DOCSLIB.ORG

Structure of Exoplanets SPECIAL FEATURE

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Structure of Exoplanets SPECIAL FEATURE Structure of exoplanets SPECIAL FEATURE David S. Spiegela,1, Jonathan J. Fortneyb, and Christophe Sotinc aSchool of Natural Sciences, Astrophysics Department, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ 08540; bDepartment of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064; and cJet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109 Edited by Adam S. Burrows, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, and accepted by the Editorial Board December 4, 2013 (received for review July 24, 2013) The hundreds of exoplanets that have been discovered in the entire radius of the planet in which opacities are high enough past two decades offer a new perspective on planetary structure. that heat must be transported via convection; this region is Instead of being the archetypal examples of planets, those of our presumably well-mixed in chemical composition and specific solar system are merely possible outcomes of planetary system entropy. Some gas giants have heavy-element cores at their centers, formation and evolution, and conceivably not even especially although it is not known whether all such planets have cores. common outcomes (although this remains an open question). Gas-giant planets of roughly Jupiter’s mass occupy a special Here, we review the diverse range of interior structures that are region of the mass/radius plane. At low masses, liquid or rocky both known and speculated to exist in exoplanetary systems—from planetary objects have roughly constant density and suffer mostly degenerate objects that are more than 10× as massive as little compression from the overlying material. In such cases, 1=3 Jupiter, to intermediate-mass Neptune-like objects with large cores Rp ∝ Mp , where Rp and Mp are the planet’s radius mass. At high and moderate hydrogen/helium envelopes, to rocky objects with masses, for objects that have had time to cool, electron de- roughly the mass of Earth. generacy pressure becomes significant, and the mass/radius re- −1=3 lation changes such that the radius scales as Rp ∝ MP . Note gas giants | hot Jupiters | super-Earths that the H/He comp. curve in Fig. 1 does not display this be- havior at low masses, because this curve is calculated for highly ow can we, from many light years away, learn about the irradiated objects that are a mere 0.045 a.u. from their Sun-like Hinterior structure of exoplanets? Radial velocity observa- star, which prevents them from reaching their zero-temperature tions provide minimum masses of exoplanets; transit observa- radius in 3 billion years (3 Gyr). For cold spheres of H/He, it has tions provide planet radii, and taken singly, neither is especially long been appreciated that the maximum in the mass/radius re- ASTRONOMY informative about planet structure. However, when we know lation occurs near 4× Jupiter’s mass (9, 10), with a broad peak at both the mass and the radius of a planet we may learn much just over 1 RJ (where RJ is Jupiter’s radius), extending from ∼1/ more about the interior structure. The Kepler satellite (1, 2) is 10th of Jupiter’s mass to ∼100× Jupiter’s mass. For a planet to be a space-based, transit-detecting mission that, as of early 2013, smaller than the H/He minimum radius requires the presence of has identified ∼100 planets and ∼3,000 planet candidates, of a significant heavy-element component, in the form of a core in which the vast majority are almost certainly real (3, 4). Thanks to the object’s center or high-metallicity material well mixed Kepler and ground-based efforts such as the Hungarian Auto- throughout the envelope (where “metals” is taken to mean ele- mated Telescope (HAT) and Super Wide Angle Search for ments heavier than helium). For a planet to be larger than the Planets (SuperWASP) transit surveys (5, 6), there are now more zero-temperature radius (∼1 RJ) requires it to have a high enough than 200 known planets with measured masses and radii, span- temperature that pressure from ions becomes a significant frac- ning a range of irradiation conditions. tion of that due to electrons. Fig. 1 portrays how planet radii relate to masses and incident Before the discovery of transiting planets, it was assumed that fluxes, among the known planets (including the solar system approximately billion-year-old planets—even ones on close-in Kepler Kepler planets) and the candidates [ objects of interest orbits around their stars (so-called “hot Jupiters,” with orbits (KOI)] (7, 8). Several trends are apparent in the data: planets with the largest radii tend to be near Jupiter’s mass and highly Significance irradiated, and Kepler seems to find low-radius planets at a wide range of orbital separations, including some small planets that are extremely highly irradiated. Planets around other stars, or exoplanets, are now known to In the remainder of this paper, we discuss what is known of the be common in our galaxy. Exoplanets span a much wider range structure of the most massive planets (gas giants), of intermediate- of physical conditions than the planets in our solar system, and mass planets (Neptunes), and of low-mass planets (terrestrial include extremely puffy gas giants to compact rocky planets and ocean planets). We conclude by considering how our that can have densities as high as that of iron. The diversity of knowledge of exoplanet structure might improve over course exoplanets allows us to place the planets of our solar system in of the next decade. a broader perspective, and invites further research in the na- scent field of comparative exoplanetology. Here we review the Gas Giants continuum of detected planets, from the gas giants, which are Jupiter and Saturn are essentially giant spheres of hydrogen and composed mostly of hydrogen, to smaller worlds where water helium (H/He) with smaller contributions from heavier elements may provide more of their mass, to rock-iron worlds in some and complex molecules. Many of the known exoplanets have ways similar to Earth. similar mass and similar radius to our local gas giants, and Author contributions: D.S.S., J.J.F., and C.S. designed research, performed research, con- probably have roughly similar bulk structure. The atmosphere, or tributed new reagents/analytic tools, analyzed data, and wrote the paper. weather layer, of such an object is a thin outer region that is of The authors declare no conflict of interest. roughly the same relative depth as the skin of a grapefruit, and is – This article is a PNAS Direct Submission. A.S.B. is a guest editor invited by the Editorial typically defined as the region above the radiative convective Board. boundary,* which can be at pressures on the order of kilobars 1To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected]. (kbar) for the most strongly irradiated planets and which occurs – in the vicinity of ∼1 kbar in gas giants subjected to lower irra- *The radiative convective boundary is the region bounding the convective interior of – a planet in which heat transport is dominated by convective eddies. This boundary diation, such as Jupiter and Saturn. Below the radiative con- occurs essentially where the vertical temperature gradient becomes subadiabatic and vective boundary, there is a deep envelope extending almost the therefore stable against convection. www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1304206111 PNAS Early Edition | 1of6 Downloaded by guest on September 24, 2021 A 2.5 B 2.5 3e+10 25.00 1e+10 Flux (erg Radius vs. Mass 4.600 Mass (M Radius vs. Flux 3e+09 2 1e+09 2 0.855 KOI 3e+08 Solar System 0.157 Solar System / 1e+08 Jupiter cm Planet Planet 3e+07 0.029 ) ) 1.5 2 1.5 1e+07 / s) 0.005 ) 3e+06 Jupiter Jupiter 1e+06 0.001 R[M] for H/He comp. J 1 J 1 R (R R (R 3Gyr old, 0.045AU from Sun S S 0.5 0.5 R[M] for 100% water comp. UN R[M] for Earth−like comp. N U R[M] for 100% iron comp. V E M E V 0 0 M 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 M (M ) Jupiter F (erg/cm2/s) Fig. 1. Radius vs. mass (A) and radius vs. incident-irradiating flux (B) for the confirmed exoplanets, the Kepler candidate planets (KOI), and the planets of our solar system. The ∼200 confirmed planets in this figure are represented with filled large circles; KOI (B) are represented with small white circles; solar system planets are represented with large pentagrams. For comparison, A shows the radius vs. mass relationship for Earth-like composition, which precisely matches the (mass, radius) values for Venus and Earth (26). Planets span masses from less than Earth’s to tens of times Jupiter’s, radii from less than Earth’stomorethandouble − − Jupiter’s, and incident fluxes from nearly zero—in the case HR 8799b, at ∼70 a.u. (27)—to nearly 1012 erg·cm 2·s 1. The planets with the largest radii tend to be close to Jupiter’s mass and highly irradiated. lasting ∼1 week or less)—would have cooled and shrunk to near essentially impossible to learn whether the extremely inflated their asymptotic radius (11, 12). However, the discovery of transiting planets have cores (although, if they do, the larger the core mass, hot Jupiters such as HD 209458b (13), with its &1.3 RJ radius, the greater the additional power that is required to explain their suggested that some planets are a good deal puffier than expected radii).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cornell University Ithaca, New York 14650 JOSE - JUPITER ORBITING SPACECRAFT
    N T Z 33854 C *?** IS81 1? JOSE - JUPITER ORBITING SPACECRAFT: A SYSTEMS STUDY Volume I '>•*,' T COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING Cornell University Ithaca, New York 14650 JOSE - JUPITER ORBITING SPACECRAFT: A SYSTEMS STUDY Volume I Prepared Under Contract No. NGR 33-010-071 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION by NASA-Cornell Doctoral Design Trainee Group (196T-TO) October 1971 College of Engineering Cornell University Ithaca, New York Table of Contents Volume I Preface Chapter I: The Planet Jupiter: A Brief Summary B 1-2 r. Mechanical Properties of the Planet Jupiter. P . T-fi r> 1-10 F T-lfi F T-lfi 0 1-29 H, 1-32 T 1-39 References ... p. I-k2 Chapter II: The Spacecraft Design and Mission Definition A. Introduction p. II-l B. Organizational Structure and the JOSE Mission p. II-l C. JOSE Components p. II-1* D. Proposed Configuration p. II-5 Bibliography and References p. 11-10 Chapter III: Mission Trajectories A. Interplanetary Trajectory Analysis .... p. III-l B. Jupiter Orbital Considerations p. III-6 Bibliography and References. p. 111-38 Chapter IV: Attitude Control A. Introduction and Summary . p. IV-1 B. Expected Disturbance Moments M in Interplanetary Space . p. IV-3 C. Radiation-Produced Impulse Results p. IV-12 D. Meteoroid-Produced Impulse Results p. IV-13 E. Inertia Wheel Analysis p. IV-15 F. Attitude System Tradeoff Analysis p. IV-19 G. Conclusion P. IV-21 References and Bibliography p. TV-26 Chapter V: Propulsion Subsystem A. Mission Requirements p. V-l B. Orbit Insertion Analysis p.
    [Show full text]
  • Adaptive Multibody Gravity Assist Tours Design in Jovian System for the Ganymede Landing
    TO THE ADAPTIVE MULTIBODY GRAVITY ASSIST TOURS DESIGN IN JOVIAN SYSTEM FOR THE GANYMEDE LANDING Grushevskii A.V.(1), Golubev Yu.F.(2), Koryanov V.V.(3), and Tuchin A.G.(4) (1)KIAM (Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics), Miusskaya sq., 4, Moscow, 125047, Russia, +7 495 333 8067, E-mail: [email protected] (2)KIAM, Miusskaya sq., 4, Moscow, 125047, Russia, E-mail: [email protected] (3)KIAM, Miusskaya sq., 4, Moscow, 125047, Russia, E-mail: [email protected] (4)KIAM, Miusskaya sq., 4, Moscow, 125047, Russia, E-mail: [email protected] Keywords: gravity assist, adaptive mission design, trajectory design, TID, phase beam Introduction Modern space missions inside Jovian system are not possible without multiple gravity assists (as well as in Saturnian system, etc.). The orbit design for real upcoming very complicated missions by NASA, ESA, RSA should be adaptive to mission parameters, such as: the time of Jovian system arrival, incomplete information about ephemeris of Galilean Moons and their gravitational fields, errors of flybys implementation, instrumentation deflections. Limited dynamic capabilities, taking place in case of maneuvering around Jupiter's moons, demand multiple encounters (about 15-30 times) for these purposes. Flexible algorithm of current mission scenarios synthesis (specially selected) and their operative transformation is required. Mission design is complicated due to requirements of the Ganymede Orbit Insertion (GOI) ("JUICE" ESA) and also Ganymede Landing implementation ("Laplas-P" RSA [1]) comparing to the ordinary early ―velocity gain" missions since ―Pioneers‖ and "Voyagers‖. Thus such scenario splits in two parts. Part 1(P1), as usually, would be used to reduce the spacecraft’s orbital energy with respect to Jupiter and set up the conditions for more frequent flybys.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Planetary System (Chapter 7) Based on Chapter 7
    Our Planetary System (Chapter 7) Based on Chapter 7 • This material will be useful for understanding Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 on “Formation of the solar system”, “Planetary geology”, “Planetary atmospheres”, “Jovian planet systems”, and “Remnants of ice and rock” • Chapters 3 and 6 on “The orbits of the planets” and “Telescopes” will be useful for understanding this chapter Goals for Learning • How do planets rotate on their axes and orbit the Sun? • What are the planets made of? • What other classes of objects are there in the solar system? Orbits mostly lie in the same flat plane All planets go around the Sun in the same direction Most orbits are close to circular Not coincidences! Most planets rotate in the same “sense” as they orbit the Sun Coincidence? Planetary equators mostly lie in the same plane as their orbits Coincidence? • Interactive Figure: Orbital and Rotational Properties of the Planets Rotation and Orbits of Moons • Most moons (especially the larger ones) orbit in near-circular orbits in the same plane as the equator of their parent planet • Most moons rotate so that their equator is in the plane of their orbit • Most moons rotate in the same “sense” as their orbit around the parent planet • Everything is rotating/orbiting in the same direction A Brief Tour • Distance from Sun •Size •Mass • Composition • Temperature • Rings/Moons Sun 695000 km = 108 RE 333000 MEarth 98% Hydrogen and helium 99.9% total mass of solar system Surface = 5800K Much hotter inside Giant ball of gas Gravity => orbits Heat/light => weather
    [Show full text]
  • Jupiter Mass
    CESAR Science Case Jupiter Mass Calculating a planet’s mass from the motion of its moons Student’s Guide Mass of Jupiter 2 CESAR Science Case Table of Contents The Mass of Jupiter ........................................................................... ¡Error! Marcador no definido. Kepler’s Three Laws ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Activity 1: Properties of the Galilean Moons ................................................................................................. 6 Activity 2: Calculate the period of your favourite moon ................................................................................. 9 Activity 3: Calculate the orbital radius of your favourite moon .................................................................... 12 Activity 4: Calculate the Mass of Jupiter ..................................................................................................... 15 Additional Activity: Predict a Transit ............................................................................................................ 16 To know more… .......................................................................................................................... 19 Links ............................................................................................................................................ 19 Mass of Jupiter 3 CESAR Science Case Background Kepler’s Three Laws The three Kepler’s Laws, published between
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Jupiter\'S Mass Growth on Satellite Capture
    A&A 414, 727–734 (2004) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031645 & c ESO 2004 Astrophysics The effect of Jupiter’s mass growth on satellite capture Retrograde case E. Vieira Neto1;?,O.C.Winter1, and T. Yokoyama2 1 Grupo de Dinˆamica Orbital & Planetologia, UNESP, CP 205 CEP 12.516-410 Guaratinguet´a, SP, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] 2 Universidade Estadual Paulista, IGCE, DEMAC, CP 178 CEP 13.500-970 Rio Claro, SP, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] Received 13 June 2003 / Accepted 12 September 2003 Abstract. Gravitational capture can be used to explain the existence of the irregular satellites of giants planets. However, it is only the first step since the gravitational capture is temporary. Therefore, some kind of non-conservative effect is necessary to to turn the temporary capture into a permanent one. In the present work we study the effects of Jupiter mass growth for the permanent capture of retrograde satellites. An analysis of the zero velocity curves at the Lagrangian point L1 indicates that mass accretion provides an increase of the confinement region (delimited by the zero velocity curve, where particles cannot escape from the planet) favoring permanent captures. Adopting the restricted three-body problem, Sun-Jupiter-Particle, we performed numerical simulations backward in time considering the decrease of M . We considered initial conditions of the particles to be retrograde, at pericenter, in the region 100 R a 400 R and 0 e 0:5. The results give Jupiter’s mass at the X moment when the particle escapes from the planet.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1904.05358V1 [Astro-Ph.EP] 10 Apr 2019
    Draft version April 12, 2019 Typeset using LATEX default style in AASTeX62 The Gemini Planet Imager Exoplanet Survey: Giant Planet and Brown Dwarf Demographics From 10{100 AU Eric L. Nielsen,1 Robert J. De Rosa,1 Bruce Macintosh,1 Jason J. Wang,2, 3, ∗ Jean-Baptiste Ruffio,1 Eugene Chiang,3 Mark S. Marley,4 Didier Saumon,5 Dmitry Savransky,6 S. Mark Ammons,7 Vanessa P. Bailey,8 Travis Barman,9 Celia´ Blain,10 Joanna Bulger,11 Jeffrey Chilcote,1, 12 Tara Cotten,13 Ian Czekala,3, 1, y Rene Doyon,14 Gaspard Duchene^ ,3, 15 Thomas M. Esposito,3 Daniel Fabrycky,16 Michael P. Fitzgerald,17 Katherine B. Follette,18 Jonathan J. Fortney,19 Benjamin L. Gerard,20, 10 Stephen J. Goodsell,21 James R. Graham,3 Alexandra Z. Greenbaum,22 Pascale Hibon,23 Sasha Hinkley,24 Lea A. Hirsch,1 Justin Hom,25 Li-Wei Hung,26 Rebekah Ilene Dawson,27 Patrick Ingraham,28 Paul Kalas,3, 29 Quinn Konopacky,30 James E. Larkin,17 Eve J. Lee,31 Jonathan W. Lin,3 Jer´ ome^ Maire,30 Franck Marchis,29 Christian Marois,10, 20 Stanimir Metchev,32, 33 Maxwell A. Millar-Blanchaer,8, 34 Katie M. Morzinski,35 Rebecca Oppenheimer,36 David Palmer,7 Jennifer Patience,25 Marshall Perrin,37 Lisa Poyneer,7 Laurent Pueyo,37 Roman R. Rafikov,38 Abhijith Rajan,37 Julien Rameau,14 Fredrik T. Rantakyro¨,39 Bin Ren,40 Adam C. Schneider,25 Anand Sivaramakrishnan,37 Inseok Song,13 Remi Soummer,37 Melisa Tallis,1 Sandrine Thomas,28 Kimberly Ward-Duong,25 and Schuyler Wolff41 1Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA 2Department of Astronomy, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA 3Department of Astronomy, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA 4NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, CA 94035, USA 5Los Alamos National Laboratory, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Correlations Between the Stellar, Planetary, and Debris Components of Exoplanet Systems Observed by Herschel⋆
    A&A 565, A15 (2014) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201323058 & c ESO 2014 Astrophysics Correlations between the stellar, planetary, and debris components of exoplanet systems observed by Herschel J. P. Marshall1,2, A. Moro-Martín3,4, C. Eiroa1, G. Kennedy5,A.Mora6, B. Sibthorpe7, J.-F. Lestrade8, J. Maldonado1,9, J. Sanz-Forcada10,M.C.Wyatt5,B.Matthews11,12,J.Horner2,13,14, B. Montesinos10,G.Bryden15, C. del Burgo16,J.S.Greaves17,R.J.Ivison18,19, G. Meeus1, G. Olofsson20, G. L. Pilbratt21, and G. J. White22,23 (Affiliations can be found after the references) Received 15 November 2013 / Accepted 6 March 2014 ABSTRACT Context. Stars form surrounded by gas- and dust-rich protoplanetary discs. Generally, these discs dissipate over a few (3–10) Myr, leaving a faint tenuous debris disc composed of second-generation dust produced by the attrition of larger bodies formed in the protoplanetary disc. Giant planets detected in radial velocity and transit surveys of main-sequence stars also form within the protoplanetary disc, whilst super-Earths now detectable may form once the gas has dissipated. Our own solar system, with its eight planets and two debris belts, is a prime example of an end state of this process. Aims. The Herschel DEBRIS, DUNES, and GT programmes observed 37 exoplanet host stars within 25 pc at 70, 100, and 160 μm with the sensitiv- ity to detect far-infrared excess emission at flux density levels only an order of magnitude greater than that of the solar system’s Edgeworth-Kuiper belt. Here we present an analysis of that sample, using it to more accurately determine the (possible) level of dust emission from these exoplanet host stars and thereafter determine the links between the various components of these exoplanetary systems through statistical analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Cold Plasma Diagnostics in the Jovian System
    341 COLD PLASMA DIAGNOSTICS IN THE JOVIAN SYSTEM: BRIEF SCIENTIFIC CASE AND INSTRUMENTATION OVERVIEW J.-E. Wahlund(1), L. G. Blomberg(2), M. Morooka(1), M. André(1), A.I. Eriksson(1), J.A. Cumnock(2,3), G.T. Marklund(2), P.-A. Lindqvist(2) (1)Swedish Institute of Space Physics, SE-751 21 Uppsala, Sweden, E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], mats.andré@irfu.se, [email protected] (2)Alfvén Laboratory, Royal Institute of Technology, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden, E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], per- [email protected] (3)also at Center for Space Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, U.S.A. ABSTRACT times for their atmospheres are of the order of a few The Jovian magnetosphere equatorial region is filled days at most. These atmospheres can therefore rightly with cold dense plasma that in a broad sense co-rotate with its magnetic field. The volcanic moon Io, which be termed exospheres, and their corresponding ionized expels sodium, sulphur and oxygen containing species, parts can be termed exo-ionospheres. dominates as a source for this cold plasma. The three Observations indicate that the exospheres of the three icy Galilean moons (Callisto, Ganymede, and Europa) icy Galilean moons (Europa, Ganymede and Callisto) also contribute with water group and oxygen ions. are oxygen rich [1, 2]. Several authors have also All the Galilean moons have thin atmospheres with modelled these exospheres [3, 4, 5], and the oxygen was residence times of a few days at most.
    [Show full text]
  • When Extrasolar Planets Transit Their Parent Stars 701
    Charbonneau et al.: When Extrasolar Planets Transit Their Parent Stars 701 When Extrasolar Planets Transit Their Parent Stars David Charbonneau Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Timothy M. Brown High Altitude Observatory Adam Burrows University of Arizona Greg Laughlin University of California, Santa Cruz When extrasolar planets are observed to transit their parent stars, we are granted unprece- dented access to their physical properties. It is only for transiting planets that we are permitted direct estimates of the planetary masses and radii, which provide the fundamental constraints on models of their physical structure. In particular, precise determination of the radius may indicate the presence (or absence) of a core of solid material, which in turn would speak to the canonical formation model of gas accretion onto a core of ice and rock embedded in a proto- planetary disk. Furthermore, the radii of planets in close proximity to their stars are affected by tidal effects and the intense stellar radiation. As a result, some of these “hot Jupiters” are significantly larger than Jupiter in radius. Precision follow-up studies of such objects (notably with the spacebased platforms of the Hubble and Spitzer Space Telescopes) have enabled direct observation of their transmission spectra and emitted radiation. These data provide the first observational constraints on atmospheric models of these extrasolar gas giants, and permit a direct comparison with the gas giants of the solar system. Despite significant observational challenges, numerous transit surveys and quick-look radial velocity surveys are active, and promise to deliver an ever-increasing number of these precious objects. The detection of tran- sits of short-period Neptune-sized objects, whose existence was recently uncovered by the radial- velocity surveys, is eagerly anticipated.
    [Show full text]
  • A Search for Planetary Transits of the Star HD 187123 by Spot Filter CCD Differential Photometry
    A Search for Planetary Transits of the Star HD 187123 by Spot Filter CCD Differential Photometry T. Castellano 1 NASA Ames Fl_esearch Center, MS 245-6, Moffett Field, CA 94035 tcastellano_mail.arc.nasa.gov Received ; accepted SubInitted to Publications of tile Astronomical Society of the Pacific _Also at Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064 _ ABSTRACT A novel method for performing high precision, time series CCD differential photometry of bright stars using a spot filter, is demonstrated. Results for sev- eral nights of observing of tile 51 Pegasi b-type planet bearing star HD 187123 are presented. Photometric precision of 0.0015 - 0.0023 magnitudes is achieved. No transits are observed at the epochs predicted from the radial velocity obser- vations. If the planet orbiting HD 187123 at, 0.0415 AU is an inflated Jupiter similar in radius to HD 209458b it would have been detected at the > 6o level if tile orbital inclination is near 90 degrees and at the > 3or level if the orbital inclination is as small as 82.7 degrees. Subject headings: stars: planetary systems techniques:photometric 1. Introduction More than two dozen extrasolar planets have been discovered around nearby stars by measuring their Keplerian radial velocity Doppler shifts (see, for example, Marcy et al. (2000)). Two radial velocity teams recently discovered a planet orbiting tile star HD 209458 (Henry et al. 1999; Mazeh et al. 2000). The planet has M v sin i = 0.62 Mj (1 ._l.j = 1 Jupiter mass = 2 x 10 a° grams) and a = 0.046 AU, with an assumed eccentricity of zero but consistent with 0.04 (Henry et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Worlds Apart - Finding Exoplanets
    Worlds Apart - Finding Exoplanets Illustrated Video Credit: NASA, JPL-Caltech, T. Pyle; Acknowledgement: djxatlanta Dr. Billy Teets Vanderbilt University Dyer Observatory Osher Lifelong Learning Institute Thursday, November 5, 2020 Outline • A bit of info and history about planet formation theory. • A discussion of the main exoplanet detection techniques including some of the missions and telescopes that are searching the skies. • A few examples of “notable” results. Evolution of our Thinking of the Solar System • First “accepted models” were geocentric – Ptolemy • Copernicus – heliocentric solar system • By 1800s, heliocentric model widely accepted in scientific community • 1755 – Immanuel Kant hypothesizes clouds of gas and dust • 1796 – Kant and P.-S. LaPlace both put forward the Solar Nebula Disk Theory • Today – if Solar System formed from an interstellar cloud, maybe other clouds formed planets elsewhere in the universe. Retrograde Motion - Mars Image Credits: Tunc Tezel Retrograde Motion as Explained by Ptolemy To explain retrograde, the concept of the epicycle was introduced. A planet would move on the epicycle (the smaller circle) as the epicycle went around the Earth on the deferent (the larger circle). The planet would appear to shift back and forth among the background stars. Evolution of our Thinking of the Solar System • First “accepted models” were geocentric – Ptolemy • Copernicus – heliocentric solar system • By 1800s, heliocentric model widely accepted in scientific community • 1755 – Immanuel Kant hypothesizes clouds of gas and dust • 1796 – Kant and P.-S. LaPlace both put forward the Solar Nebula Disk Theory • Today – if Solar System formed from an interstellar cloud, maybe other clouds formed planets elsewhere in the universe.
    [Show full text]
  • EXPLORATION of JUPITER. F. Bagenal, Laboratory for Atmospheric & Space Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder CO 80302 ([email protected])
    50th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2019 (LPI Contrib. No. 2132) 1352.pdf EXPLORATION OF JUPITER. F. Bagenal, Laboratory for Atmospheric & Space Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder CO 80302 ([email protected]) Introduction: Jupiter reigns supreme amongst plan- zones, hinting at convective motions but images were ets in our solar system: the largest, the most massive, the insufficient to allow tracking of features. fastest rotating, the strongest magnetic field, the greatest • Infrared emissions from Jupiter’s nightside com- number of satellites, and its moon Europa is the most pared to the dayside, confirming that the planet radiates likely place to find extraterrestrial life. Moreover, we 1.9 times the heat received from the Sun with the poles now know of thousands of Jupiter-type planets that orbit being close to equatorial temperatures. other stars. Our understanding of the various compo- • Accurately tracking of the Doppler shift of the nents of the Jupiter system has increased immensely spacecraft’s radio signal refined the gravitational field with recent spacecraft missions. But the knowledge that of Jupiter, constraining models of the deep interior. we are studying just the local example of what may be • Similarly, the masses of the Galilean satellites ubiquitous throughout the universe has changed our per- were corrected by up to 10%, establishing a decline in spective and studies of the jovian system have ramifica- their density with distance from Jupiter. tions that extend well beyond our solar system. • Magnetic field measurements confirmed the strong The purpose of this talk is to document our scientific magnetic field of Jupiter, putting tighter constraints on understanding of the jovian system after six spacecraft the higher order components.
    [Show full text]