HR 8799 Christian Marois,1,2,3* Bruce Macintosh,2 Travis Barman,4B

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

HR 8799 Christian Marois,1,2,3* Bruce Macintosh,2 Travis Barman,4B Direct Imaging of Multiple Planets Orbiting the Star HR 8799 Christian Marois,1,2,3* Bruce Macintosh,2 Travis Barman,4B. Zuckerman,5 Inseok Song,6 Jennifer Patience,7David Lafrenière,8 René Doyon9 1National Research Council Canada Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics, 5071 West Saanich Road, Victoria, BC, V9E 2E7, Canada. 2Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 7000 East Avenue, Livermore, CA 94550, USA. 3Astronomy Department, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. 4Lowell Observatory, 1400 West Mars Hill Road, Flagstaff, AZ 86001, USA. 5Physics & Astronomy Department and Center for Astrobiology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. 6University of Georgia, Physics and Astronomy, 240 Physics, Athens, GA 30602, USA. 7University of Exeter, School of Physics, Stocker Road, Exeter, EX4 4QL, UK. 8Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Toronto, 50 St. George Street, Toronto, ON, M5S 3H4, Canada. 9Département de Physique and Observatoire du Mont Mégantic, Université de Montréal, C.P. 6128, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, QC, H3C 3J7, Canada. *To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected] Direct imaging of exoplanetary systems is a powerful There is indirect evidence for planets in orbits beyond technique that can reveal Jupiter-like planets in wide 5 AU from their star. Some images of dusty debris disks orbits, can enable detailed characterization of planetary orbiting main-sequence stars (the Vega phenomenon) show atmospheres, and is a key step toward imaging Earth-like spatial structure on a scale of tens to hundreds of planets. Imaging detections are challenging due to the astronomical units (2). The most likely explanation of such combined effect of small angular separation and large structure is gravitational perturbations by planets with semi- luminosity contrast between a planet and its host star. major axes comparable to the radius of the dusty disks and High-contrast observations with the Keck and Gemini rings [see references in (3)]. telescopes have revealed three planets orbiting the star The only technique currently available to detect planets HR 8799, with projected separations of 24, 38, and 68 with semi-major axes greater than about 5 AU in a reasonable astronomical units. Multi-epoch data show counter- amount of time is infrared imaging of young, nearby stars. clockwise orbital motion for all three imaged planets. The The detected near-infrared radiation is escaped internal heat low luminosity of the companions and the estimated age of energy from the recently formed planets. During the past the system imply planetary masses between 5 and 13 times decade, hundreds of young stars with ages ! 100 Ma have that of Jupiter. This system resembles a scaled-up version been identified within ~100 pc of Earth (4, 5), and many of of the outer portion of our solar system. these have been imaged in the near-IR with ground-based adaptive optics (AO) systems and with the Hubble Space During the past decade various planet detection techniques— Telescope. Direct imaging searches for companions of these precision radial velocities, transits, and microlensing—have stars have detected some objects that are generally considered been used to detect a diverse population of exoplanets. to be near or above the mass threshold 13.6 M dividing However, these methods have two limitations. First, the Jup planets from brown dwarfs [see (6) for an example and (7) for existence of a planet is inferred through its influence on the a list of known substellar objects orbiting stars], and one star about which it orbits; the planet is not directly discerned planetary mass companion that is orbiting a brown dwarf, not [photometric signals from some of the closest-in giant planets a star (8). Recently, Lafrenière et al. (9) have detected a have been detected by careful analysis of the variations in the candidate planet near a young (5 Ma) star of the Upper integrated brightness of the system as the planet orbits its star Scorpius association, but a proper motion analysis is required (1)]. Second, these techniques are limited to small (transits) to to confirm that it is bound to the host star and not an moderate (precision radial velocity and microlensing) planet- unrelated low-mass member of the young association. In this star separation. The effective sensitivities of the latter two issue, Kalas et al. report the detection, in visible light, of a techniques diminish rapidly at semi-major axes beyond about candidate planetary mass companion near the inner edge of 5 AU. Direct observations allow discovery of planets in wider the Fomalhaut debris disk (10). Non-detections of the orbits and allow the spectroscopic and photometric candidate companion at near-IR wavelengths suggest that the characterization of their complex atmospheres to derive their detected visible flux may be primarily host-star light physical characteristics. scattering off circumplanetary dust rather than photons from / www.sciencexpress.org / 13 November 2008 / Page 1 / 10.1126/science.1166585 the underlying object. A statistical Bayesian analysis of a When planets form, gravitational potential energy is dedicated AO survey of nearby young F-, G- and K-type stars released and turned into heat in their interior. As planets do shows that exoplanets are relatively rare at separations not possess any internal nuclear energy source to maintain >20 AU around stars with masses similar to the Sun (11). their temperature, they cool down and become less luminous Bright A-type stars have been mostly neglected in imaging with time. For massive planets, this self-luminosity can surveys since the higher stellar luminosity offers a less dominate over their stellar insolation for hundreds of millions favorable planet-to-star contrast. However, main sequence A- or billions of years. With some assumptions on the initial type stars do have some advantages. The higher-mass A stars conditions at the time of formation, a planet’s mass can be can retain heavier and more extended disks and thus might derived simply by estimating the planet’s luminosity and the form massive planets at wide separations, making their system age. Our age estimate for HR8799 is based on four planets easier to detect. Millimeter interferometric continuum lines of evidence: the star’s galactic space motion, the star’s observations of the nearest Herbig Ae stars, the precursors to position in a color-magnitude diagram, the typical age of A-type stars, indicate that these are encircled by disks with $ Boo and # Dor class stars and the large mass of the masses up to several times the Minimum Mass Solar Nebula HR 8799 debris disk. (12), the minimum amount of solar abundance material Most young stars in the solar neighborhood have Galactic (0.01MSun) required to form all planets in the solar system space motions (UVW) that fall in limited ranges. HR 8799’s (13). Associated millimeter line observations resolve these space motion with respect to the Sun, as calculated from gas disks and indicate that their outer radii are 85-450 AU published distance, radial velocity and proper motion, is (12). The most exceptional example of a young A-star disk is UVW = (–11.9, –21.0, –6.8 km s%1) (16, 22). This UVW is the one orbiting IRAS 18059-3211, which is estimated to similar to that of other stars with an age between that of the have a mass of 90 times the Minimum Mass Solar Nebula and TW Hydra association [8 Ma (4, 5)] and the Pleiades [125 an outer radius extending to ~3,000 AU (14). Radial velocity ±8 Ma (23)]. The UVW of HR 8799 is similar to that of surveys of evolved A stars do seem to confirm these members of the 30 Ma old, southern hemisphere, Columba hypotheses by showing a trend of a higher frequency of and Carina Associations (5). Calculations of the UVW of the planets at wider separations (15). In this article, we describe young stars HD 984 and HD 221318, which lie near HR8799, the detection of three faint objects at 0.63"", 0.95"", and 1.73"" show that their space motions are similar to that of HR8799. (24, 38, and 68 AU projected separation) (see Fig. 1) from the We estimate the ages of HD 984 and HD 221318 to be 30 and dusty and young A-type main sequence star HR 8799, show 100 Ma, respectively, while the FEPS team estimates the age that all objects are co-moving with HR 8799, and describe of HD 984 to be 40 Ma (24). Overall, the UVW of HR 8799 their orbital motion and physical characteristics. is clearly consistent with those of young clusters and HR 8799 stellar properties. HR 8799 [also V342 Peg & associations in the solar neighborhood. Of course, in this HIP114189, located 39.4 pc (16) from Earth] is the only star UVW range of young stars, there are also older stars with known that has simultaneously been classified as # Doradus random motions; so other, independent, methods must also be (variable), $ Bootis (metal-poor Population I A-type star) and employed to place limits/constraints on the age of HR 8799. Vega-like (far-IR excess emission from circumstellar dust) HR 8799 is also found below the main sequence of the (17, 18). A fit to the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS) Pleiades, & Per (70 Ma) and IC2391 (50 Ma) on a and Infrared Space Observatory (ISO) photometry indicates Hertzsprung-Russell diagram. This is consistent with a that it has a dominant dust disk with temperature of 50 K (3, younger age compared to that of the Pleiades (25). Even with 19). Such blackbody grains, in an optically thin disk, would the more recent Tycho measurement and correcting for the reside ~75 AU ( ~2"") from HR 8799.
Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • GEMINI PLANET IMAGER SPECTROSCOPY of the HR 8799 PLANETS C and D
    The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 794:L15 (5pp), 2014 October 10 doi:10.1088/2041-8205/794/1/L15 C 2014. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved. Printed in the U.S.A. GEMINI PLANET IMAGER SPECTROSCOPY OF THE HR 8799 PLANETS c AND d Patrick Ingraham1, Mark S. Marley2, Didier Saumon3, Christian Marois4, Bruce Macintosh1, Travis Barman5, Brian Bauman6, Adam Burrows7, Jeffrey K. Chilcote8, Robert J. De Rosa9,10, Daren Dillon11,Rene´ Doyon12, Jennifer Dunn4, Darren Erikson4, Michael P. Fitzgerald8, Donald Gavel11, Stephen J. Goodsell13, James R. Graham14, Markus Hartung13, Pascale Hibon13, Paul G. Kalas14, Quinn Konopacky15, James A. Larkin8, Jer´ omeˆ Maire15, Franck Marchis16, James McBride14, Max Millar-Blanchaer15, Katie M. Morzinski17,24, Andrew Norton11, Rebecca Oppenheimer18, Dave W. Palmer6, Jenny Patience9, Marshall D. Perrin19, Lisa A. Poyneer6, Laurent Pueyo19, Fredrik Rantakyro¨ 13, Naru Sadakuni13, Leslie Saddlemyer4, Dmitry Savransky20,Remi´ Soummer19, Anand Sivaramakrishnan19, Inseok Song21, Sandrine Thomas2,22, J. Kent Wallace23, Sloane J. Wiktorowicz11, and Schuyler G. Wolff19 1 Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA 2 NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA 3 Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA 4 NRC Herzberg Astronomy and Astrophysics, 5071 West Saanich Road, Victoria, BC V9E 2E7, Canada 5 Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0092, USA 6 Lawrence Livermore National Lab,
    [Show 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.
    [Show full text]
  • First Direct Detection of an Exoplanet by Optical Interferometry Astrometry and K-Band Spectroscopy of HR 8799 E?,??
    A&A 623, L11 (2019) Astronomy https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201935253 & c S. Lacour et al. 2019 Astrophysics LETTER TO THE EDITOR First direct detection of an exoplanet by optical interferometry Astrometry and K-band spectroscopy of HR 8799 e?;?? GRAVITY Collaboration: S. Lacour1,2, M. Nowak1, J. Wang20;???, O. Pfuhl2, F. Eisenhauer2, R. Abuter8, A. Amorim6,14, N. Anugu7,22, M. Benisty5, J. P. Berger5, H. Beust5, N. Blind10, M. Bonnefoy5, H. Bonnet8, P. Bourget9, W. Brandner3, A. Buron2, C. Collin1, B. Charnay1, F. Chapron1, Y. Clénet1, V. Coudé du Foresto1, P. T. de Zeeuw2,12, C. Deen2, R. Dembet1, J. Dexter2, G. Duvert5, A. Eckart4,11, N. M. Förster Schreiber2, P. Fédou1, P. Garcia7,9,14 , R. Garcia Lopez15,3, F. Gao2, E. Gendron1, R. Genzel2,13, S. Gillessen2, P. Gordo6,14, A. Greenbaum16, M. Habibi2, X. Haubois9, F. Haußmann2, Th. Henning3, S. Hippler3, M. Horrobin4, Z. Hubert1, A. Jimenez Rosales2, L. Jocou5, S. Kendrew17,3, P. Kervella1, J. Kolb9, A.-M. Lagrange5, V. Lapeyrère1, J.-B. Le Bouquin 5, P. Léna1, M. Lippa2, R. Lenzen3, A.-L. Maire19,3, P. Mollière12, T. Ott2, T. Paumard1, K. Perraut5, G. Perrin1, L. Pueyo18, S. Rabien2, A. Ramírez9, C. Rau2, G. Rodríguez-Coira1, G. Rousset1, J. Sanchez-Bermudez21,3, S. Scheithauer3, N. Schuhler9, O. Straub1,2, C. Straubmeier4, E. Sturm2, L. J. Tacconi2, F. Vincent1, E. F. van Dishoeck2,12, S. von Fellenberg2, I. Wank4, I. Waisberg2, F. Widmann2, E. Wieprecht2, M. Wiest4, E. Wiezorrek2, J. Woillez8, S. Yazici2,4, D. Ziegler1, and G. Zins9 (Affiliations can be found after the references) Received 12 February 2019 / Accepted 28 February 2019 ABSTRACT Aims.
    [Show full text]
  • WTS-1 B: the first Extrasolar Planet Detected in the WFCAM Transit Survey
    WTS-1 b: the first extrasolar planet detected in the WFCAM Transit Survey Michele Cappetta M¨unchen2012 WTS-1 b: the first extrasolar planet detected in the WFCAM Transit Survey Michele Cappetta Dissertation an der Fakult¨atf¨urPhysik der Ludwig{Maximilians{Universit¨at M¨unchen vorgelegt von Michele Cappetta aus Bolzano, Italien M¨unchen, den 19. Dezember 2012 Erstgutachter: R. P. Saglia Zweitgutachter: B. Ercolano Tag der m¨undlichen Pr¨ufung:5. Februar 2013 Contents Zusammenfassung xix Summary xxi 1 Extrasolar planets 1 1.1 Introduction . .2 1.2 Detection methods . .4 1.3 Planet formation . .7 1.3.1 The Solar Nebular Model . .7 1.3.2 Rocky planets formation . .8 1.3.3 Gas-giant planets formation . 10 1.4 Planet evolution . 13 1.4.1 Gas disk migration . 13 1.4.2 Planetesimal-driven migration . 14 1.4.3 Planet-planet scattering . 16 1.5 Extrasolar planets properties . 17 1.5.1 Radius anomaly of the hot-Jupiters . 22 2 WFCAM Transit Survey 25 2.1 Observing strategy . 27 2.2 Reduction pipeline . 29 2.3 Transit detection algorithm . 32 2.4 Transit recovery ratios . 34 2.5 Results . 37 3 Instrumentation and spectroscopic observations 39 3.1 Hobby-Eberly Telescope . 40 3.2 The HRS Spectrograph . 42 3.3 Instrumental configurations . 46 3.4 Visit types . 49 4 Reduction and analysis pipeline 51 4.1 Introduction . 52 vi CONTENTS 4.2 Data reduction . 54 4.2.1 Cosmic-rays filtering . 54 4.2.2 Frames calibration . 54 4.2.3 Apertures definition . 55 4.2.4 Spectra extraction .
    [Show full text]
  • Coronagraphic Imaging of Debris Disks from a High Altitude Balloon Platform
    Coronagraphic Imaging of Debris Disks From a High Altitude Balloon Platform Stephen Unwin >", Wesley 'Traub", Geoffrey Bryden", Paul Brugarolasa , Pin Chen", Olivier Guyonb, Lynne Hillenbrandc, John Krist", Bruce ~facintoshd , Dimitri 1Ifawete, Bertrand Mennesson", Dwight Moody", Lewis C. Roberts Jr.", Karl Stapelfeldt!, David Stuchlik9, John 'Traugera , and Gautam Vasisht" "Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109 bNational Observatory of Japan, 650 N. A'ohoku Place, Hilo, HI 96720 cCalifornia Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125 dLawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550 eEuropean Southern Observatory, Alonso de Cordova 3107, Vitacura, Casilla 19001, Santiago de Chile 19, Chile fNASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771 9NASA Wallops Flight Facility, Wallops Island, VA 23337 ABSTRACT Debris disks around nearby stars are tracers of the planet formation process, and they are a key element of our understanding of the, formation and evolution of extrasolar planeta.ry systems. With multi-color images of a. significant number of disks, we can probe important questions: ca.'1. we learn about planetary system evolution; whflt materials are the disks made of; and can they reveal the presence of planets? :Most disks are known to exist only through their infrared flux excesses as measured by the Spitzer Space Telescope, and through images mesaured by Herschel. The brightest, most exte::tded disks have been imaged with HST, and a few, such as Fomalhaut, can be observed using ground-based telescopes. But the number of good images is still very small, and there are none of disks with densitips as low as the disk associated with the asteroid belt and Edgeworth­ Kuiper belt in our own Solar System.
    [Show full text]
  • The Detection and Characterization of Extrasolar Planets
    Challenges 2014, 5, 296-323; doi:10.3390/challe5020296 OPEN ACCESS challenges ISSN 2078-1547 www.mdpi.com/journal/challenges Article The Detection and Characterization of Extrasolar Planets Ken Rice * Institute for Astronomy, The University of Edinburgh, Royal Observatory, Blackford Hill, Edinburgh EH9 3HJ, UK; E-Mail: [email protected] Received: 1 July 2014; in revised form: 3 September 2014 / Accepted: 3 September 2014 / Published: 19 September 2014 Abstract: We have now confirmed the existence of > 1800 planets orbiting stars other than the Sun; known as extrasolar planets or exoplanets. The different methods for detecting such planets are sensitive to different regions of parameter space, and so, we are discovering a wide diversity of exoplanets and exoplanetary systems. Characterizing such planets is difficult, but we are starting to be able to determine something of their internal composition and are beginning to be able to probe their atmospheres, the first step towards the detection of bio-signatures and, hence, determining if a planet could be habitable or not. Here, I will review how we detect exoplanets, how we characterize exoplanetary systems and the exoplanets themselves, where we stand with respect to potentially habitable planets and how we are progressing towards being able to actually determine if a planet could host life or not. Keywords: planet formation; planetary systems; extrasolar planets; exoplanets; exoplanet detection; exoplanet characterization; planetary atmospheres; habitability 1. Introduction Just over 20 years ago, we were completely unaware of the existence of any planets outside our own solar system. Known as extrasolar planets, or exoplanets, the first were detected in 1992 [1], but rather than orbiting a Sun-like star, these two exoplanets were detected in orbit around a pulsar: the remnant core of a massive star.
    [Show full text]
  • Structure of Exoplanets
    Structure of exoplanets 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 9: More About Extrasolar Planets
    Lecture 9:! More About Extrasolar Planets Please Predicted remind me to weather take a break patterns on at 12:45 pm! HD80606 Claire Max May 1, 2014 Astro 18: Planets and Planetary Systems UC Santa Cruz Page Outline of lecture • Formation of protoplanetary disks • Orbits and masses of exoplanets • Planet formation in the light of what we know about exoplanets today • Atmospheres of exoplanets • Future exoplanet detection plans Page Phases in the evolution of protplanetary disks: theory Credit: Jonathan Williams and Lucas Cieza Page Phases in the evolution of protplanetary disks: data Young protoplanetary disks: lots of dust and gas. Opaque. Planets and low-mass 1 Myr stars within disk can create features. 5 Myr Transitional disks: much less dust and gas. No longer opaque. Beta Pictoris disk Old disks: dust is 12-20 replenished by collisions Myr of rocky bodies. ! Very little gas. Protoplanetary disks have short lifetimes: a few million years • This means that giant planet formation must be very fast. • Giant planets must accumulate tens to hundreds of Earth masses of nebular gas, before gas is lost from the disk. Slide credit: Jonathan Fortney Core accretion: dust grains + pebbles stuck together to form larger bodies • Asteroid Itokawa in our own Solar System may be a close-up example • Called a “rubble pile” • Self gravity not large enough to make it round Unanticipated characteristics of extra-solar planets • Much higher eccentricity in most of their orbits • Much higher fraction of planets very close to their parent stars. • Many of these have masses comparable to Jupiter’s. • Many planets are “super-Jupiters” (up to 10 times more massive than Jupiter) Page Eccentric Orbits Page Eccentric Orbits • Orbits of some extrasolar planets are much more elongated (have a greater eccentricity) than those in our solar system.
    [Show full text]
  • The LEECH Exoplanet Imaging Survey. Further Constraints on the Planet Architecture of the HR 8799 System?
    A&A 576, A133 (2015) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425185 & c ESO 2015 Astrophysics The LEECH Exoplanet Imaging Survey. Further constraints on the planet architecture of the HR 8799 system? A.-L. Maire1, A. J. Skemer2;??, P. M. Hinz2, S. Desidera1, S. Esposito3, R. Gratton1, F. Marzari4, M. F. Skrutskie5, B. A. Biller6;7, D. Defrère2, V. P. Bailey2, J. M. Leisenring2, D. Apai2, M. Bonnefoy8;9;7, W. Brandner7, E. Buenzli7, R. U. Claudi1, L. M. Close2, J. R. Crepp10, R. J. De Rosa11;12, J. A. Eisner2, J. J. Fortney13, T. Henning7, K.-H. Hofmann14, T. G. Kopytova7;15, J. R. Males2;???, D. Mesa1, K. M. Morzinski2;???, A. Oza5, J. Patience11, E. Pinna3, A. Rajan11, D. Schertl14, J. E. Schlieder7;16;????, K. Y. L. Su2, A. Vaz2, K. Ward-Duong11, G. Weigelt14, and C. E. Woodward17 1 INAF–Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova, Vicolo dell’Osservatorio 5, 35122 Padova, Italy e-mail: [email protected] 2 Steward Observatory, Department of Astronomy, University of Arizona, 993 North Cherry Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA 3 INAF–Osservatorio Astrofisico di Arcetri, Largo E. Fermi 5, 50125 Firenze, Italy 4 Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia, Universitá di Padova, via F. Marzolo 8, 35131 Padova, Italy 5 Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA 6 Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Blackford Hill, Edinburgh EH9 3HJ, UK 7 Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Königstuhl 17, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany 8 Université Grenoble Alpes, IPAG, 38000 Grenoble, France 9 CNRS, IPAG, 38000 Grenoble, France
    [Show full text]