<p>The planets all have differences based on where they are and their compositions. The outer gas giants are so large today because of how quick they were to accrete material. In a protoplanetary disk, once an object gets massive enough, it can attract others through gravity, making the process much quicker than granules sticking together through electromagnetic forces or random collisions. The reason the outer planets were able to get massive much quicker than the inner planets is that there is more material with larger circumferences and that material was able to stay a <a href="https://lco.global/spacebook/planets-and-how-they-formed/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">solid rather than become gaseous</a>. </p>

<p>With a larger mass, the outer planets attracted material quicker and the process was self-perpetuating. In addition, these gas giants had the opportunity to collect more gas that the sun did not end up taking as they are farther out. Hot Jupiters can confuse scientist because of how close they are to their host star when they could not have formed there. </p>

<p>The Kuiper Belt and Oort cloud are also two interesting topics in planetary formation and are most likely relics of planetary formation. This would result from the material that was created around that area, but also material that was <a href="https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/kbos/indepth" rel="nofollow noreferrer">flung out by gas giants</a> to larger orbits. The Oort Cloud could also have been formed from interactions of the sun with <a href="https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/23nov_aliencomets/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">neighboring stars</a> but we do not have direct observation of this cloud yet. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-11-08T16:20:40.593Z
Fractional distillation plays a role: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_distillation
Wayfaring Stranger
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-02T02:51:38.110Z
2017-09-02T02:51:38.110Z
t.sand
<p>As far as our understanding of planetary formation goes, rocky planets tended to form closer to the Sun because the materials they're made of -- silicates and heavier gases -- 'fall' inwards towards the Sun. In the areas closer to the Sun, it's too warm for the lighter gases to condense there, and so the larger gas and ice giants tended to form further from the Sun. As for trans-Neptunian objects like Pluto...we're not exactly sure. Can anyone else shed some light on the current research on the formation of the Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-01T01:48:26.847Z
The Kuiper and Oort cloud objects are made of basically the same material that the gas giants were, initially.  That is, made primarily from ices that stuck/clumped together, but they don't have enough mass to hold an atmosphere, so any ice that evaporated escaped, where as with planets ice that evaporates is retained.     When objects get even larger (Jupiter/Saturn) they begin to accumulate large amounts of hydrogen and helium.  Neptune and Uranus didn't do that, perhaps cause they formed closer to the sun, perhaps cause they had less mass, or perhaps a combination of both.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-01T01:55:58.487Z
Ceres, even though it has a kind of rocky surface, was also formed in a similar way, out of mostly ices.   It lost all it's surface ice by being close enough to the sun and perhaps also by asteroid collisions.    It's too small and light to retain an atmosphere.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-01T12:51:07.030Z
@userLTK so what is answer of my question is it > gas condense and form Rocky planets.
Mental Shakya
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-01T12:52:10.430Z
What type of gas holds by Jupiter??
Mental Shakya
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-01T14:59:38.690Z
Boiling point of the individual elements no doubt has something to do with it. Iron freezes at a pretty high temperature, while hydrogen and helium require much lower temperatures to bring out of the gas phase. Of course, there are hot Jupiters, but planets don't have to stay in the same orbit they formed in forever.
Wayfaring Stranger
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-01T16:33:46.423Z
Maybe I'll make an answer, but gas doesn't condense unless there's a whole lot of mass.   Ice (or more specifically, solids) can coalesce/clump/stick to each other, partially by electric charge, it's not entirely gravity but once past a certain size, gravity takes over.   The distance from the sun determines temperature and temperature determines which molecular compounds are solid.   Gas gets collected late in the game, after planetary mass is approached.  See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frost_line_(astrophysics)
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-01T00:53:19.053Z
2017-09-01T00:53:19.053Z
Jim421616
<p>Planets, including Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars are rocky planets and are small compared to gas giants. And all these planet are near to Sun. But mass is directly proportional to force. So why don't any planets lie between rocky planets. And if gas giants lie farther always they why does Pluto lie after all the gas giants?</p>

<planet><planetary-formation><pluto>
Why are rocky and small planets nearer to the Sun whereas big, gas giants are farther?
Mental Shakya
# Why are rocky and small planets nearer to the Sun whereas big, gas giants are farther?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-09-01)

Planets, including Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars are rocky planets and are small compared to gas giants. And all these planet are near to Sun. But mass is directly proportional to force. So why don't any planets lie between rocky planets. And if gas giants lie farther always they why does Pluto lie after all the gas giants?

**Tags:** planet, planetary-formation, pluto


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-09-02. Score: 4

The planets all have differences based on where they are and their compositions. The outer gas giants are so large today because of how quick they were to accrete material. In a protoplanetary disk, once an object gets massive enough, it can attract others through gravity, making the process much quicker than granules sticking together through electromagnetic forces or random collisions. The reason the outer planets were able to get massive much quicker than the inner planets is that there is more material with larger circumferences and that material was able to stay a [solid rather than become gaseous](https://lco.global/spacebook/planets-and-how-they-formed/).

With a larger mass, the outer planets attracted material quicker and the process was self-perpetuating. In addition, these gas giants had the opportunity to collect more gas that the sun did not end up taking as they are farther out. Hot Jupiters can confuse scientist because of how close they are to their host star when they could not have formed there.

The Kuiper Belt and Oort cloud are also two interesting topics in planetary formation and are most likely relics of planetary formation. This would result from the material that was created around that area, but also material that was [flung out by gas giants](https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/kbos/indepth) to larger orbits. The Oort Cloud could also have been formed from interactions of the sun with [neighboring stars](https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/23nov_aliencomets/) but we do not have direct observation of this cloud yet.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Fractional distillation plays a role: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_distillation  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2017-09-01. Score: 0

As far as our understanding of planetary formation goes, rocky planets tended to form closer to the Sun because the materials they're made of -- silicates and heavier gases -- 'fall' inwards towards the Sun. In the areas closer to the Sun, it's too warm for the lighter gases to condense there, and so the larger gas and ice giants tended to form further from the Sun. As for trans-Neptunian objects like Pluto...we're not exactly sure. Can anyone else shed some light on the current research on the formation of the Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud?

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: The Kuiper and Oort cloud objects are made of basically the same material that the gas giants were, initially.  That is, made primarily from ices that stuck/clumped together, but they don't have enough mass to hold an atmosphere, so any ice that evaporated escaped, where as with planets ice that evaporates is retained.     When objects get even larger (Jupiter/Saturn) they begin to accumulate large amounts of hydrogen and helium.  Neptune and Uranus didn't do that, perhaps cause they formed closer to the sun, perhaps cause they had less mass, or perhaps a combination of both.  
> **username_4**: Ceres, even though it has a kind of rocky surface, was also formed in a similar way, out of mostly ices.   It lost all it's surface ice by being close enough to the sun and perhaps also by asteroid collisions.    It's too small and light to retain an atmosphere.  
> **username_0**: @username_4 so what is answer of my question is it > gas condense and form Rocky planets.  
> **username_0**: What type of gas holds by Jupiter??  
> **username_2**: Boiling point of the individual elements no doubt has something to do with it. Iron freezes at a pretty high temperature, while hydrogen and helium require much lower temperatures to bring out of the gas phase. Of course, there are hot Jupiters, but planets don't have to stay in the same orbit they formed in forever.  
> **username_4**: Maybe I'll make an answer, but gas doesn't condense unless there's a whole lot of mass.   Ice (or more specifically, solids) can coalesce/clump/stick to each other, partially by electric charge, it's not entirely gravity but once past a certain size, gravity takes over.   The distance from the sun determines temperature and temperature determines which molecular compounds are solid.   Gas gets collected late in the game, after planetary mass is approached.  See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frost_line_(astrophysics)  

---

