Received 2012 April 5; accepted 2012 July 9; published 2012 August 21 A Preprint typeset using LTEX style emulateapj v. 5/2/11 THE PHOTOECCENTRIC EFFECT AND PROTO HOT JUPITERS I. MEASURING PHOTOMETRIC ECCENTRICITIES OF INDIVIDUAL TRANSITING PLANETS Rebekah I. Dawson1 Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics 60 Garden St, MS-10, Cambridge, MA 02138 John Asher Johnson Department of Astronomy, California Institute of Technology, 1200 East California Boulevard, MC 249-17, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA and NASA Exoplanet Science Institute (NExScI), CIT Mail Code 100-22, 770 South Wilson Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91125 Received 2012 April 5; accepted 2012 July 9; published 2012 August 21 ABSTRACT Exoplanet orbital eccentricities offer valuable clues about the history of planetary systems. Eccen- tric, Jupiter-sized planets are particularly interesting: they may link the “cold” Jupiters beyond the ice line to close-in hot Jupiters, which are unlikely to have formed in situ. To date, eccentricities of individual transiting planets primarily come from radial velocity measurements. Kepler has discov- ered hundreds of transiting Jupiters spanning a range of periods, but the faintness of the host stars precludes radial velocity follow-up of most. Here we demonstrate a Bayesian method of measuring an individual planet’s eccentricity solely from its transit light curve using prior knowledge of its host star’s density. We show that eccentric Jupiters are readily identified by their short ingress/egress/total transit durations – part of the “photoeccentric” light curve signature of a planet’s eccentricity — even with long-cadence Kepler photometry and loosely-constrained stellar parameters. A Markov Chain Monte Carlo exploration of parameter posteriors naturally marginalizes over the periapse angle and automatically accounts for the transit probability. To demonstrate, we use three published transit +0.16 light curves of HD 17156b to measure an eccentricity of e = 0.71−0.09, in good agreement with the discovery value e =0.67 0.08 based on 33 radial-velocity measurements. We present two additional tests using actual Kepler±data. In each case the technique proves to be a viable method of measur- ing exoplanet eccentricities and their confidence intervals. Finally, we argue that this method is the most efficient, effective means of identifying the extremely eccentric, proto hot Jupiters predicted by Socrates et al. (2012). Subject headings: planetary systems, techniques: photometric 1. INTRODUCTION Socrates et al. (2012) (hereafter S12) refer to this pro- Many exoplanets have highly eccentric orbits, a trend cess as “high eccentricity migration” (HEM). If HEM that has been interpreted as a signature of the dynamical were responsible for hot Jupiters, at any given time processes that shape the architectures of planetary sys- we would observe hot Jupiters that have undergone full tems (e.g. Juri´c& Tremaine 2008; Ford & Rasio 2008; tidal circularization, failed hot Jupiters that have tidal Nagasawa & Ida 2011). Giant planets on eccentric or- timescales too long to circularize over the star’s lifetime, bits are of particular interest because they may be relics and proto hot Jupiters that are caught in the process of tidal circularization. S12 predicted that the Kepler Mis- arXiv:1203.5537v3 [astro-ph.EP] 2 Nov 2012 of the same processes that created the enigmatic class of planets known as hot Jupiters: planets on very short sion should detect several “super-eccentric” proto hot period (P < 10 days) orbits that, unlike smaller plan- Jupiters with eccentricities in excess of 0.9. This pre- ets (e.g. Hansen & Murray 2012), could not have formed diction was tested by Dong et al. (2012) on a sample of in situ. Hot Jupiters may have smoothly migrated in- eclipsing binaries in the Kepler field: in an incomplete ward through the disk from which they formed (e.g. search, they found 14 long-period, highly eccentric bina- Goldreich & Tremaine 1980; Ward 1997; Alibert et al. ries and expect to eventually find a total of 100. 2005; Ida & Lin 2008; Bromley & Kenyon 2011). Al- As a test of planetary architecture theories, we are de- ternatively, the typical hot Jupiter may have been per- voting a series papers to measuring the individual ec- turbed by another body onto an eccentric orbit (see centricities of the Kepler Jupiters to either identify or Naoz et al. 2012), with a star-skirting periapse that be- rule out the super-eccentric proto hot Jupiters predicted came the parking spot for the planet as its orbit circu- by S12. In this first paper, we describe and demon- larized through tidal dissipation, initiated by one of sev- strate our technique for measuring individual eccentrici- eral perturbation mechanisms (e.g. Wu & Murray 2003; ties from transit light curves. Measuring the eccentricity Ford & Rasio 2006; Wu & Lithwick 2011). of a Jupiter-sized planet is also key to understanding its tidal history (e.g. Jackson et al. 2008; Hansen 2010) and tidal heating (e.g Mardling 2007; Jackson et al. 2008), 1 [email protected] climate variations (e.g Kataria et al. 2011), and the ef- 2 Dawson and Johnson fect of the variation in insolation on the habitability planets. (e.g Spiegel et al. 2010; Dressing et al. 2010) of possi- The work of FQV08 was the basis for several recent ble orbiting rocky exomoons detectable by Kepler (e.g. analyses of high-precision light curves from the Kepler Kipping et al. 2009). mission that have revealed information about the eccen- To date, the measurements of eccentricities of individ- tricity distribution of extra-solar planets and the eccen- ual transiting planets have been made through radial ve- tricities of planets in multi-transiting systems. By com- locity follow-up, except when the planet exhibits tran- paring the distribution of observed transit durations to sit timing variations (e.g. Nesvorny et al. 2012). How- the distribution derived from model populations of eccen- ever, a transit light curve is significantly affected by a tric planets, Moorhead et al. (2011) ruled out extreme planet’s eccentricity, particularly if the photometry is eccentricity distributions. They also identified individual of high quality: we refer to the signature of a planet’s planets with transit durations too long to be consistent eccentricity as the “photoeccentric” effect. One aspect with a circular orbit; these planets are either on eccentric is the asymmetry between ingress and egress shapes orbits (transiting near apoapse) or orbit host stars whose (Burke et al. 2007; Kipping 2008). The eccentricity stellar radii are significantly underestimated. also affects the timing, duration, and existence of sec- Kane et al. (2012) used the distribution of transit du- ondary eclipses (Kane & von Braun 2009; Dong et al. rations to determine that the eccentricity distribution of 2012). The most detectable aspect of the photoeccentric Kepler planets matches that of planets detected by the effect in Kepler photometry for long-period, planet-sized RV method and to discover a trend that small planets companions is the transit event’s duration at a given or- have less eccentric orbits. In contrast, Plavchan et al. bital period P , which is the focus of this work. (2012) found that the distribution of eccentricities in- Depending on the orientation of the planet’s argu- ferred from the transit durations is not in agreement with ment of periapse (ω), the planet moves faster or slower the eccentricity distribution of the RV sample; they sug- during its transit than if it were on a circular or- gested that the difference may be due to errors in the bit with the same orbital period (Barnes 2007, Burke stellar parameters. Finally, Kipping et al. (2012) pre- 2008, Ford, Quinn, and Veras 2008, hereafter FQV08; sented a method that they refer to as Multibody Astero- Moorhead et al. 2011). If the transit ingress and egress density Profiling to constrain eccentricities of planets in durations can be constrained, the duration aspect of the systems in which multiple planets transit. They noted photoeccentric effect can be distinguished from the effect that one can also apply the technique to single transit- of the planet’s impact parameter (b), because although ing planets, but discouraged doing so, except for planets b > 0 shortens the full transit duration (T23, during whose host star densities have been tightly constrained which the full disk of the planet is inside the disk of (e.g. by asteroseismology). FQV08 recommend measur- the star, i.e. from second to third contact), it lengthens ing eccentricities photometrically only for planets with the ingress/egress duration. Therefore, with prior knowl- “well-measured stellar properties” but also point out the edge or assumptions of the stellar parameters, combined weak dependence of eccentricity on stellar density. with measurements from the light curve of the planet’s In this work we apply the idea first proposed by FQV08 period and size (RP /R⋆), one can identify highly eccen- to real data and demonstrate that we can measure the tric planets as those moving at speeds inconsistent with eccentricity of an individual transiting planet from its a circular orbit as they pass in front of their stars (see transit light curve. We show that this technique is par- also 3 of Barnes 2007, 3.1 of FQV08). ticularly well-suited for our goal of identifying highly ec- Barnes§ (2007) presented§ the first comprehensive de- centric, giant planets. In 2, we show that even a loose scription of the effects of orbital eccentricity on a transit prior on the stellar density§ allows for a strong constraint light curve, including that a short transit duration cor- on the planet’s orbital eccentricity. In 3, we argue that responds to a minimum eccentricity, contingent on the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) exploration§ of the measurement of b and of the host star’s density.