* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Document
Cygnus (constellation) wikipedia , lookup
History of astronomy wikipedia , lookup
Observational astronomy wikipedia , lookup
Circumstellar habitable zone wikipedia , lookup
Kepler (spacecraft) wikipedia , lookup
Corvus (constellation) wikipedia , lookup
Space Interferometry Mission wikipedia , lookup
Astrobiology wikipedia , lookup
Rare Earth hypothesis wikipedia , lookup
Satellite system (astronomy) wikipedia , lookup
Planets beyond Neptune wikipedia , lookup
Directed panspermia wikipedia , lookup
Late Heavy Bombardment wikipedia , lookup
Star formation wikipedia , lookup
Astronomical naming conventions wikipedia , lookup
Aquarius (constellation) wikipedia , lookup
Nebular hypothesis wikipedia , lookup
Planets in astrology wikipedia , lookup
Formation and evolution of the Solar System wikipedia , lookup
Dwarf planet wikipedia , lookup
History of Solar System formation and evolution hypotheses wikipedia , lookup
Extraterrestrial life wikipedia , lookup
IAU definition of planet wikipedia , lookup
Exoplanetology wikipedia , lookup
Definition of planet wikipedia , lookup
Radial Velocity Detection of Planets: II. Results 1. Mutiple Planets 2. The Planet-Metallicity connection 3. Fake Planets Planetary Systems: 41 Multiple Systems 41 Extrasolar Planetary Systems (18 shown) Star P (d) MJsini a (AU) e HD 82943 221 0.9 0.7 0.54 444 1.6 1.2 0.41 GL 876 47 UMa 30 61 1095 2594 0.6 2.0 2.4 0.8 HD 37124 153 0.9 550 1.0 55 CnC 2.8 0.04 14.6 0.8 44.3 0.2 260 0.14 5300 4.3 Ups And 4.6 0.7 241.2 2.1 1266 4.6 HD 108874 395.4 1.36 1605.8 1.02 HD 128311 448.6 2.18 919 3.21 HD 217107 7.1 1.37 3150 2.1 0.1 0.2 2.1 3.7 0.27 0.10 0.06 0.00 0.5 2.5 0.04 0.1 0.2 0.78 6.0 0.06 0.8 2.5 1.05 2.68 1.1 1.76 0.07 4.3 0.20 0.40 0.17 0.0 0.34 0.2 0.16 0.01 0.28 0.27 0.07 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.13 0.55 Star P (d) MJsini HD 74156 51.6 1.5 2300 7.5 HD 169830 229 2.9 2102 4.0 HD 160691 9.5 0.04 637 1.7 2986 3.1 HD 12661 263 1444 HD 168443 58 1770 HD 38529 14.31 2207 HD 190360 17.1 2891 HD 202206 255.9 1383.4 HD 11964 37.8 1940 2.3 1.6 7.6 17.0 0.8 12.8 0.06 1.5 17.4 2.4 0.11 0.7 a (AU) 0.3 3.5 0.8 3.6 0.09 1.5 0.09 e 0.65 0.40 0.31 0.33 0 0.31 0.80 0.8 2.6 0.3 2.9 0.1 3.7 0.13 3.92 0.83 2.55 0.23 3.17 0.35 0.20 0.53 0.20 0.28 0.33 0.01 0.36 0.44 0.27 0.15 0.3 The 5-planet System around 55 CnC 0.17MJ 5.77 MJ •0.11 M J Red: solar system planets 0.82MJ • •0.03M J The Planetary System around GJ 581 16 ME 7.2 ME 5.5 ME Inner planet 1.9 ME Can we find 4 planets in the RV data for GL 581? Note: for Fourier analysis we deal with frequencies (1/P) and not periods n1 = 0.317 cycles/d n2 = 0.186 n3 = 0.077 n4 = 0.015 Almost: The Period04 solution: P1 = 5.38 d, K = 12.7 m/s Published solution: P1 = 5.37 d, K = 12.5 m/s P2 = 12.99 d, K = 3.2 m/s P2 = 12.93 d, K = 2.63 m/s P3 = 83.3 d, K = 2.7 m/s P3 = 66.8 d, K = 2.7 m/s P4 = 3.15, K = 1.05 m/s P4 = 3.15, K = 1.85 m/s s=1.17 m/s s=1.53 m/s Conclusions: 5.4 d and 12.9 d probably real, 66.8 d period is suspect, 3.15 d may be due to noise and needs confirmation. A better solution is obtained with 1.4 d instead of 3.15 d, but this is above the Nyquist frequency Measurements from two telescopes: AAT (red) and Keck (blue) s = 2.17 m/s The Planetary System around 61 Vir? Note: a 0.895 m/s offset was applied to the AAT data The Period04 solution: P1 55.5 d, K = 1.2 m/s Published solution: P1 = 4.214 d, K = 2.09 m/s P2 = 3.8 d, K = 1.2 m/s P2 = 38.01 d, K = 3.58 m/s P3 = 39 d, K = 1.14 m/s P3 = 124 d, K = 3.18 m/s s = 2.02 m/s s = 2.17 m/s With different periods and amplitudes (and the same number of sine functions) we have come up with a better solution. Problem #1 Largest peak is at 55 d, second peak is at 3.8 d, not 4.2 d. The False Alarm Probability of the 3.8 d peak is 0.004. I only believe planets with FAP << 0.001 Problem #2 Removing first two signals gives a peak at 39 d, but I do not believe it! AAT Data only Peak at 55 d (0.018 c/d), but nothing signficant at 4.2 d (0.24 c/d) Remove the strongest peak and get two signals at 0.033 c/d (30 d, moon contamination?) and another at 0.26 c/d (3.8 d), but smaller peak at 4.44 d Keck Data only Peak at 10.3 d (0.097c/d) Remove the dominant peak and residuals show a peak at 4.26 d (0.24 c/d) AAT Keck ? AAT Keck Conclusions about the „Planetary System“ around 61 Vir 1. Combined data shows a 3.8 d period, not 4.26 d 2. AAT data shows 3.8 d peak 3. Individual data sets do not show either 39 d, or 124 d signal There might be a signal at ~4 d, but the fact that different data sets give different answers makes me doubt this The other two „planets“ are noise → This is not a robust or confirmed planetary system because a different approach gives an entirely different answer! „The first principle is that you must not fool yourself – and you are the easiest person to fool.“ - Richard Feynman RV (m/s) The CoRoT-7 Planetary System JD Radial Velocity Measurements of CoRoT-7b with HARPS. CoRoT-7b is a transiting planet discovered by CoRoT. The additional planets were found from the radial velocity follow up. 44 The RV variations are dominated by the stellar activity. This must be removed in order to find the planet(s) signal(s). CoRoT-7b CoRoT-7c P = 3.7 Days Mass = 12.4 ME P = 0.85 Days Mass = 6.9 ME CoRoT-7d P = 9 Days Mass = 16.7 ME 0.045 AU 0.017 AU CoRoT-7d CoRoT-7b CoRoT-7c 0.082 AU 47 Resonant Systems Systems Star P (d) MJsini a (AU) e HD 82943 221 0.9 0.7 0.54 444 1.6 1.2 0.41 → GL 876 → 2:1 55 CnC 30 61 0.6 2.0 0.1 0.2 14.6 0.8 44.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.27 0.10 0.0 0.34 2:1 → 3:1 HD 108874 395.4 1.36 1605.8 1.02 1.05 2.68 0.07 0.25 → 4:1 HD 128311 448.6 2.18 919 3.21 1.1 1.76 0.25 0.17 → 2:1 2:1 → Inner planet makes two orbits for every one of the outer planet Eccentricities • Period (days) Red points: Systems Blue points: single planets Mass versus Orbital Distance Eccentricities Red points: Systems Blue points: single planets Crazy idea: If you divide the disk mass among several planets, they each have a smaller mass The Dependence of Planet Formation on Stellar Mass Poor precision Too faint (8m class tel.). Ideal for 3m class tel. RV Error (m/s) Main Sequence Stars A0 ~10000 K 2 Msun A5 F0 F5 G0 G5 Spectral Type K0 K5 M0 ~3500 K 0.2 Msun Exoplanets around low mass stars Ongoing programs: • ESO UVES program (Kürster et al.): 40 stars • HET Program (Endl & Cochran) : 100 stars • Keck Program (Marcy et al.): 200 stars • HARPS Program (Mayor et al.):~200 stars Results: • Giant planets (2) around GJ 876. Giant planets around low mass M dwarfs seem rare • Hot neptunes around several. Currently too few planets around M dwarfs to make any real conclusions GL 876 System 1.9 MJ 0.6 MJ Inner planet 0.02 MJ Exoplanets around massive stars Difficult with the Doppler method because more massive stars have higher effective temperatures and thus few spectral lines. Plus they have high rotation rates. A way around this is to look for planets around giant stars. This will be covered in „Planets off the Main Sequence“ Result: few planets around early-type, more massive stars, and these are mostly around F-type stars (~ 1.4 solar masses) Galland et al. 2005 HD 33564 M* = 1.25 msini = 9.1 MJupiter P = 388 days e = 0.34 F6 V star A Planet around an F star from the Tautenburg Program HD 8673 An F4 V star from the Tautenburg Program P = 328 days Msini = 8.5 Mjupiter e = 0.24 Scargle Power M* = 1.4 Mסּ Frequency (c/d) The Tautenburg F-star Planets Parameter 30 Ari B HD 8673 Period (days) e K (m/s) a (AU) M sin i (MJup) Sp. T Stellar Mass (M)סּ 338 0.21 278 1.06 10.1 F4 V 1.4 1628 0.711 290 2.91 12.7 F7 V 1.2 As we will see later, more massive stars tend to have more massive planets. M ~ 1.4 Msun M ~ 0.2 Msun M ~ 1 Msun Preliminary conclusions: more massive stars have more massive planets with higher frequency. Less massive stars have less massive planets → planet formation is a sensitive function of the planet mass. Jovian Analogs: Giant Planets at ≈ 5 AU Definition: A Jupiter mass planet in a 11 year orbit (5.2 AU) One of the better candidates: Period = 14.5 yrs Mass = 4.3 MJupiter e = 0.16 Why care about Jupiter analogs? There is a lot of junk in the solar system and in the past there was more. b Pic: A young star with planets e Eri: A young stars with a planet(s) And sometimes this junk hits something. On Jupiter you get big holes. On the Earth it can destroy most of life. What would the Solar System Look Like without Jupiter? G. Wetherill asked this question and through numerical simulations establised: • The gravitational influence of Jupiter quickly removes most of the junk from the solar system. • Without Jupiter the frequency of a cataclysmic collision like the one that killed off the dynosaurs would occur every 100.000 years instead of every 150.000.000 Years Conclusion: Jupiters at 5 AU may be important for the development of intelligent life! A good Jovian analog but with a lot of junk, and in an eccentric orbit e Eri • Long period planet • Very young star • Has a dusty ring • Nearby (3.2 pcs) • Astrometry (1-2 mas) • Imaging (Dm =20-22 mag) • Other planets? Clumps in Ring can be modeled with a planet here (Liou & Zook 2000) Radial Velocity Measurements of e Eri Hatzes et al. 2000 Large scatter is because this is an active star. It has been argued that this is not a planet at all, but rather the signal due to activity. Scargle Periodogram of e Eri Radial velocity measurements False alarm probability ~ 10–8 Scargle Periodogram of Ca II measurements Period Msini 6.85 Years 1.55 MJupiter e a K 0.7 3.39 AU 19 m/s The Best Candidates Planet Mass (MJup) Period (years) a (AU) e HD 187123c 1.99 10.4 4.89 0.25 HD 13931b 1.88 11.3 5.15 0.02 HD 160691e 1.81 11.5 5.2 0.1 HD 217107c 2.49 11.5 5.27 0.51 55 Cnc c 3.83 14.3 5.77 0.02 HD 134987 c 0.82 13.7 5.8 0.12 Jupiter 1 11.9 5.2 0.05 Note: These are the best candidates for direct imaging Wittenmyer et al. Combined data from 2 programs (McDonald and CFHT) to get a time base of over 23 years (probes to 8 AU). Could exclude M sin i > 2.0 ± 1.1 MJup for 17 objects (frequency < 6%) Planets and the Properties of the Host Stars: The StarMetallicity Connection Astronomer‘s Metals More Metals ! Even more Metals !! The „Bracket“ [Fe/H] Take the abundance of heavy elements (Fe for instance) Ratio it to the solar value Take the logarithm e.g. [Fe/H] = –1 → 1/10 the iron abundance of the sun The Planet-Metallicity Connection? These are stars with metallicity [Fe/H] ~ +0.3 – +0.5 Valenti & Fischer There is believed to be a connection between metallicity and planet formation. Stars with higher metalicity tend to have a higher frequency of planets. This is often used as evidence in favor of the core accretion theory There are several problems with this hypothesis Endl et al. 2007: HD 155358 two planets and.. …[Fe/H] = –0.68. This certainly muddles the metallicity-planet connection The Hyades The Hyades • Hyades stars have [Fe/H] = 0.2 • According to V&F relationship 10% of the stars should have giant planets, • Paulson, Cochran & Hatzes surveyed 100 stars in the Hyades • According to V&H relationship we should have found 10 planets •We found zero planets! Something is funny about the Hyades. Something else is funny about the Hyades: Spitzer observations of the Hyades suggest that the fraction of stars in the Hyades with debris disks is comparable to old field stars and significantly less than for stars with planets. → In the cluster environment of the Hyades, whatever something removed the disks so planets could not form. False Planets or How can you be sure that you have actually discovered a planet? HD 166435 In 1996 Michel Mayor announced at a conference in Victoria, Canada, the discovery of a new „51 Peg“ planet in a 3.97 d. One problem… HD 166435 shows the same period in in photometry, color, and activity indicators. This is not a planet! What can mimic a planet in Radial Velocity Variations? 1. Spots or stellar surface structure 2. Stellar Oscillations 3. Convection pattern on the surface of the star Starspots can produce Radial Velocity Variations Spectral Line distortions in an active star that is rotating rapidly Oscillations can produce Radial Velocity Variations P = 4.8 days Activity Effects: Convection Hot rising cell Cool sinking lane •The integrated line profile is distorted. •The ratio of dark lane to hot cell areas changes with the solar cycle This is a Jupiter! RV changes can be as large as 10 m/s with an 11 year period One has to worry even about the nature long period RV variations Tools for confirming planets: Photometry Starspots are much cooler than the photosphere Light Variations Color Variations Relatively easy to measure Tools for confirming planets: Ca II H&K Active star Inactive star Ca II H & K core emission is a measure of magnetic activity: Where does this emission core come from? Keep in mind: 1. Strong spectral lines are formed higher up in the atmosphere 2. The core of a line is formed higher up than the wings. The core of the line is formed in the chromosphere where the temperature is higher Dl (Å) HD 166435 Ca II emission measurements Tools for confirming planets: Bisectors Bisectors can measure the line shapes and tell you about the nature of the RV variations: Curvature Span What can change bisectors: • Spots • Pulsations • Convection pattern on star Spots produce an „anti-correlation“ of Bisector Span versus RV variations: Correlation of bisector span with radial velocity for HD 166435 The Planet around TW Hya? Setiawan et al. 2007 And my doubts… The claim is no bisector variations in this star Maximum RV variations in the velocity span is ~500 m/s Doppler image of V 410 Tau: A Weak T Tauri Star The spot distribution on V410 Tau has been present for 15 years! In a Galaxy (The Milky Way) a long time ago (1990) I did some simulations. I new that active stars had polar spots and I asked the question: „What would the RV and bisector variations look like for a star with a polar spot viewed nearly pole on. My results (from memory): 1. The RV curve is nearly sinusoidal 2. There are virtually no bisector span variations detectable at resolving power R =100,000 3. The largest effect is in the bisector curvature, but high resolution is needed to detect this. R ´= 50,000 (resolving power of TW Hya measurements) is too low. • TW Hya is a T Tauri star (that will become a weak T Tauri star) viewed pole-on • It most likely has a decentered polar spot (Doppler images of another TW Hya association star indeed shows a polar spot) From my lecture of 2009: What is needed to confirm this: 1. Contemporaneous photometry (but this star has a disk and complicated light variations) 2. RV measurements in the infrared where the spot contrast is smaller. Il = 2hc2 1 l5 (exp(hc/lkT) – 1) (exp(hc/lkTp) – 1) Ispot/Iphotosphere = (exp(hc/lkTs) – 1) Tspot ≈ 3000 K Tspot ≈ 5000 K At 5500 Å contrast ratio = 0.03 At 1.5 mm contrast ratio = 0.25 → weaker distortions in line profile Figueira et al. 2010, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 511, 55 A constant star Points: IR measurements, Solid line is the orbital solution using optical radial velocity measurements, but with one-third the optical amplitude → No planet! Confirming Extrasolar Planet Discoveries made with Radial Velocity Measurements The commandments of planet confirmation: • Must have long-lived coherent periodic variations • RV amplitude must be constant with wavelength • Must not have photometric variations with the same period as the planet • Must not have Ca II H&K emission variations with the planet period • Most not have line shape (bisector) variations with the same period as the planet Why I think CoRoT-7b is a 3 planet System Another source of „Fake Planets“ Secular changes in proper motion: Small proper motion Perspective effect Large proper motion The Secular Acceleration of Barnard‘s Star (Kürster et al. 2003). How do you know you have a planet? 1. Is the period of the radial velocity reasonable? Is it the expected rotation period? Can it arise from pulsations? • E.g. 51 Peg had an expected rotation period of ~30 days. Stellar pulsations at 4 d for a solar type star was never found 2. Do you have Ca II data? Look for correlations with RV period. 3. Get photometry of your object 4. Measure line bisectors 5. And to be double sure, measure the RV in the infrared! Summary Radial Velocity Method Pros: • Most successful detection method • Gives you a dynamical mass • Distance independent • Will provide the bulk (~1000) discoveries in the next 10+ years Summary Radial Velocity Method Cons: • Only effective for late-type stars • Most effective for short (< 10 – 20 yrs) periods • Only high mass planets (no Earths!) • Projected mass (msin i) • Other phenomena (pulsations, spots) can mask as an RV signal. Must be careful in the interpretation Summary of Exoplanet Properties from RV Studies • ~6% of normal solar-type stars have giant planets • ~10% or more of stars with masses ~1.5 M סּhave giant planets that tend to be more massive (more on this later in the course) • < 1% of the M dwarfs stars (low mass) have giant planets, but may have a large population of neptune-mass planets → low mass stars have low mass planets, high mass stars have more planets of higher mass → planet formation may be a steep function of stellar mass • 0.5–1% of solar type stars have short period giant plants • Exoplanets have a wide range of orbital eccentricities (most are not in circular orbits) • Massive planets tend to be in eccentric orbits • Massive planets tend to have large orbital radii • Stars with higher metallicity tend to have a higher frequency of planets, but this needs confirmation