.
    Reply
  • Coinneach
    This: https://planetplanet.net/2022/06/23/the-solar-systems-story/ might help. There is a guide half way down the page.
    Reply
  • Helio
    Unclear Engineer said:

    Questions:
    1. Does anybody know where I can find the full graphic for exoplanet sizes in each star system?
    I can’t do a graphic, but I can do a table. Just define what table you want, if any.
    Reply
  • Unclear Engineer
    Thanks Helio,

    What I would be interested in seeing is any system with a gas giant in a closer orbit than some rocky planet the size of Earth or Mars. Do you have a way to scan the table for parameters like that (e.g.,, is it in Xcell)?
    Reply
  • Helio
    Unclear Engineer said:
    Thanks Helio,

    What I would be interested in seeing is any system with a gas giant in a closer orbit than some rocky planet the size of Earth or Mars. Do you have a way to scan the table for parameters like that (e.g.,, is it in Xcell)?
    That shouldn't take much programing. I'll have time tomorrow, hopefully.
    Reply
  • Helio
    Here is a quick table showing M-class systems. The Solar Equivalent distance is calculated.

    The bright green highlight are the exos that are the largest in a multisystem and are also closest to the star.

    Note that many radii are similar, so the error bars could change the results somewhat. I also estimated the radii given a known distance that could be used to get an approximate density. So if mass is stated, then these radii are estimated.



    Reply
  • Unclear Engineer
    Thanks for the table, Helio.

    I am only seeing one entry with a radius that looks like a "Jupiter" - AU Mic c at 30. 61 earth radius. And that seems to be outside of the other rather large planet at 4.69 Earth "radius" (diameter ?). Is that inner planet a large rocky super-earth?

    I thought we had more "hot Jupiters" on our exoplanet list. But I am not seeing them here.

    The green highlighted entries all look like various sized rocky (?) planets with other similar sized rocky neighbors. Not really different than mars being outside Earth, and Venus from a formation consideration.

    I guess we really are not detecting enough planets to draw any firm conclusions. If we can find a "hot Jupiter", can we also expect to detect a much smaller rocky planet in a wider orbit? Or, does the mass of the large inner planet make it hard to see small wobbles in the star's position. I guess we should still be able to see transits of smaller planets.
    Reply
  • Helio
    I had limited time so I took some short cuts for now. The M class likely has smaller planets, I think. The K, F, and G-class have many more exos. Also, I think I limited the sizes a bit.

    Have a nice Thanksgiving. I’ll have more time in a few days for a bigger gulp.
    Reply