arXiv:1309.5956v2 [astro-ph.EP] 26 Sep 2013 otmnto ytemleiso setx)asmn oan no albedo assuming text) geometric respectively. (see the bution, emission represent thermal circles by open contamination large and small A ain ftefato ftemlflxrdae nthe in radiated flux thermal of fraction the of mations otmnto ytemleiso.Tecre aee “ labeled curves The emission. thermal by with contamination studied Jupiters hot of F g ahstsIsiueo ehooy 7MsahstsAve. [email protected] Massachusetts Email: 77 U.S.A. 02139, Technology, MA of Institute sachusetts H31,Br,Sizrad mi:[email protected] Email: Switzerland. Bern, CH-3012, IG rpittpstuigL using typeset Preprint D 0 = ATVERSION RAFT . emti leovru h nietselrflxfras a for flux stellar incident the versus albedo Geometric 1.— . 2 1 eateto at,AmshrcadPaeaySine,M Sciences, Planetary and Atmospheric Earth, of Department nvriyo en etrfrSaeadHbtblt,Sidl Habitability, and Space for Center Bern, of University sldcre and curve) (solid ujc headings: Subject optical albedo. exop geometric the both the with and for curve associated similar scenarios being various Kepler flux deciphering why stellar sh for Kepler-12b incident explanation while the condensates, an despite whethe of be on (20 abundance may depends in This sinusoidal al. variation or et number. flat Evans Knudsen is by the curve 189733b phase l HD optical be of ter an will in spectrum spectrum particle albedo albedo measured cloud the the a computing if p for estimate formula temperature-pressure analytical to the and s relate layer of to populations deposition uniform relations vertically scaling of and limit stella the the pr In and albedo is scatter. The geometric it the albedo). which between the correlation at determine any level (which pressure particles cloud the embedded and p absorbed t following circulation), starlight atmospheric the of of relate depth and to strength needs the hence approach modeling holistic a leoadteicdn tla u ontehbtacercor clear a exhibit not do flux Kepler stellar incident the and albedo niepeiul xlrdrltosisbtenteprop the between relationships explored previously Unlike NESADN RNSASCAE IHCOD NIRRADIATED IN CLOUDS WITH ASSOCIATED TRENDS UNDERSTANDING 1.1. aa fteabd spiaiyascae ihtepresenc the with associated primarily is albedo the If data. S EPTEMBER A T bevtoa Motivation Observational E tl mltajv 5/2/11 v. emulateapj style X A 1. Kepler g INTRODUCTION 0 = lnt n aelts atmospheres satellites: and planets ,2021 9, . htmty ro asicuepossible include bars Error photometry. 1 .,03ad04(otdcre) The curves). (dotted 0.4 and 0.3 0.2, , K EVIN Kepler f thermal H orce for corrected s ulredistri- full d .ch ENG Cambridge, , adas for bandpass, rf eso etme ,2021 9, September version Draft rtas 5, erstrasse r esti- are ” 1 AND ample ABSTRACT as- B RICE egoercabd wihcnrl ohtefraction the both controls (which albedo geometric he -O lnt norlclcsi egbrod h culscient the actual the of neighborhood, scope cosmic local our in planets tla on ( point stellar e eprtrs(oa gl2011b), Agol (see & (Cowan data temperatures Q0–Q14 few of analysis improved § an performed have o uiest emaue.I iue1 eso h geo- the show we 1, Figure In ( albedo measured. metric be to chann Jupiters detec- optical hot broadband The the in atmospheres. eclipses of their and and transits Jupiters of tion hot of study the pae.Tequantity The oplanet. and radius stellar with to eprtr”a h uselrpit uhthat such point, substellar the at temperature” ation osat)with constant”) asd otengtiehmshr:w have we th from hemisphere: redistribution nightside heat the of to efficiency dayside the describes that quantity The σ imtmeaue n nldsadmninesfactor dimensionless a includes and temperature” rium and atrr n bobr,w s naayia model analytical an use we absorbers, and catterers ol fa raitdamshr n h photon the and atmosphere irradiated an of rofile . o eal) obgnordsuso eursdfiiga defining requires discussion our begin To details). for 2.1 u ob ekadcaatrzdb considerable by characterized and weak be to flux r hs uv,tepa fsto h nrrdphase infrared the of offset peak the curve, phase SB eain srvae yorr-nlsso Q0–Q14 of re-analysis our by revealed as relation, ul rmrl osuyteocrec fErhlk exo- Earth-like of occurrence the study to primarily Built aes eicuea osre’ okok for cookbook” “observer’s an include We lanets. LIVIER w oeiec o h rsneo condensates, of presence the for evidence no ows so h lu rpris hc ecmaeto compare we which properties, cloud the of ms Kepler dmnnl bobd n h rpriso the of properties the and absorbed) edominantly fe yamshrccruain edrv an derive We circulation. atmospheric by ofted oete:tesrnt fselrirdain(and irradiation stellar of strength the roperties: riso o oinamshrs h geometric the atmospheres, Jovian hot of erties T niiae iest ncodpoete renders properties cloud in diversity anticipated 1 h atce r ml rlrea endby defined as large or small are particles the r 0 T / 4 ⋆ 2 4 = fcod nteeirdae atmospheres, irradiated these in clouds of e o oadfl eitiuin epciey(Hansen respectively redistribution, full and no for eoigteselrefcietemperature, effective stellar the denoting D a nbe h emti leo faotadozen a about of albedos geometric the enabled has 7 xiiseiec o h longitudinal the for evidence exhibits -7b 3.Frhroe eso htwhether that show we Furthermore, 13). T T T EMORY 0 eq eq σ elrSaeTelescope Space Kepler T F SB ≡ , eq 0 ≡ A 0 σ o apeo o uies o hc we which for Jupiters, hot of sample a for ) T ≡ T sorcnetoa ento fte“equilib- the of definition conventional our is g SB T 2 eq essteicdn tla u ttesub- the at flux stellar incident the versus ) ⋆ 4 a ⋆ T , eoigteSea-otmn constant. Stefan-Boltzmann the denoting 0 ⋆ h ria eimjrai fteex- the of axis semi-major orbital the R steicdn tla u o “stellar (or flux stellar incident the is a R ⋆ T R 2 ⋆ 0 f a a ⋆ 1 dist a ergre ste“irradi- the as regarded be may / 2 1 / , EXOPLANETS 2 1 , / 2 (1 a xaddt include to expanded has − A B ) 1 / 4 f , dist R 2 = F ⋆ f 0 dist ific the (1) / = el 3 e 2
2008). The quantity Teq 0 is the equilibrium temperature as- Taken at face value (without performing a correction , • suming full redistribution and a vanishing albedo. Strictly for contamination by thermal emission), the Ag versus speaking, the geometric albedo is defined at a specific wave- F0 data exhibits a weak correlation (Spearman rank co- length λ and at zero viewing angle. The spherical albedo efficient of 0.6), although the A =0.352 0.023 mea- g ± (As) is the geometric albedo considered over all viewing an- surement associated with Kepler-7b stands out. When gles (Russell 1916; Sudarsky, Burrows & Pinto 2000; Seager we correct for contamination by thermal emission as- 2010; Madhusudhan& Burrows 2012). For a Lambertian suming full redistribution (fdist = 1/2), the Ag values sphere (isotropic scattering), we have Ag = 2As/3. When do not change much (and the Spearman rank coefficient integrated over all wavelengths, we obtain the Bond albedo remains, to the first significant figure, unchanged). (AB). Since we are dealing with observations integrated over a broad optical bandpass, we assume A = 3A /2; the con- When the correction is performed assuming no redis- B g • sideration of more sophisticated scattering behavior will in- tribution (fdist = 2/3), the trend flattens as expected troduce an order-of-unity correction factor to this relation. (with a Spearman rank coefficient of 0.1). Three of − For the range of Teq,0 values listed in Table 1, we estimate the data points are consistent with being zero. The key that the hot Jupiters examined in Figure 1 radiate mostly at point is that the correlation between Ag and F0 can only wavelengths of about 1–2 µm (using Wien’s law). Neverthe- weaken, and not strengthen, when heat redistribution is less, since the Kepler bandpass extends from λ1 0.4 µm to taken into account. ≈ λ2 0.9 µm (Koch et al. 2010), it is instructive to estimate the≈ fraction of thermal flux from the exoplanet radiated in this Our conclusion is that there exists no clear correlation be- bandpass, tween Ag and F0. Values of Ag 0.1 may be consistent with Rayleigh scattering caused by hydrogen≈ molecules alone λ2 (Sudarsky, Burrows & Pinto 2000), without the need for the π λ1 Bλ (Teq) dλ fthermal = 4 , (2) presence of clouds or condensates. The high geometric albedo R σSBTeq associated with Kepler-7b (A 0.35) may require an ex- g ≈ by approximating the spectral energy distribution of a hot planation that includes the effects of clouds or condensates Jupiter to be a blackbody function. In Figure 1, we plot (Demory et al. 2011, 2013). fthermal as a function of F0 for both fdist = 2/3 and 1/2. 1.2. Theoretical Motivation It is apparent that fthermal may not be small and generally in- creases with F0, implying that the measured geometric albedo Unlike other previously examined relationships between (Seager 2010), various properties of hot Jupiters (e.g., radius and heat 2 redistribution versus Teq; e.g., Cowan&Agol 2011b; Fp,⊕ a Ag = , (3) Demory & Seager 2011; Laughlin, Crismani & Adams 2011; F⋆,⊕ Rp Perna, Heng & Pont 2012), there is no clear trend of Ag with may be contaminated by thermal emission “leaking” into the the incident stellar flux. One of the goals of the present study Kepler bandpass, causing A to be over-estimated. The quan- is to suggest that the absence of a clear trend is caused by g a combination of opacity effects, possibly due to the pres- tities Fp,⊕ and F⋆,⊕ are the fluxes from the star and the exo- planet, respectively, received at Earth, while the radius of the ence of condensates or clouds, and atmospheric circulation, the latter of which is often ignored in spectral analyses of exoplanet is given by Rp. One may approximately correct for the contamination by thermal emission by considering the hot Jupiters. The study of clouds or hazes is emerging following equation, as a major theme in the observations of hot Jupiters (e.g., Lecavelier des Etangs et al. 2008; Pont et al. 2008; Sing et al. λ2 2 2 2011; Gibson et al. 2012) and directly-imaged exoplanets Fp,⊕ π λ1 Bλ (Teq) dλ Rp a Ag = (e.g., Barman et al. 2011; Madhusudhan, Burrows & Currie " F⋆,⊕ − F0 R⋆ # Rp 2011; Marley et al. 2012; Lee, Heng & Irwin 2013), and has R (4) 2 long been an obstacle plaguing advances in the under- π λ B (T ) dλ 2 λ1 λ eq a standing of brown dwarfs (e.g., Saumon & Marley 2008; = A , g,obs Artigau et al. 2009; Burrows, Heng & Nampaisarn 2011; − R F0 R⋆ Helling et al. 2011; Buenzli et al. 2012). where Ag,obs is the measured value of the geometric albedo On the theoretical front, several trends are now understood: obtained by applying equation (3). Since Teq depends on Ag, the preceding expression is an implicit equation for the The strength and depth of atmospheric circulation is geometric albedo, which may be solved to obtain the “de- • intimately tied to the intensity of stellar irradiation contaminated” Ag, also shown in Figure 1. The small and (Perna, Heng & Pont 2012). An “eddy diffusion coef- large open circles represent the corrected Ag values assuming ficient” (Kzz) is often used to mimic this behavior, but no and full redistribution, respectively. Generally, decreasing ultimately the relationship between atmospheric circu- the efficiency of heat redistribution decreases the geometric lation and stellar flux can—and should—be calculated albedo obtained. A better approach is to allow for fdist to from first principles using global, three-dimensional vary with F0, since the efficiency of heat redistribution wors- (3D) simulations. ens as F0 increases (Perna, Heng & Pont 2012), but we do not attempt this as the functional form of fdist(F0) is not well The geometric albedo of an irradiated atmosphere known. For this reason, we do not specify the uncertainties • controls not only the amount of starlight pene- associated with the corrected Ag values. trating the atmosphere, but also the depth of the Based on the results in Figure 1, there are two possible in- penetration (Fortneyet al. 2008; Heng et al. 2012; terpretations: Dobbs-Dixon, Agol & Burrows 2012). 3
Whether a particle embedded in an atmospheric flow albedo. To this end, we employ a Markov Chain Monte Carlo • is held aloft depends not only on its size and (MCMC) framework to characterize the posterior distribution density, but also on the local temperature, pres- of Ag. MCMC is a Bayesian inference method based on sure and velocity field of the atmosphere (e.g., stochastic simulations that samples the posterior probability Spiegel, Silverio & Burrows 2009). The abundance of distributions of adjusted parameters for a given model. Our the particles relative to the atmospheric gas, their sizes MCMC implementation (described in, e.g., Gillon et al. and their composition in turn determine the geometric 2012) uses the Gibbs sampler and the Metropolis-Hastings albedo, which controls the heating of the atmosphere. algorithm to estimate the posterior distribution function of all jump parameters. Our nominal model is based on a star and To date, no model or simulation has succeeded in includingall a transiting planet on a Keplerian orbit about their center of of these effects, which need to be studied in concert in order mass. to gain a global perspective on the atmospheres of irradiated Input data provided to the MCMC for each system consist exoplanets. Examining each factor in isolation is reasonable of the Q0–Q14 Kepler photometry and the spectroscopic stel- and necessary as an initial step, but the final word will come lar parameters (effective temperature T⋆, metallicity [Fe/H] from studying their complex interplay. Conversely, investing and log g⋆) published in the references mentioned above. precision in some of these factors at the expenseof others may We correct for the photometric dilution induced by neigh- yield misleading results. We highlight some features of this bor stellar sources using a quarter-dependent dilution factor interplay using an analytical toy model and scaling relations based on the dilution values presented in the literature and on in the hope that it will motivate more sophisticated, follow- the contamination values reported in the FITS files headers up studies. More succinctly, the goal of the present study (Bryson et al. 2010) . is to relate the presence of condensates and their properties We divide the total lightcurve in segments of duration of with the geometric albedo, the pressure of the atmospheric about 24 to 48 hr and fit for each of them the smooth photo- layer probed by the Kepler bandpass and the strength of at- metric variations due to stellar variability or instrumental sys- mospheric circulation, which is tied to the stellar irradiation tematic effects with a time-dependent quadratic polynomial. flux. Baseline model coefficients are determined at each step of the To begin, 2 describes the details involved in constructing § MCMC for each lightcurve with the singular value decompo- Figure 1 as well as ourtheoreticalmethod. Our results are pre- sition method (Press et al. 1992). The resulting coefficients sented in 3. An example of comparative exoplanetology is are then used to correct the raw photometric lightcurves. described§ in 4 (Kepler-7b versus Kepler-12b), along with an § We assumed a quadratic law for the stellar limb-darkening “observer’s cookbook” for diagnosing qualitative trends asso- (LD) and used c1 = 2u1 + u2 and c2 = u1 2u2 as − ciated with the geometric albedo and phase curves. jump parameters, where u1 and u2 are the quadratic coeffi- cients. u and u were drawn from the theoretical tables of 2. METHODOLOGY 1 2 Claret & Bloemen (2011) for the stellar parameters obtained 2.1. Data from the references above. Our goal is to perform detailed photometric analyses of all The MCMC has the following set of jump parameters: the Kepler giant exoplanets confirmed to date in order to precisely planet/star flux ratio, the impact parameter b, the transit dura- constrain their geometric albedos. In this section, we describe tion from first to fourth contact, the time of minimum light t0, our methodology and results. the orbital period, the occultation depth, the two LD combina- tions c1 and c2 and the two parameters √e cos ω and √e sin ω. 2.1.1. Kepler photometry The latter two parameters allow to fit for the occultation phase and width. A uniform prior distribution is assumed for all This study is based on quarters Q0 through Q14 of Kepler jump parameters but c1 and c2, for which a normal prior dis- data (see Batalha et al. 2013, for the Q0–Q8 data release) that tribution is used, based on theoretical tables and the stellar are available at the time of writing. In total, the datasets en- parameters used as input data to the MCMC fit. compass about 1,250 days of quasi-continuous photometric We run two Markov chains of 100,000 steps each. The monitoring between May 2009 and October 2012. We re- 3 good mixing and convergenceof the chains are assessed using trieved the Q0–Q14 FITS files from MAST and extracted the the Gelman-Rubin statistic criterion (Gelman & Rubin 1992). raw long-cadence photometry (Jenkins et al. 2010b) for each We use the posterior distribution functions for the jump pa- target. 2 rameters Fp,⊕/F⋆,⊕, a/R⋆ and (Rp/R⋆) obtained from the MCMC to derive the geometric albedo posteriors for each 2.1.2. Data analysis and derivation of the geometric albedo planet. We show the median of the posterior distribution func- We consider the following 11 giant exoplanets in this tion and its associated 1-σ probability interval for Ag and study: TrES-2b (Barclay et al. 2012), HAT-P-7b (Pal et al. Teq,0 in Table 2. 2008; Christiansen et al. 2010), Kepler-8b (Jenkins et al. As already mentioned in 1, the non-parametric Spearman § 2010a), Kepler-6b (Dunhametal. 2010), Kepler-5b rank coefficient is 0.6 for the Ag versus F0 data shown in (Koch et al. 2010), Kepler-12b (Fortney et al. 2011), Kepler- Figure 1. Values of 1 indicate a perfectly monotonically in- 7b (Latham et al. 2010), Kepler-14b (Buchhave et al. 2011), creasing or decreasing± trend, while those close to zero indicate Kepler-15b (Endl et al. 2011), Kepler-41b (Santerne et al. no correlation between the two quantities. 2011; Quintana et al. 2013) and Kepler-17b (D´esert et al. 2011). The purpose of this analysis is to search for the 2.2. Models planetary occultation (whose depth yields Fp,⊕/F⋆,⊕) in the Any model constructed to describe clouds in exoplanetary Kepler bandpass and derive the corresponding geometric atmospheres has to include both their radiative and dynami- cal effects. Even when clouds contribute negligible mass to 3 http://archive.stsci.edu/kepler/ the atmosphere, they introduce strong radiative forcing to it 4
TABLE 1 GEOMETRIC ALBEDOSOF HOT JUPITERS FROM Kepler PHOTOMETRY, REFINED USING Q0–Q14 DATA
Object Name Ag Teq,0 (K) TrES-2b 0.015 ± 0.003 1444 ± 13 HAT-P-7b 0.225 ± 0.004 2139 ± 27 Kepler-5b 0.134 ± 0.021 1752 ± 17 Kepler-6b 0.091 ± 0.021 1451 ± 16 Kepler-7b 0.352 ± 0.023 1586 ± 13 Kepler-8b 0.051 ± 0.029 1638 ± 40 Kepler-12b 0.078 ± 0.019 1477 ± 26 Kepler-14b 0.012 ± 0.023 1573 ± 26 Kepler-15b 0.078 ± 0.044 1225 ± 31 Kepler-17b 0.106 ± 0.011 1655 ± 40 Kepler-41b 0.135 ± 0.014 1745 ± 43 in the form of the reflection of incident starlight (cooling) and diative transfer equation in the plane-parallel, two-stream ap- the retention of reprocessed starlight in the infrared (heating). proximation using the method of moments, while the incom- On Earth, these two significant effects almost cancel, but not ing stellar radiation is approximated as a collimated beam. quite—it is this imperfect cancellation that is important for The free parameters involved are the irradiation temperature determining details of the terrestrial weather and climate sys- (T0), the Bond albedo (AB), the absorption opacity in the in- tem. Getting these details correct to high precision remainsa frared (κIR) and the absorption opacity in the optical (κO). formidable challenge (see, e.g., Pierrehumbert 2010). Clouds We set collision-induced absorption, associated with hydro- also interact with the atmospheric flow. To first order, we may gen molecules, to be the dominant opacity source at pressures neglect the dynamical effects of clouds on the flow (unless of 0.1 bar and greater (ǫ = 51 for a bottom pressure of 10 the dust-to-gas ratio is close to unity), but we may not neglect bar). There is an option to specify a purely-absorbing cloud the dynamical effects of the flow on the clouds. Atmospheric deck of intermediate width, which we ignore for the purpose circulation sets the background state of velocity, temperature, of simplicity and clarity. pressure and density—and all of its dependent quantities— Starlight incident upon an atmosphere is predominantly ab- that allows us to determine if a cloud particle will remain at a sorbed at the following pressure level, known as the “photon certain location in the atmosphere. deposition layer” (Heng et al. 2012), To place the present study in context, we note that the 3D simulations of Parmentier, Showman & Lian (2013) ex- 0.63g 1 AB PD = − , (5) amine the effects of the atmospheric flow on embedded trac- κO 1+ AB ers that mimic the presence of cloud particles, but these trac- ers do not feed back on the flow in any way, both dynam- where g denotes the surface gravity of the exoplanet. In a ically and radiatively. By contrast, the 3D simulations of purely reflecting atmosphere (AB = 1), there is no penetra- Dobbs-Dixon & Agol (2012) include an extra opacity source tion of starlight (PD = 0). Note that this unique relationship to describe Rayleigh scattering, but do not consider the inter- between the photon deposition layer and the Bond albedo only action between the flow and embedded particles. exists in the limit of uniform, vertical populations of scatter- It is practically impossible to include all of these effects in ers and absorbers in the 1D model atmosphere. When the as- an analytical model in any rigorous manner. Instead, we sub- sumption of spatial uniformity is relaxed, this unique relation- sume the absorptivity of the clouds into a general, infrared, ship is broken and it is now possible to specify cloud decks of absorption opacity that also describes the atmospheric gas. varying spatial and optical thicknesses, located at different al- The geometric albedo is a consequence of the scattering and titudes, that will produce the same Bond albedo. While being absorption properties of the atmosphere, as we will discuss in aware of this possibility, we do not explore this complexity for 2.2.3. While being mindful of this fact, we prescribe the ge- several reasons: we are interested in elucidating trends, rather ometric§ albedo as a free parameter when computing the ana- than making detailed predictions; to develop intuition, we lytical temperature-pressure profile. To describe the action of confine ourselves to analytical models as much as possible, the atmospheric flow on the cloud particles, we use an analyt- and it has been previously shown that such a generalization ical expression for the local terminal velocity of a given cloud breaks the analytical nature of the model for the temperature- particle and approximate the vertical velocity of the flow to be pressure profile (Heng et al. 2012); the atmospheric data as- a fixed fraction of the local sound speed. Finally, we discuss sociated with hot Jupiters is not (yet) of a high enough quality the relationship between the properties of the cloud particles to warrant such sophisticated investigations (unlike, for exam- and the albedo. ple, in the case of brown dwarfs).
2.2.1. Radiative Forcing 2.2.2. Effects of Atmospheric Flow on Condensates We use analytical models of the temperature-pressure pro- In this sub-section, we use simple scaling relations to elu- files of hot Jupiters in the present study from Hengetal. cidate the relationship between vertical, atmospheric flow (2012), where the cloudfree models of Guillot (2010) were and its ability to loft condensates. The mean free path of generalized to include a non-zero albedo. Whether the albedo molecules within an atmosphere is L = m/ρσm where is due to Rayleigh scattering associated with molecules or m is the mean molecular mass, ρ is the mass density and −15 2 scattering associated with condensates or dust grains is un- σm 10 cm is the cross section for inter-molecular specified. These models solve the one-dimensional (1D) ra- interactions.∼ To describe the influence of the atmospheric 5
flow on a particle embedded within it, we use the analyti- cal formulae previously described in Li & Wang (2003) and Spiegel, Silverio & Burrows (2009) (and references therein). The terminal velocity of the (spherical) particle is 2 r2ρ g v = C c c . (6) t ρν
Its internal mass density is ρc, while its radius is rc. The kinematic viscosity of the atmospheric gas is ν Lc with ≈ s cs being the local sound speed. The quantity is a correction factor accountingfor the enhancementof the terminalC velocity in rarefied media, 1.1 =1+ N 1.256+0.4exp , (7) C k −N k and depends on the Knudsen number, FIG. 2.— Root-mean-square vertical velocity (left panel) and Mach num- L kBT ber (right panel) as functions of pressure in the atmospheres of model hot Nk = = Jupiters. See text for details of the simulations. rc P σmrc −1 (8) and vertical Mach number ( z,rms) as functions of the ver- T P rc tical pressure P . We seeM that at P 0.1 bar, we have 10 , −6 ∼ ∼ 1500 K 0.1 bar 1 µm z,rms 10 with a somewhat weak dependence on the equilibriumM ∼ temperature and the absence or presence of a which in turn dependson the pressure level (P ) and local tem- temperature inversion. A caveat is that the simulations of perature (T ) of the atmosphere considered. The Boltzmann Perna, Heng & Pont (2012) essentially assume Ag = 0 and constant is given by kB. do not include a treatment of scattering. Secondly, like most We define a quantity S v /vt, which describes whether ≡ z other published general circulation models (GCMs) of hot a particle is likely to be lofted by atmospheric circulation. We Jupiters, they solve the primitive equations of meteorology, approximate the vertical component of the velocity to be which assumes hydrostatic balance. Hydrostatic balance does 1/2 not preclude v = 0, since the vertical velocity is assumed γk T z v = c = B , (9) to be sub-dominant6 only in the vertical component of the mo- z Mz s Mz m mentum equation, but it does imply that any simulated value is probably a lower limit to the one obtained by a fully non- where γ = 7/5 is the adiabatic gas index. The vertical hydrostatic simulation. It is with these caveats that we adopt Mach number z is approximated to be constant, although −6 we fully anticipateM that it generally has the functional form z = 10 at P 0.1 bar. MSince we are interpreting∼ to be the rms vertical veloc- = (P,T ). It follows that vz Mz Mz ity in equations (9), (10) and (11), min 1,S may be inter- { } 9 zγkBT preted as the relative abundance of embedded cloud particles S M 2 . (10) summed horizontally over an entire atmospheric layer. ≈ 2 ρ r σmg C c c When S S0, atmospheric circulation keeps the particles 2.2.3. Relationship Between Condensates and Albedo ≥ lofted. When S
FIG. 4.— Examples of temperature-pressure profiles adopting some of the parameters of Kepler-7b. The dots indicate the locations of the photon deposi- tion layers, where starlight is predominantly absorbed. The Kepler bandpass probes the photon deposition layer.
index of the condensates (nr) and the relative abundance of sodium atoms to the condensates by number (fNa). The sin- gle scattering albedo becomes
σscat ω0 = , (22) σscat + fNaσNa
and is somewhat insensitive to nr. We choose nr = 1.6 to mimic the presence of silicates such as enstatite. We set g0 = 0. In the middle and bottom panels of Figure 3, we show calculations of Ag using equations (19) and (22) for rc 0.1 µm and 10 nm and compare them to the measure- ment∼ of the albedo∼ spectrum of the hot Jupiter HD 189733b by Evanset al. (2013). These assumed particle radii are consistent with those inferred by Lecavelier des Etangs et al. (2008). Generally, the computed geometric albedo is a de- generate function of rc and fNa. However, since the Rayleigh 6 cross section scales as σscat rc , a small change in the particle radius needs to be compensated∝ by a large change in the relative abundance of sodium atoms to condensates. This property may prove to be useful for constraining rc in future observations of exoplanetary atmospheres. We do not use equation (19) to compute Ag for use in the analytical temperature-pressure profiles, but rather specify it as a free parameter while being mindful that the geometric albedo is an emergent property of the scattering and absorption proper- ties of the atmosphere.
3.2. The Effects of Geometric Albedo on Thermal Structure Figure 4 shows some examples of temperature-pressure
FIG. 3.— Calculations of the geometric albedo. Top panel: Ag as a function profiles. We have adopted some of the parameters of Kepler- of the single scattering albedo (ω0) for different values of the asymmetry pa- 7b: Teq = 1586 K and log g =2.62 (Demory et al. 2011). We rameter (g0) and the blackbody efficiency of the particle (fB). Middle panel: 2 −1 pick κIR =0.004 cm g such that the infrared photosphere Ag as a function of wavelength (λ) for Rayleigh scattering by condensates ∼ 0 1 lies at 0.1 bar. Since the opacity sources in the optical and absorption by the sodium D doublet assuming particle radii of rc . ∼ µm. Bottom panel: same as for the middle panel, but for rc ∼ 10 nm. range of wavelengths remain poorly known for hot Jupiters 2 −1 in general, we adopt κO = 0.003 cm g as an illustration. spectra by considering the limiting case where Rayleigh scat- We consider Ag =0, 0.17 and 0.34 to demonstrate the effects tering is entirely due to the presence of small condensates of varying the albedo, corresponding to PD 0.09, 0.04 and ≈ (2πrc/λ 1) and absorption is due to the sodium D doublet 0.03 bar. (Sudarsky,≪ Burrows & Pinto 2000). (The potassium doublet In the limit of vertically uniform populations of scatterers absorbs at somewhat longer wavelengths: about 0.77 µm.) and absorbers, starlight is absorbed and reflected mostly at the Details of the scattering and absorption cross sections used are photon deposition layer (PD). It is also the pressure level the described in Appendix A. This simple model contains three Kepler optical bandpass is probing. Thus, the presence of a parameters: the particle radius (rc), the scattering refractive non-zero albedo has two effects. The first, obvious one is to 8
The bounty of exoplanets discovered by the Kepler mis- sion has emphasized the importance of comparative exoplan- etology. Within our sample of hot Jupiters examined in Fig- ure 1, Kepler-7b (Latham et al. 2010; Demory et al. 2011) and Kepler-12b (Fortney et al. 2011) provide for an intrigu- ing comparison. They receive similar degrees of stellar heat- ing (Teq,0 1500 K) and thus we expect the strength of at- mospheric≈ circulation to be comparable in both atmospheres. They possess comparable surface gravities (log g 2.6) and ≈ radii (R 1.6–1.7 RJ ). They orbit somewhat quiescent, Sun-like stars≈ of comparable metallicity ([Fe/H] 0.1). Yet their measured geometric albedos are non-negligibly≈ differ- ent: Ag 0.35 (for Kepler-7b) versus 0.08 (for Kepler-12b). For Kepler-7b,≈ there is evidence for the presence of conden- sates at the atmospheric layer probed by the Kepler bandpass (Demory et al. 2011, 2013). Furthermore, the optical phase curve of Kepler-7b exhibits a sinusoidal functional form with FIG. 5.— The “lofting parameter” S as a function of Teq,0 (see text for a peak that is offset from the secondary eclipse (Demory et al. definition) and the geometric albedo of the hot Jupiter for three different cloud particle radii (rc = 1, 10 and 100 µm). 2013). The infrared secondary eclipses of Kepler-7b, as de- diminish the amount of heat deposited in an atmosphere. The tected by the Spitzer Space Telescope at 3.6 and 4.5 µm, im- second, less obvious effect is to alter the location at which ply brightness temperatures that are markedly lower than that most of the starlight is being deposited. More reflecting at- in the optical (Demory et al. 2013). By contrast, the phase mospheres tend to have their starlight deposited higher in alti- curve of Kepler-12b exhibits no sinusoidal variations (at the tude. Both properties are reflected in Figure 4. Consequently, sensitivity level of Kepler) with a period similar to the orbital the effect of a non-zero albedo is to produce a temperature motion of the exoplanet, while registering brightness temper- inversion if Ag is of a high enough value. atures of about 1400-1600 K in the infrared (Fortney et al. 2011). 3.3. The Relationship Between Thermal Structure, We apply the lessons learnt from the analytical models pre- Condensate Size and Condensate Abundance sented in this study. All else being equal, we expect the pho- Next, we wish to examine the lofting properties of the at- ton deposition layer to reside at a higher altitude (lower pres- mosphere at P = P . We evaluate the temperature at the sure) for Kepler-7bdue to its higheralbedo. If large cloud par- D ticles (N 1) are embedded in the atmosphere of Kepler- photon deposition layer using our analytical T -P profiles: k ≪ 7b, then we expect S TD to describe the lofting property T = TD where TD T (PD). In Figure 5, we show S as ≡ of its photon deposition∝ layer. Large particles generally pro- a function of Teq,0 for various values of Ag. We show three duce a higher geometric albedo if rc λ/2π. There are sets of curves for rc = 1, 10 and 100 µm. For rc = 1 µm, ≫ two possible configurations of TD that will produce a sinu- we obtain S & 1 for Teq,0 = 1000–3000 K, implying that micron-sized particles should be readily lofted in hot Jovian soidal functional form for S with a peak that is offset from atmospheres, consistent with the results from the 3D simula- the secondary eclipse. The first and simplest configuration tions of Parmentier, Showman & Lian (2013). Micron-sized is a shifted Heaviside function, i.e., TD has two values, one in each hemisphere, but it is translated in longitude by some particles have N 1 and S PD. Since we do not allow k ≫ ∝ amount. In this case, the corresponding brightness tempera- the optical opacity (κO) to depend on the intensity of inci- dent, stellar irradiation, S is a flat function of T . However, ture in the Kepler bandpass as a function of orbital phase will eq,0 be a sinusoidal function that has a peak offset (Cowan & Agol since PD depends on Ag, the pressure level probed is lower 2008). The second configuration is for TD sin(φ φ0), (higher altitude) and the corresponding value of S is lower ∝ ± for larger values of A . For r = 100 µm (N 1), S with φ being the longitude of the exoplanet and φ0 being a g c k ≪ constant offset, which also produces a sinusoidal function for now has a dependence on Teq,0 as we have S TD. How- ever, since S 1 for all values of the equilibrium∝ temper- S. In the right circumstances (i.e., rc 10 µm), the varia- ≪ tion in temperature and pressure may cause∼ S to possess val- ature examined, we do not expect particles with rc = 100 µm to be lofted by atmospheric circulation. Particles with ues ranging from 0.1 to 1. Such a variation in S produces a longitudinal variation in the abundance of lofted cloud par- rc = 10 µm have S 0.1–1 and are expected to be par- tially lofted as a population,∼ again consistent with the results ticles, which in turn produces a longitudinal variation in the of Parmentier, Showman & Lian (2013). associated albedo and the flux of reflected starlight. The ob- servations of Kepler-7b (Demory et al. 2013) are consistent If small cloud particles or grains (Nk 1) are robustly formed in hot Jovian atmospheres, then they≫ should be om- with such a scenario. By contrast, if small cloud particles (N 1) are embedded in the atmosphere of Kepler-12b, nipresent due to the ease at which atmosphericcirculation will k ≫ we expect S PD, which produces a flat phase curve for a keep them aloft. The variations in their scattering and absorp- ∝ tion properties (see 2.2.3), which is determined by their sizes given albedo value if the opacity in the optical range of wave- and compositions, are§ expected to produce a scatter in the val- lengths is roughly constant with longitude. In other words, ues of the measured geometric albedos. when small grains are present, we expect their abundance to be zonally uniform; if g, κO and Ag are constant, then PD 4. DISCUSSION and hence S are constant across longitude. Small particles are consistent with a lower albedo if r λ/2π. 4.1. Comparative Exoplanetology: c ≪ Kepler-7b versus Kepler-12b However, there is an important detail in the optical phase curve of Kepler-7b that is difficult to reconcile with our simple 9 explanation. The peak of the optical phase curve peaks after below unity, we expect the infrared photosphere(s) to be lo- secondary eclipse, implying that the corresponding brightness cated just below the top of the atmosphere. When Ag = 0, map peaks westwards of the substellar point (Demory et al. the contribution functions are correctly computed by the pub- 2013). Irradiated atmospheres in the hot Jupiter regime are lished retrieval models. Since we expect physical quantities expected to possess temperature maps that peak eastwards of to vary continuously, the contribution functions, at various the substellar point (Showman & Polvani 2011), a theoreti- infrared wavelengths, should shift to lower pressures as Ag cal expectation that is corroborated by 3D simulations of at- increases, an effect that needs to be included in the retrieval mospheric circulation. That this property is independent of models. Future work that includes a simple model of clouds, whether Newtonian cooling (e.g., Showman & Guillot 2002; with a small number of free parameters, in the retrieval tech- Heng, Menou & Phillipps 2011), dual-band radiative transfer nique will set some empirical constraints on the cloud proper- (Heng, Frierson & Phillipps 2011; Rauscher & Menou 2012; ties, although some degeneracy is anticipated. Perna, Heng & Pont 2012) or multi-wavelength radiative While 3D simulations that treat only the dynamicalor radia- transfer (Showman et al. 2009) is utilized suggests that it is tive interaction between the atmospheric flow and the cloud a robust outcome of the hot Jupiter regime. If an infrared particles are insufficient for a full understanding of the effects phase curve of Kepler-7b is measured with this property (east- of clouds in irradiated exoplanetary atmospheres, neither is a ward shift), then it is a “smoking gun” for the presence of 1D analytical model that employs simple, approximate treat- condensates—reflected light and thermal emission are not ments for these effects, as presented in this study. Neverthe- tracing each other, implying that the spatial distribution of the less, both approaches drive us toward constructing falsifiable condensates is being modified by atmospheric dynamics. models that are realistic yet simple enough to be confronted by observations and feasibly included in future 3D simula- 4.2. Caveats and Future Work tions. Several caveats and unexplored aspects provide opportu- nities for future work. We have not used an eddy dif- 4.3. An “Observer’s Cookbook” fusion coefficient (Kzz) to mimic atmospheric circulation To provide an executive summary of the observational rel- and instead approximated the vertical velocity as a fixed evance of our study, we highlight a few scenarios and suggest fraction of the local sound speed. While such an ap- possible (and possibly non-unique) interpretations. When the proach includes the effect of varying the stellar irradia- peak amplitude of the phase curve is on the order of the oc- tion, since it is tied to the temperature-pressure profile, it cultation depth, then we term it to be “sinusoidal”; if not, we fails to capture the dependence of the depth of atmospheric term it to be “flat”. When the angular offset of the peak of the circulation on the incident stellar flux (Fortney et al. 2008; phase curve from secondary eclipse is 1◦ or close to zero, Dobbs-Dixon,Agol & Burrows 2012; Perna, Heng & Pont we term it to be “small”. Phase offsets ∼ 10◦ are “large”. 2012). The vigor of atmospheric circulation in irradiated ex- ∼ oplanetary atmospheres means that if clouds form, they will High albedo, sinusoidal optical phase curve: Large be well-mixed from 1 mbar all the way down to 10 bar, • cloud particles or dust grains ( 10 µm). As discussed, ∼ ∼ ∼ depending on F0 and Ag. Performing 3D simulations of at- a possible example is Kepler-7b. mospheric circulation with a diversity of cloud configurations will inform 1D models on how to “paint” clouds onto their Low albedo, flat optical phase curve: Small cloud • particles ( 1 µm). As discussed, a possible example T -P profiles. ≪ Another important interplay we have not explored concerns is Kepler-12b. atmospheric chemistry. Specifically, the strength and spectral High albedo, small infrared phase offset: A high distribution of the incident stellar flux modifies the absorption • albedo implies that the photon deposition layer resides (κO) and scattering (Ag) properties of both the condensates higher in the atmosphere. With most of the starlight and the gas in the irradiated atmosphere. To understand the being deposited at lower pressures, the infrared pho- lofting behavior of small cloud particles as a function of the tosphere also lies at lower pressures. With the at- incident stellar flux requires this interplay to be elucidated. mosphere being more radiative (or less advective) at In recent years, retrieval models, originally developed for higher altitudes, a small phase offset in the infrared the modestly-irradiated planets/moons of the Solar System, is expected (Showman & Guillot 2002; Cowan & Agol have been employed to infer the temperature-pressure pro- 2011a; Perna, Heng & Pont 2012; Heng 2012). Con- files and atmospheric chemistry/composition of hot Jupiters versely, a larger infrared phase offset is expected for a (Madsudhan & Seager 2009; Lee, Fletcher & Irwin 2012; low albedo (Fortney et al. 2008). Line et al. 2012). While being an important development in the study of exoplanetary atmospheres, these published works Low albedo, small infrared phase offset: For have so far been “blue sky” and omitted the effects of clouds. • highly-irradiated hot Jupiters, the intense stellar flux Benneke & Seager (2012) specify the albedo as a free param- trumps any effect due to opacity (e.g., albedo) and eter in their analysis, but only include one of its effects as sug- small infrared phase offsets are generally expected gested by their use of the Guillot (2010) model: the diminu- (Perna, Heng & Pont 2012). Conversely, hot Jupiters tion of the incident stellar flux, but not the modification of its with lower levels of incident irradiation are expected to vertical absorption profile. They also allow for the cloud-top possess large infrared phase offsets. pressure to be a fitting parameter. To illustrate the importance of including a non-zero albedo, consider the limiting case of As an example, we consider the prototypical case of the Ag =1, in which case we expect the photon deposition layer hot Jupiter HD 189733b, for which large peak offsets have to reside at the top of the atmosphere and for the infrared pho- been measured in the infrared phase curves (Knutson et al. tosphere to be undefined (if interior heat from the irradiated 2007, 2009). This is consistent with the low intensity of exoplanet is negligible). When the geometric albedo is just stellar irradiation impinging upon its atmosphere (Teq 0 , ≈ 10
1200 K). Transit observations in the ultraviolet and op- Case studies that contradict these scenarios (e.g., tical range of wavelengths reveal a spectral slope, punc- Crossfield et al. 2010) hint at the possibility of missing tuated by sodium lines, consistent with Rayleigh scatter- physics or chemistry and will inspire novel ways of thinking ing by condensates present at the day-night terminators about irradiated exoplanetary atmospheres. Some of the (Lecavelier des Etangs et al. 2008; Pont et al. 2008, 2013; degeneracies described may be broken by examining the Sing et al. 2011; Gibson et al. 2012). That the infrared peak colors of these atmospheres. offsets are not small suggests that the albedo associated with the condensates is small, or even close to zero, at and near the KH acknowledges financial and/or logistical support from peak of the stellar spectrum. Based on a tentative compari- the University of Bern, the Swiss-based MERAC Foundation son of several brightness temperature points with an analyt- and the University of Zurich.¨ We are grateful to Bruce Draine, ical temperature-pressure profile, Heng et al. (2012) estimate Jaemin Lee, Michael Gillon and Nikku Madhusudhan for use- that the Bond albedo of HD 189733bis about 0.1. The albedo ful conversations. KH benefited from discussions conducted spectrum of HD 189733bsuggests a low to vanishing geomet- at the Exeter-Oxford exoplanet workshop in April 2013 and at ric albedo in the Kepler bandpass (Evans et al. 2013). Optical the PPVI conference in July 2013. We thank the anonymous phase curves of HD 189733b will further constrain the prop- referee for constructive comments that improved the quality erties of the condensates, including if they are small or large and clarity of the manuscript. (as already described by the preceding scenarios).
APPENDIX MODELING SODIUM ABSORPTIONAND RAYLEIGH SCATTERING The quantum mechanical properties of the sodium D doublet are well-known (e.g., Draine 2011). The absorption cross section is πe2 σNa = fluφν , (A1) mec where e is the elementary unit of electric charge, me is the mass of the electron, c is the speed of light, flu is the oscillator strength and φν is the dimensionless line profile function, described by a Lorentz profile,
4Aul φν = , (A2) 16π2 (ν ν )2 + A2 − ul ul normalized such that φν dν =1 over all frequencies (ν). The frequency of the line transition is given by νul with “u” and “l” denoting the upper and lower atomic levels, respectively. The properties associated with the sodium doublet are R 7 −1 λ =0.5891582 µm : flu =0.641,gu =4,gl =2, Aul 6.159 10 s , ≈ × (A3) λ =0.5897558 µm : f =0.320,g = g =2, A 6.137 107 s−1. lu u l ul ≈ × The Einstein A-coefficients are computed using 2 2 2 8π e νulglflu Aul = 3 , (A4) mec gu with gl and gu being the statistical weights of the lower and upper atomic levels, respectively. Essentially, there are no free parameters involved in specifying σNa. The assumption employed here is that Doppler broadening of the line may be neglected, otherwise a Voigt profile has to be used in place of the Lorentz profile. Rayleigh scattering by small particles is also a well-known phenomenon with a cross section given by 2 2π5 n2 1 σ = r − r6λ−4, (A5) scat 3 n2 +2 c r where nr is the real part of the index of refraction. For molecules, it is (Pierrehumbert 2010) 32π3 n′ 1 2 σ′ = r − λ−4, (A6) scat 3 n ′ where nr is the real part of the index of refraction for the molecular gas and n is its number density. For molecular gas, ′ we have (nr 1) 1; for refractory condensates, we have (nr 1) 0.1. Rayleigh scattering by molecules is weaker ′ − ≪ − ∼ (fgasσscat/σscat < 1) as long as the particle radius exceeds a critical value, 1/3 4 (n′ 1) n2 +2 r > r − r f 1/6, (A7) c πn (n2 1) gas " r − # where fgas is the relative abundance of molecules to condensates by number. For P = 0.1 bar and T = 1500 K, we have 17 −3 ′ 1/6 n 5 10 cm . Using nr =1.0001 and nr =1.6, we obtain 0.9fgas nm for the critical particle radius. For comparison, we note≈ that× the Bohr radius is about 0.05 nm. The relative weakness of Rayleigh scattering by hydrogen molecules may producean 11 albedo spectrum that is too low if sodium atoms are abundantly present. Measuring the abundance of sodium relative to hydrogen remains challenging, even for HD 189733b (Huitson et al. 2012).
REFERENCES Artigau, E., Bouchard, S., Doyon, R., & Lafreni`ere, D. 2009, ApJ, 701, Jenkins, J. M., Caldwell, D. A., Chandrasekaran, H., et al. 2010b, ApJ, 713, 1534 L120 Barclay, T., Huber, D., Rowe, J. F., et al. 2012, ApJ, 761, 53 Koch, D. G., Borucki, W. J., Rowe, J. F., et al. 2010, ApJ, 713, L131 Barman, T., Macintosh, B., Konopacky, Q.M., & Marois, C. 2011, ApJ, Knutson, H.A., et al. 2007, Nature, 447, 183 733, 65 Knutson, H.A., et al. 2009, ApJ, 690, 822 Batalha, N. M., Rowe, J. F., Bryson, S. T., et al. 2013, ApJS, 204, 24 Latham, D.W., et al. 2010, ApJL, 713, L140 Benneke, B., & Seager, S. 2012, ApJ, 753, 100 Laor, A., & Draine, B.T. 1993, ApJ, 402, 441 Buenzli, E., et al. 2012, ApJ, 760, L31 Laughlin, G., Crismani, M., & Adams, F.C. 2011, ApJ, 729, L7 Bryson, S. T., Tenenbaum, P., Jenkins, J. M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 713, L97 Lecavelier des Etangs, A., Pont, F., Vidal-Madjar, A., & Sing, D. A&A, Buchhave, L. A., Latham, D. W., Carter, J. A., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 3 481, L83 Burrows, A., Heng, K., & Nampaisarn, T. 2011, ApJ, 736, 47 Lee, J.-M., Fletcher, L.N., & Irwin, P.G.J. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 170 Christiansen, J. L., Ballard, S., Charbonneau, D., et al. 2010, ApJ, 710, 97 Lee, J.-M., Heng, K., & Irwin, P.G.J. 2013, arXiv:1307.1404 Claret, A., & Bloemen, S. 2011, A&A, 529, 75 Li, Z., & Wang, H. 2003, Physical Review E, 68, 061206 Cowan, N.B., & Agol, E. 2008, ApJ, 678, L129 Line, M.R., Zhang, X., Vasisht, G., Natraj, V., Chen, P., & Yung, Y.L. 2012, Cowan, N.B., & Agol, E. 2011a, ApJ, 726, 82 ApJ, 749, 93 Cowan, N.B., & Agol, E. 2011b, ApJ, 729, 54 Madhusudhan, N., & Seager, S. 2009, ApJ, 707, 24 Crossfield, I.J.M., Hansen, B.M.S., Harrington, J., Cho, J. Y.-K., Deming, Madhusudhan, N., Burrows, A., & Currie, T. 2011, ApJ, 737, 34 D., Menou, K., & Seager, S. 2010, ApJ, 723, 1436 Madhusudhan, N., & Burrows, A. 2012, ApJ, 747, 25 Demory, B.-O., & Seager, S. 2011, ApJS, 197, 12 Marley, M.S., Saumon, D., Cushing, M., Ackerman, A.S., Fortney, J.J., & Demory, B.-O., et al. 2011, ApJ, 735, L12 Freedman, R. 2012, ApJ, 754, 135 Demory, B.-O., et al. 2013, ApJ, in press Pal, A., Bakos, G. A., Torres, G., et al. 2008, ApJ, 680, 1450 D´esert, J.-M., Charbonneau, D., Demory, B.-O., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 14 Parmentier, V., Showman, A.P., & Lian, Y. 2013, arXiv:1301.4522 Dobbs-Dixon, I., Agol, E., & Burrows, A. 2012, ApJ, 751, 87 Perna, R., Heng, K., & Pont, F. 2012, ApJ, 751, 59 Dobbs-Dixon, I., & Agol, E. 2012, arXiv:1211.1709v1 Pierrehumbert, R.T. 2010, Principles of Planetary Climate (New York: Draine, B.T., & Lee, H.M. 1984, ApJ, 285, 89 Cambridge University Press) Draine, B.T. 2003, ApJ, 598, 1017 Pont, F., Knutson, H., Gilliland, R.L., Moutou, C., & Charbonneau, D. Draine, B.T. 2011, Physics of the Interstellar and Intergalactic Medium 2008, MNRAS, 385, 109 (New Jersey: Princeton University Press) Pont, F., Sing, D.K., Gibson, N.P., Aigrain, S., Henry, G., Husnoo, N. 2013, Dunham, E. W., Borucki, W. J., Koch, D. G., et al. 2010, ApJ, 713, L136 MNRAS, in press Endl, M., MacQueen, P. J., Cochran, W. D., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 13 Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T., & Flannery, B. P. 1992, Evans, T., et al. 2013, ApJ, 772, L16 Numerical recipes in FORTRAN. The art of scientific computing Fortney, J.J., Lodders, K., Marley, M.S., & Freedman, R.S. 2008, ApJ, 678, Quintana, E. V., Rowe, J. F., Barclay, T., et al. 2013, ArXiv e-prints 1419 Rauscher, E., & Menou, K. 2012, ApJ, 750, 96 Fortney, J.J., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 9 Russell, H.N. 1916, ApJ, 43, 173 Gelman, & Rubin. 1992, Statistical Science, 7, 457 Santerne, A., Bonomo, A. S., H´ebrard, G., et al. 2011, A&A, 536, A70 Gibson, N.P., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 753 Saumon, D., & Marley, M.S. 2008, ApJ, 689, 1327 Gillon, M., Demory, B.-O., Benneke, B., et al. 2012, A&A, 539, A28 Seager, S. 2010, Exoplanet Atmospheres (Princeton: Princeton University Guillot, T. 2010, A&A, 520, A27 Press) Hansen, B.M.S. 2008, ApJS, 179, 484 Showman, A.P., & Guillot, T. 2002, A&A, 385, 166 Helling, Ch., Jardine, M., Witte, S., & Diver, D.A. 2011, ApJ, 727, 4 Showman, A.P., Fortney, J.J., Lian, Y., Marley, M.S., Freedman, R.S., Heng, K., Frierson, D.M.W., & Phillipps, P.J. 2011, MNRAS, 418, 2669 Knutson, H.A., & Charbonneau, D. 2009, ApJ, 699, 564 Heng, K., Menou, K., & Phillipps, P.J. 2011, MNRAS, 413, 2380 Showman, A.P., & Polvani, L.M. 2011, ApJ, 738, 71 Heng, K., Hayek, W., Pont, F., & Sing, D.K. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 20 Sing, D.K., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 416, 14433 Heng, K. 2012, ApJ, 748, L17 Spiegel, D.S., Silverio, K., & Burrows, A. 2009, ApJ, 699, 1487 Henyey, L.G., & Greenstein, J.L. 1941, ApJ, 93, 70 Sudarsky, D., Burrows, A., & Pinto, P. 2000, ApJ, 538, 885 Huitson, C.M., Sing, D.K., Vidal-Madjar, A., Ballester, G.E., Lecavelier des Etangs, A., D´esert, J.-M., & Pont, F. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 2477 Jenkins, J. M., Borucki, W. J., Koch, D. G., et al. 2010a, ApJ, 724, 1108