Download Terrestrial Planets

PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
1
Week 1: Distance, Luminosity, Magnitude, Photometry
Week 2: Standard Candles, Planet dynamics, Kepler’s
laws, Binaries
Week 3: Exoplanets
Lecture 7: Extrasolar Planets
13/1/2007 update: 209 exoplanets
Resources. For observations, a good starting point is Berkeley extrasolar planets search
homepage
http://exoplanets.org/
http://exoplanet.eu/catalog-RV.php
Candidates detected by radial velocity
169 planetary systems
197 planets
20 multiple planet systems
Candidates detected by microlensing
4 planets
Candidates detected by imaging
4 planets
Candidates pulsar planets
2 planetary systems
4 planets
1 multiple planet systems
Although few of the planets have been directly imaged, the effects
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
2
of the gravity tugging at the stars, as well as the way that
gravitation affects can affect material close to the stars, has been
clearly seen.
Disc of material around the star Beta Pictoris – the image of
the bright central star has been artificially blocked out by
astronomers using a ‘Coronograph’
• How can we discover extrasolar planets?
• Characteristics of the exoplanet population
• Planet formation
• Explaining the properties of exoplanets
Rapidly developing subject - first extrasolar planet around an
ordinary star only discovered in 1995 by Mayor & Queloz.
Observations thought to be secure, but theory still preliminary...
Theory: Annual Reviews article by Lissauer (1993) is a good
summary of the state of theory prior to the discovery of extrasolar
planets
Definition of a planet
Simplest definition is based solely on mass
• Stars: burn hydrogen (M > 0.075 Msun)
• Brown dwarfs: burn deuterium
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
3
• Planets: do not burn deuterium (M < 0.013 Msun)
Deuterium burning limit occurs at around 13 Jupiter masses (1 MJ
= 1.9 x 1027 kg ~ 0.001 Msun It is important to realise that for
young objects, there is no large change in properties at the
deuterium burning limit. ALL young stars / brown dwarfs /
planets liberate gravitational potential energy as they contract
Types of planet
Giant planets (gas giants, `massive’ planets)
• Solar System prototypes: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus...
• Substantial gaseous envelopes
• Masses of the order of Jupiter mass
• In the Solar System, NOT same composition as Sun
• Presence of gas implies formation while gas was still
prevelant
Terrestrial planets
• Prototypes: Earth, Venus, Mars
• Primarily composed of rocks
• In the Solar System (ONLY) orbital radii less than giant
planets
Much more massive terrestrial planets could exist (>10 Earth
masses), though none are present in the Solar System. The Solar
system also has asteroids, comets, planetary satellites and rings we won’t discuss those in this course.
Detecting extrasolar planets
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
4
(1)
D
irect imaging - difficult due to enormous star / planet flux
ratio
(2)
Radial velocity
• Observable: line of sight velocity of star orbiting centre of
mass of star - planet binary system
• Most successful method so far
(3) Astrometry
• Observable: stellar motion in plane of sky
• Very promising future method: Keck interferometer,
GAIA, SIM
(4) Transits
• Observable: tiny drop in stellar flux as planet transits
stellar disc
• Requires favourable orbital inclination
•
Jupiter mass exoplanet observed from ground
(HD209458b)
• Earth mass planets detectable from space (Kepler (2007
launch. NASA Discovery mission), Eddington)
(5) Gravitational lensing
• Observable: light curve of a background star lensed by the
gravitational influence of a foreground star. The light curve
shape is sensitive to whether the lensing star is a single star
or a binary (star + planet is a special case of the binary)
• Rare - requires monitoring millions of background stars,
and also unrepeatable
• Some sensitivity to Earth mass planets
Each method has different sensitivity to planets at various
orbital radii - complete census of planets requires use of
several different techniques
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
5
Planet detection method : Radial velocity technique
This is also known as the "Doppler method". Variations in
the speed with which the star moves towards or away
from Earth — that is, variations in the radial velocity of the
star with respect to Earth — can be deduced from the
displacement in the parent star's spectral lines due to the
Doppler effect. This has been by far the most productive
technique used by planet hunters.
A planet in a circular orbit around star with semi-major axis a
Assume that the star and planet both rotate around the centre of
mass with an angular velocity:
Using a1 M* = a2 mp and a = a1 + a2, then the stellar speed (v* = a
) in an inertial frame is:
(assuming mp << M*). i.e. the stellar orbital speed is small….just
metres per second!
For a circular orbit, observe a sin-wave variation of the stellar
radial velocity, with an amplitude that depends upon the
inclination of the orbit to the line of sight:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
6
Hence, measurement of the radial velocity amplitude produces a
constraint on:
mp sin(i)
(assuming stellar mass is well-known, as it will be since to
measure radial velocity we need exceptionally high S/N spectra of
the star).
Observable is a measure of mp sin(i).
-> given vobs, we can obtain a lower limit to the planetary mass
In the absence of other constraints on the inclination, radial
velocity searches provide lower limits on planetary masses
Magnitude of radial velocity:
Sun due to Jupiter:
Sun due to Earth:
i.e. extremely small running pace
12.5 m/s
0.1 m/s
10 m/s is Olympic 100m
Spectrograph with a resolving power of 105 will have a pixel scale
~ 10-5 c ~ few km/s
Therefore, specialized techniques that can measure radial
velocity shifts of ~10-3 of a pixel stably over many years are
required
High sensitivity to small radial velocity shifts is achieved by:
• comparing high S/N = 200 - 500 spectra with template
stellar spectra
• using a large number of lines in the spectrum to allow
shifts of much less than one pixel to be determined.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
7
Absolute wavelength calibration and stability over long
timescales is achieved by:
• passing stellar light through a cell containing iodine,
imprinting large number of additional lines of known
wavelength into the spectrum
• with the calibrating data suffering identical instrumental
distortions as the data
Error sources:
(1) Theoretical: photon noise limit
• flux in a pixel that receives N photons uncertain by ~
N1/2
• implies absolute limit to measurement of radial
velocity
• depends upon spectral type - more lines improve
signal
• around 1 m/s for a G-type main sequence star with
spectrum recorded at S/N=200
• practically, S/N=200 can be achieved for V=8 stars
on a 3m class telescope in survey mode
(2) Practical:
• stellar activity - young or otherwise active stars are
not stable at the m/s level and cannot be monitored
with this technique
• remaining systematic errors in the observations
Currently, the best observations achieve:
 ~ 3 m/s
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
8
...in a single measurement. Thought this error can be reduced to
around 1 m/s with further refinements, but not substantially
further. The very highest Doppler precisions of 1 m/s are
capableof detecting planets down to about 5 earth masses.
Radial velocity monitoring detects massive planets, especially
those at small a, but is not sensitive enough to detect Earthlike planets at ~ 1 AU.
Examples of radial velocity data
51 Peg b was the first known exoplanet with a 4 day, circular
orbit: a hot Jupiter, lying close to the central star.
Example of a planet with an eccentric orbit: e=0.67
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
9
Summary of observables
(1) Planet mass, up to an uncertainty from the normally
unknown inclination of the orbit. Measure mp sin(i)
(2) Orbital period -> radius of the orbit given the stellar
mass
(3) Eccentricity of the orbit
Summary: selection function
Need to observe full orbit of the planet: zero sensitivity to planets
with P > Psurvey
For P < Psurvey, minimum mass planet detectable is one that
produces a radial velocity signature of a few times the sensitivity
of the experiment (this is a practical detection threshold)
Which planets are detectable? For a given radial velocity
amplitude:
m p sin i  a
1
2
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
10
Hence, inner massive planets are selected.
Current limits:
• Maximum a ~ 3.5 AU (ie orbital period ~ 7 years)
• Minimum mass ~ 0.5 Jupiter masses at 1 AU, scaling with
square root of semi-major axis
• No strong selection bias in favour / against detecting
planets with different eccentricities
Of the first 100 stars found to harbor planets, more than 30 stars
host a Jupiter-sized world in an orbit smaller than Mercury's,
whizzing around its star in a matter of days.
This implies: Planet formation is a contest, where a growing
planet must fight for survival lest it be swallowed by the star that
initially nurtured it.
Planet detection method : Astrometry
The gravitational perturbations of a star's position by an unseen
companion provides a signature which can be detected through
precision astrometry. While very accurate wide-angle astrometry
is only possible from space with a mission like the Space
Interferometry Mission (SIM), narrow-angle astrometry with an
accuracy of tens of microarcseconds is possible from the ground
with an optimized instrument.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
11
Conceptually identical to radial velocity searches. Light from a
planet-star binary is dominated by star. Measure stellar motion
in the plane of the sky due to presence of orbiting planet. Must
account for parallax and proper motion of star.
Magnitude of effect: amplitude of stellar wobble (half peak
displacement) for an orbit in the plane of the sky is
 mp 
  a
a1  
 M* 
In terms of the angle:
 m p  a 
 
  
M
 *  d 
for a star at distance d. Note we have again used mp << M*
Writing the mass ratio q = mp / M*, this gives:
A Jupiter around a Sun at 10 PC would produce a wobble with an
amplitude of 0.5 milliarcseconds.
Note:
• Units here are milliarcseconds - very small effect
• Different dependence on a than radial velocity method astrometric planet searches are more sensitive at large a
• Explicit dependence on d (radial velocity measurements
also less sensitive for distant stars due to lower S/N spectra)
• Detection of planets at large orbital radii still requires a
search time comparable to the orbital period
Detection threshold as function of semi-major axis
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
12
• Lack of units deliberate! Astrometric detection not yet achieved
• As with radial velocity, dependence on orbital inclination,
eccentricity
• Very promising future: Keck interferometer, Space Interferometry
Mission (SIM), ESA mission GAIA, and others
• Planned astrometric errors at the ~10 microarcsecond level – good
enough to detect planets of a few Earth masses at 1 AU around
nearby stars
Lecture 8 (?)
Planet detection method : Transits - Photometry
Simplest method: look for drop in stellar flux due to a planet
transiting across the stellar disc
Needs luck or wide-area surveys - transits only occur if the orbit is almost
edge-on
For a planet with radius rp << R*, probability of transits is:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
13
Close-in planets are more likely to be detected. P = 0.5 % at 1AU, P = 0.1
% at the orbital radius of Jupiter
What can we measure from the light curve?
(1) Depth of transit = fraction of stellar light blocked
This is a measure of planetary radius, NOT the mass! The method
suffers from a high rate of false detections. A transit detection requires
additional confirmation, typically from the radial-velocity method.
In practice, isolated planets with masses between ~ 0.1 MJ and 10
MJ, where MJ is the mass of Jupiter, should have almost the same
radii (i.e. a flat mass-radius relation).
-> Giant extrasolar planets transiting solar-type stars produce
transits with a depth of around 1%.
Close-in planets are strongly irradiated, so their radii can be
(detectably) larger. But this heating-expansion effect is not
generally observed for short-period planets.
(2)
(3)
(4)
Duration of transit plus duration of ingress, gives measure of the
orbital radius and inclination
Bottom of light curve is not actually flat, providing a measure of
stellar limb-darkening
Deviations from profile expected from a perfectly opaque disc could
provide evidence for satellites, rings etc
Photometry at better than 1% precision is possible (not easy!) from
the ground. HST reached a photometric precision of 0.0001.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
14
Potential for efficient searches for close-in giant planets
Transit depth for an Earth-like planet is:
Photometric precision of ~ 10-5 seems achievable from space
May provide first detection of habitable Earth-like planets
NASA’s Kepler mission, ESA version Eddington
A reflected light signature must also exist, modulated on the orbital
period, even for non-transiting planets. No detections yet.
Planet detection method : Gravitational microlensing
Microlensing operates by a completely different principle, based on
Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. According to Einstein, when
the light emanating from a star passes very close to another star on
its way to an observer on Earth, the gravity of the intermediary star
will slightly bend the light rays from the source star, causing the
two stars to appear farther apart than they normally would.
This effect was used by Sir Arthur Eddington in 1919 to provide the
first empirical evidence for General Relativity. In reality, even the
most powerful Earth-bound telescope cannot resolve the separate
images of the source star and the lensing star between them, seeing
instead a single giant disk of light, known as the "Einstein disk,"
where a star had previously been. The resulting effect is a sudden
dramatic increase in the brightness of the lensing star, by as much as
1,000 times. This typically lasts for a few weeks or months before the
source star moves out of alignment with the lensing star and the
brightness subsides.
Light is deflected by gravitational field of stars, compact objects, clusters
of galaxies, large-scale structure etc
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
15
Simplest case to consider: a point mass M (the lens) lies along the line of
sight to a more distant source
Define:
• Observer-lens distance
• Observer-source distance
• Lens-source distance
Dl
Ds
Dls
Azimuthal symmetry -> light from the source appears as a ring
...with radius R0 - the Einstein ring radius - in the lens plane.
Gravitational lensing conserves surface brightness, so the distortion of
the image of the source across a larger area of sky implies magnification.
The Einstein ring radius is given by:
Suppose now that the lens is moving with a velocity v. At time t, the
apparent distance (in the absence of lensing) in the lens plane between the
source and lens is r0.
Defining u = r0 / R0, the amplification is:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
16
Note: for u > 0, there is no symmetry, so the pattern of images is not a ring
and is generally complicated. In microlensing we normally only observe
the magnification A, so we ignore this complication...
Notes:
(1) The peak amplification depends upon the impact parameter,
small impact parameter implies a large amplification of the flux from
the source star
(2) For u = 0, apparently infinite magnification! In reality, finite size
of source limits the peak amplification
(3) Geometric effect: affects all wavelengths equally
(4) Rule of thumb: significant magnification requires an impact
parameter smaller than the Einstein ring radius
(5) Characteristic timescale is the time required to cross the Einstein
ring radius:
Optical depth to microlensing
Define the optical depth to microlensing as:
This is just the integral of the area of the Einstein ring along the line of
sight to the source. For a uniform density of lenses, can easily show that
the maximum contribution comes from lenses halfway to the source.
Several groups have monitored stars in the Galactic bulge and the
Magellanic clouds to detect lensing of these stars by foreground objects
(MACHO, Eros, OGLE projects). Original motivation for these projects
was to search for dark matter in the form of compact objects in the halo.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
17
Timescales for sources in the Galactic bulge, lenses ~ halfway along the
line of sight:
• Solar mass star ~ 1 month
• Jupiter mass planet ~ 1 day
• Earth mass planet ~ 1 hour
The dependence on M1/2 means that all these timescales are observationally
feasible. However, lensing is a very rare event, all of the projects monitor
millions of source stars to detect a handful of lensing events.
Lensing by a single star
Lensing by a star and a planet
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
18
Planet detection through microlensing
The microlensing process in stages, from right to left. The lensing star
(white) moves in front of the source star (yellow) doubling its image and
creating a microlensing event. In the fourth image from the right the planet
adds its own microlensing effect, creating the two characteristic spikes in
the light curve. Credit: OGLE
Planet search strategy:
• Monitor known lensing events in realtime with dense, high
precision photometry from several sites
• Look for deviations from single star light curve due to planets
• Timescales ~ a day for Jupiter mass planets, ~ hour for Earths
• Most sensitive to planets at a ~ R0, the Einstein ring radius
• Around 3-5 AU for typical parameters
Sensitivity to planets
Complementary to other methods:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
19
Actual sensitivity is hard to evaluate: depends upon frequency of
photometric monitoring (high frequency needed for lower masses),
accuracy of photometry (planets produce weak deviations more often than
strong ones)
Very roughly: observations with percent level accuracy, several times per
night, detect Jupiter, if present, with 10% efficiency
Many complicated light curves observed:
The microlensing event that led to the discovery of the new planet was first
observed by the Poland-based international group OGLE, the Optical
Gravitational Lensing Experiment. The microlensing light curve of planet
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
20
OGLE–2005-BLG-390Lb
The general curve shows the microlensing event peaking on July 31, 2005, and
then diminishing. The disturbance around August 10 indicates the presence of a
planet. OGLE –2005-BLG-390Lb will never be seen again. At around five times
the mass of Earth, the new planet, designated OGLE–2005-BLG-390Lb, is the
lowest-mass planet ever detected outside the solar system. And when one
considers that the vast majority of the approximately 170 extrasolar planets
detected so far have been Jupiter-like gas giants, dozens or hundreds of times
the mass of Earth, the discovery of a planet of only five Earth masses is indeed
good news.
Photometric :
2005 image of 2M1207 (blue) and its planetary companion, 2M1207b, one of the
first exoplanets to be directly imaged, in this case from the Very Large
Telescope array in Chile
Planet detection method: Direct detection!
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
21
Infrared image of 2M1207 (blue) and its planet 2M1207b, as viewed by the Very
Large Telescope. As of September 2006 this was the first confirmed extrasolar
planet to have been directly imaged.
Spectroscopic? The starlight scattered from the planet can be
distinguished from the direct starlight because the scattered light is
Doppler shifted by virtue of the close-in planet's relatively fast
orbital velocity (~ 150 km/sec). Superimposed on the pattern given
by the planet's albedo changing slowly with wavelength, the
spectrum of the planet's light will retain the same pattern of
photospheric absorption lines as in the direct starlight.
Pulsar Planets
In early 1992, the Polish astronomer Aleksander Wolszczan (with Dale Frail)
announced the discovery of planets around another pulsar, PSR 1257+12.This discovery
was quickly confirmed, and is generally considered to be the first definitive detection of
exoplanets.
These pulsar planets are believed to have formed from the unusual remnants of the
supernova that produced the pulsar, in a second round of planet formation, or else to
be the remaining rocky cores of gas giants that survived the supernova and then spiralled
in to their current orbits.
PH507

Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
22
Pulsar timing Pulsars (the small, ultradense remnant of a star that has
exploded as a supernova) emit radio waves extremely regularly as they
rotate. Slight anomalies in the timing of its observed radio pulses can
be used to track changes in the pulsar's motion caused by the presence
of planets.
4 Detecting extrasolar planets: summary
RV, Doppler technique (v = 3 m/s)
Astrometry: angular oscillation
Photometry: transits - close-in planets
Microlensing:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
23
Lecture 9: The extrasolar planet population
Review
http://exoplanet.eu/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrasolar_planet
There are 211 planets listed — 48 in multiple planet systems, 154 in single
planet systems, 4 orbiting pulsars, 1 orbiting a brown dwarf, and 2 free
floating.
The planets are listed with indications of their approximate masses as
multiples of Jupiter 's mass (MJ = 1.898 × 1027 kg) or multiples of Earth's
mass (ME = 5.9737 × 1024 kg), and have approximate distances in
astronomical units (1) AU = 1.496 × 108 km, distance between Earth and
Sun) from their parent stars.
According to astronomical naming conventions, the official designation for
a body orbiting a star is the star's catalogue number followed by a letter.
The star itself is designated with the letter 'a', and orbiting bodies by 'b', 'c',
etc
Fusing stars
There are currently 204 planets known in orbit around fusing stars.
There are currently 156 known planets in single-planet systems and 48 known planets
in 20 multiple-planet systems (14 with two planets, 4 with three and 2 with four).
"Single" here means that only one planet has been detected to date. Since detection
methods are not sensitive to low-mass planets, these stars may have smaller planets that
are below the limits of detectability, or are so far from the star that they have not yet
been observed over an orbital period.
Pulsars
There are currently four known planets orbiting two different pulsars. The planet of PSR
B1620−26 is in a circumbinary orbit around a pulsar and a white dwarf star.
Brown dwarfs
There is currently one known planet orbiting a brown dwarf.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
24
Free floating planets
There are currently four suspected free-floating planet,s i.e. they don't appear to orbit a
star.
DISTRIBUTIONS:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
25
Metallicity:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/7/f/6/7f667a48e6b688f
5a63f96114390faaa.png
Observed Properties of Exoplanets: Masses, Orbits, and
Metallicities
Geoffrey Marcy et al…….2005
Summary:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
26
Ongoing 18-year survey of 1330 FGKM type stars at Lick, Keck, and the AngloAustralian Telescopes that offers both uniform Doppler precision (3 m s-1) and long
duration. The 104 planets detected in this survey have minimum masses (M sin i) as
low as 6 M Earth, orbiting between 0.02 and 6 AU.
The core-accretion model of planet formation is supported by four
observations:
1) The mass distribution rises toward the lowest detectable masses,
dN/dM ~ M -1.0.
2) Stellar metallicity correlates strongly with the presence of planets.
3) One planet (1.3 M Sat) has a massive rocky core, M Core ≈ 70 M Earth.
4) A super-Earth of about 7 M Earth has been discovered.
The distribution of semi-major axes rises from 0.3 – 3.0 AU (dN/d log a)
and extrapolation suggests that about 12% of the FGK stars harbour
gas-giant exoplanets within 20 AU.
The median orbital eccentricity is <e >= 0.25, and even planets beyond 3
AU reside in eccentric orbits, suggesting that the circular orbits in our
Solar System are unusual.
The occurrence “hot Jupiters” within 0.1 AU of FGK stars is 1.2 ± 0.2%.
Among stars with one planet, 14% have at least one additional planet,
occasionally locked in resonances.
Kepler and COROT will measure the occurrence of earth-sized planets.
The Space Interferometry Mission (SIM) will detect planets with masses as
low as 3 M Earth orbiting within 2 AU of stars within 10 pc, and it will
measure masses, orbits, and multiplicity. The candidate rocky planets will
be amenable to follow-up spectroscopy by the “Terrestrial Planet Finder”
and Darwin.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
27
• Planet fraction among ~ solar-type stars exceeds 7%
• Most are beyond 1 AU
• Four very low mass planets have been detected ….20 earth masses.
Other positive detections:
Microlensing: two strong detections, low detection rate imply upper limit of ~1/3 on
the fraction of lensing stars (~ 0.3 Msun) with Jupiter mass planets at radii to which
lensing is most sensitive (1.5 - 4 AU)
Transits: 7 known planets (5 found with OGLE photometrically – dimming).
Interesting upper limit from non-detection of transits in globular cluster 47 Tuc.
Transits + Doppler yields mass and size, hence the density of the planet: 0.2 – 1.4
gm/cm3 : mainly gaseous. In addition, sodium and nitrogen found in their atmospheres.
Eccentricity:
• Except at very small radii, typical planet orbit has significant eccentricity
The eccentricity of an orbit is how much it varies from a perfect circle. A stable orbit
can have an eccentricity anywhere from a perfect circle with an eccentricity of 0, up to a
highly elliptical orbit with an eccentricity up to (but not including) 1. If an orbit had an
eccentricity of 1, it would be parabolic and escape from the system. If it were larger than
1, it would be hyperbolic and also escape from the system.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
28
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
29
Most extrasolar planets reside in non-circular orbits. Of the 90
extrasolar planets that reside beyond 0.15 AU, their average
orbital eccentricity is 0.32.
In contrast, planets orbiting within 0.1 AU of their host star all
reside in nearly circular orbits, no doubt enforced by tidal
circularization.
Earth's eccentricity is 0.017, while Jupiter's is 0.094. In our solar system, the planet with
the largest eccentricity is Pluto at 0.244, and Mercury with 0.205. The planet with the
lowest eccentricity is Venus with 0.007. Unless there is some gravitational tugging
(such as with the Galilean Satellites) that keeps an orbit eccentric, orbits will usually
circularize with time.
About 10% of the planets found so far have an eccentricity of nearly 0. About 15% have
an eccentricity smaller than Earth's, and over 25% have an eccentricity smaller than
Jupiter's. 45% are smaller than Mercury's eccentricity, and 50% are lower than Pluto's.
The other half have very eccentric orbits; this means that, throughout their years, they
come very close to and very far from their parent star. This will create wide temperature
swings, and for any life like Earth's, this would make survival quite difficult, if not
impossible.
Theories:
 Various theories have been proposed to explain the orbital eccentricities, but
none is definitive at the current time. Most proposed mechanisms invoke
gravitationally scattering or perturbations of planets by other planets, perhaps
in resonances, or by interactions with the protoplanetary disk.
Orbital eccentricity as a function of semimajor axis for the 168 known nearby
exoplanets. Planets within 0.1 AU are presumably tidally circularized. Beyond
0.1 AU, the distribution of eccentricities appears essentially uniform between 0
and 0.8. For most Doppler surveys, sensitivity is not a strong function of
eccentricity for 0 < e < 0.8 and a < 3 AU. This plot represents results from many
surveys, and so is drawn from an inhomogeneous sample.
Distribution of Eccentricity:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
Eccentricity vs planet mass
30
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
31
Distribution of orbital eccentricities as a function of minimum mass for the
130 known nearby exoplanets with M sin i < 13 MJup, excluding those for which
a < 0.1 AU, i.e., those planets which may have been tidally circularized. Highmass exoplanets (M sin i > 5MJup) have a slightly higher median eccentricity
than lower-mass exoplanets. The completeness of Doppler surveys increases
with M sin i and is generally insensitive to eccentricity. This distribution
represents results from many surveys, and so is drawn from an
inhomogeneous.
Ignoring the hot Jupiters, no obvious correlation between planet mass and
eccentricity.
(1) Hot Jupiters have close to circular orbits. All detected planets with semi-major
axis < 0.07 AU have low e. This is similar to binary stars, and is likely due to
tidal circularization.
(2) Remaining planets have a wide scatter in e, including some planets with large e.
Note that the distance of closest approach is a(1-e), and that the effect of
tidal torques scales as separation d-6. The very eccentric planet around
HD80606 (a = 0.438 AU, e = 0.93, a(1-e) = 0.03 AU) may pose some
problems for tidal circularization theory.
Minimum mass as a function of semimajor axis:
PH507
Astrophysics
Nothing very striking in these plots:
Professor Michael Smith
32
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
33
• Accessible region of mp - a space is fully occupied by detected planets
Get rid of the log (Mj) :
Minimum mass as a function of semimajor axis for the 164
known nearby exoplanets with 0.03 < a < 6.5 AU. Doppler surveys
are generally incomplete for exoplanets with a > 3 AU, low-mass
planets (M sin i < 1MJup) beyond 1 AU, and very low-mass planets
(M sin i < 0.1MJup) everywhere. This plot represents results from
many surveys, and so is drawn from an inhomogeneous sample.
Results from radial velocity searches
(1) Massive planets exist at small orbital radii. Closest-in planet is at a = 0.035 AU,
cf Mercury at ~ 0.4 AU. Less than 10 Solar radii.
Best-fit orbit to the radial velocities measured at Keck Observatory
for HD 66428,
with P = 5.4yr, e = 0.5, and M sin i = 3MJup.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
34
Best-fit orbit to the radial velocities measured at Keck Observatory
for HD 11964,
with P = 5.8yr, e ~ 0, and M sin i = 0.6MJup.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
35
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
36
Account for this by considering only planets with masses large enough to be detectable
at any a < 2.7 AU.
-> dN / dlog(a) rises steeply with orbital radius
Implies that the currently detected planet fraction ~7% is likely to be a substantial
underestimate of the actual fraction of stars with massive planets.
Models suggest 15-25% of solar-type stars may have planets with masses 0.2 MJ < mp <
10 MJ.
Strong selection effect in favour of detecting planets at small orbital radii, arising from:
- lower mass planets can be detected there
- mass function rises to smaller
masses
Orbital distance distribution of the 167 known nearby exoplanets with
0.03 <a < 10 in logarithmic distance bins. Planets with a > 3AU have
periods comparable to or longer than the length of most Doppler
surveys, so the distribution is incomplete beyond that distance. This
distribution represents results from many surveys, and so is drawn from
an inhomogeneous sample
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
37
Distribution of periods among the known nearby “hot Jupiters”. There
is a clear “pile-up” of planets with orbital periods near 3 days. Doppler
surveys generally have uniform sensitivity to hot Jupiters, so for massive
planets, there is no important selection effect contributing to the 3-day
pile-up. This distribution represents results from many surveys, and so is
drawn from an inhomogeneous sample.
Observed mass function increases to smaller Mp:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
38
Note: the brown dwarf desert!
Minimum mass distribution of the 167 known nearby exoplanets with M sin i <
15 MJup. The mass distribution shows a dramatic decrease in the number of
planets at high masses, a decrease that is roughly characterized by a power law,
dN/dM ~ M-1.16. Lower mass planets have smaller Doppler amplitudes, so the
relevent selection effects enhance this effect. This distribution represents results
from many surveys, and so is drawn from an inhomogeneous sample.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
39
Metallicity distribution of stars with and without planets
Left plot: metallicity of stars with planets (shaded histogram) compared to a sample of
stars with no evidence for planets (open histogram) (data from Santos, Israelian &
Mayor, 2001)
Host star metallicity
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
40
Planets are preferentially found around stars with enhanced metal abundance.
Cause or effect? High metal abundance could:
(a) Reflect a higher abundance in the material which formed the star +
protoplanetary disc, making planet formation more likely.
(b) Result from the star swallowing planets or planetesimals subsequent to
planets forming. If the convection zone is fairly shallow, this can apparently
enrich the star with metals even if the primordial material had Solar abundance.
Detailed pattern of abundances can distinguish these possibilities, but results currently
still controversial.
Lack of transits in 47 Tuc
A long HST observation monitored ~34,000 stars in the globular cluster 47 Tuc looking
for planetary transits.
Locally: 1% of stars have hot Jupiters
~ 10% of those show transits
 Expect 10 -3 x 34,000 ~ few tens of planets
None were detected. Possible explanations:
• Low metallicity in cluster prevented planet formation
• Cluster environment destroyed discs before planets formed
• Stellar fly-bys ejected planets from bound orbits
All of these seem plausible - make different predictions for other clusters.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
41
Microlensing Statistics:
Constraint from monitoring of 43 microlensing events. Typically, the lenses are
low mass stars.
At most 1/3 of 0.3 Solar mass stars have Jupiter mass planets between 1.5
AU and 4 AU.
Currently consistent with the numbers seen in radial velocity searches.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
42
HST Transit light curve from Brown et al. (2001)
Consistent with expectations - the probability of a transiting system is ~10%.
Measured planetary radius rp = 1.35 RJ:
• Proves we are dealing with a gas giant.
• Somewhat larger than models for isolated (non-irradiated) planets effect of environment on structure.
Precision of photometry with HST / STIS impressive.
Summary of Future Missions
CoRoT is a space project in Astrophysics.
Convection, Rotation and Tramsits
Its objective is double:
- study the stellar interiors
- detect planets analogous to the Earth orbiting around other stars
than the Sun.
The satellite will orbit at an altitude of 896 km. It will carry a
telescope able to observe continuously many stars during very long
periods and to measure very accurately the variations of their
brightness.
PH507
Astrophysics
http://corot.oamp.fr/
….down to earth-like planets.
Kepler: 2008 - Transit method
SIM and Gaia: astrometry
Professor Michael Smith
43
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
44
Lectures: Star Formation & Theory of Exoplanets
1. Intro: Star formation is on-going.
 What is the origin of our solar system? Descartes, Kant,
Laplace: vortices, nebular hypothesis: importance of angular
momentum.
Major facts for nebula hypothesis:





Coplanar orbits of the planets
All planets have prograde revolution (orbits)
The revolution of rings and natural moons are all prograde (some moons of the
outer planets are not prograde, but these are believed to be captured satellites)
All planets except Venus and Uranus have prograde rotation
The sun contains all the mass
PH507



Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
45
The planets (especially Jupiter and Saturn) contain most of the angular
momentum in the solar system
Small, dense, iron and silicate rich planets in the inner 2 AU. Slow rotors, few
or no moons, no rings, differentiated (molten interiors)
Large, low density, gaseous planets rich in H, He and volatile elements at >= 5
AU

Rapid rotors, many moons, all have ring systems

Abundance gradient. Inner solar system is poor in light volatile gases such as H,
He, but rich in Fe & Ni. Outer solar system is rich in volatiles H, He, etc.
Abundances similar to that of the sun.

In general: Gravity is fast-acting. Galaxy is old. But young stars
are still being born.

Stars don't live forever, they must continue to be "born".
Where?

Born in obscurity….needed infrared/millimeter/radio
wavelengths.
Gas Disks around Young Stars
During star formation, gas accretion occurs through a geometrically thin
disk that is optically thick. The disks are cooler than the young star, and we
thus see an infrared excess superimposed on the black body stellar
spectrum:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
46
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
47
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
48
Debris Disks
Debris disks are remnant accretion disks with little or no gas left (just
dust & rocks), outflow has stopped, the star is visible.
Theory: Gas disperses, “planetesimals” form (100 km diameter rocks),
collide & stick together due to gravity forming protoplanets).
Protoplanets interact with dust disks: tidal torques cause planets to
migrate inward toward their host stars. Estimated migration time ~ 2 x
105 yrs for Earth-size planet at 5 AU.
Perturbations caused by gas giants may spawn smaller planets:
Start with a stable disk
around central star.
Jupiter-sized planet forms
& clears gap in gas disk.
Planet accretes along spiral Disk fragments into more
arms, arms become unstable. planetary mass objects.
Spiral density waves continuously produced by the gravity of embedded or
external perturber.
Debris Disks – Outer Disk
AB Aurigae outer
debris disk nearly
face on – see
structure &
condensations
(possible protoplanet formation
sites? Very far
from star) .
(Grady et al. 1999)
Debris: not from original nebula but from recent collisions.
After a few hundred million years, a planetary system is expected to have assumed its
final configuration and has either set the stage for life, or will probably remain barren
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
49
forever. It is difficult to probe this era. Most of its traces have been obliterated in the
solar system. Only a minority of the nearby stars are so young. Even for them, planets—
and particularly those in the terrestrial planet/asteroidal region—are faint and are lost in
the glare of their central stars. However, when bodies in this zone collide, they initiate
cascades of further collisions among the debris and between it and other members of the
system, eventually grinding a significant amount of material into dust grains distributed
in a so-called debris disk. Because the grains have larger surface area per unit mass
compared to larger bodies, they (re)radiate more energy and therefore are more easily
detected in the IR compared to their parent bodies. By studying this signal, we can probe
the evolution of other planetary systems through this early, critical stage.
Debris disks are found around stars generally older than 10 Myr, with no signs of
gas accretion (as judged from the absence of emission lines or UV excess) (Lagrange et
al. 2000; Hillenbrand 2005). In the absence of gas drag, a 10 m sized dust grain from
the primordial, proto–planetary nebula cannot survive longer than 1 Myr within 10 AU
of a star due to a number of clearing processes, such as sublimation, radiation pressure,
Poynting-Robertson, and stellar wind drag (Backman & Paresce 1993; Chen et al.
2005a). Therefore, any main-sequence star older than 10 Myr with an IR excess is a
candidate to have circumstellar material supplied through debris disk processes.
The Birth of the Solar System
The properties of the Solar System hold important clues to its origin

Orbits of the planets and asteroids.

Rotation of the planets and the Sun.

Composition of the planets, especially the strong distinction between
Terrestrial, Jovian, and Icy planets.
Clues from planetary motions:

Planets orbit in nearly the same plane.

Planet orbits are nearly circular.

Planets & Asteroids orbit in the same direction.

Rotation axes of the planets tends to align with the sense of their orbits,
with exceptions.

Sun rotates in the same direction in the same sense.

Jovian moon systems mimic the Solar System.
Clues from planet composition:
Inner Planets & Asteroids:

Small rocky bodies
PH507

Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
50
Few ices or volatiles
Jovian Planets:

Deep Hydrogen & Helium atmospheres rich in volatiles.

Large ice & rock cores
Outer solar system moons & icy bodies:

Small ice & rock mixtures with frozen volatiles.
Formation of the Sun: back to the Primordial Solar Nebula
Stars form out of interstellar gas clouds:

Large cold cloud of H2 molecules and dust gravitationally collapses and
fragments.
Rotating fragments collapse further:

Rapid collapse along the poles, but centrifugal forces slow the collapse
along the equator.

Result is collapse into a spinning disk

Central core collapses into a rotating proto-Sun surrounded by a rotating
"Solar Nebula"
Primordial Solar Nebula
The rotating solar nebula is composed of

~75% Hydrogen & 25% Helium

Traces of metals and dust grains
Starts out at ~2000 K, then cools:

As it cools, various elements condense out of the gas into solid form as
grains or ices.

Which materials condense out when depends on their "condensation
temperature".
Condensation Temperatures
Temp (K)
Elements
>2000 K
Condensate
All elements are gaseous
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
51
1600 K
Al, Ti, Ca
Mineral Oxides
1400 K
Iron & Nickel
Metallic Grains – Refractory, Rocky
1300 K
Silicon
Silicate Grains - Rocky
300 K
Carbon,
Oxygen
Carbonaceous grains -Volatiles
300-100 K
Hydrogen,
Nitrogen
Ices (H2O, CO2, NH3, CH4)
The "Frost Line"
Rock & Metals can form anywhere it is cooler than about 1300 K.
Carbon grains & ices can only form where the gas is cooler than 300 K.
Inner Solar System:

Too hot for ices & carbon grains.
Outer Solar System:

Carbon grains & ices form beyond the "frost line".
The location of the "frost line" is also a matter of some debate but current
thinking holds that it is probably about 4 AU . A great deal depends on how
much solar radiation can penetrate deep into the outer parts of the primordial
Solar Nebula.
From Grains to Planetesimals to Planets
Grains that have low-velocity collisions can stick together, forming bigger
grains.

Beyond the "frost line", get additional growth by condensing ices onto
the grains.

Grow to where their mutual gravitation assists in the aggregation
process, accelerating the growth rate. Can form km-sized planetesimals
after a few 1000 years of initial growth.

Aggregation of planetesimals into planets
Terrestrial vs. Jovian planet formation.
Terrestrial Planets
Only rocky planetesimals inside the frost line:

Collisions between planetesimals form small rocky bodies.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
52

It is hotter closer to the Sun, so the proto-planets cannot capture H and
He gas.

Solar wind is also dispersing the solar nebula from the inside out,
removing H & He.
Result:

Form rocky terrestrial planets with few ices.
Jovian Planets
The addition of ices to the mix greatly augments the masses of the
planetesimals
These collide to form large rock and ice cores:.

Jupiter & Saturn: 10-15 MEarth rock/ice cores.

Uranus & Neptune: 1-2 MEarth rock/ice cores.
As a consequence of their larger masses & colder temperatures:

Can accrete H & He gas from the solar nebula.

Planets with the biggest cores grow rapidly in size, increasing the
amount of gas accretion.
Result:

Form large Jovian planets with massive rock & ice cores and heavy H
and He atmospheres
Moons & Asteroids
Some of the gas attracted to the proto-Jovians forms a rotating disk of material:

Get mini solar nebula around the Jovians

Rocky/icy moons form in these disks.

Later moons added by asteroid/comet capture.
Asteroids:

Gravity of the proto-Jupiter keeps the planetesimals in the main belt
stirred up.

Never get to aggregate into a larger bodies.
Icy Bodies & Comets
Outer reaches are the coldest, but also the thinnest parts of the Solar Nebula:

Ices condense very quickly onto rocky cores.
PH507

Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
53
Stay small because of a lack of material.
Gravity of the proto-Neptune also plays a role:

Assisted the formation of Pluto-sized bodies in 3:2 resonance orbits
(Pluto and Plutinos)

Disperses the rest into the Kuiper Belt to become Kuiper Belt Objects.
Comets and other Trans-Neptunian objects are the leftover icy planetesimals from the
formation of the Solar System.
Mopping up...
The entire planetary assembly process probably took about 100 Million years.
Followed by a 1 Billion year period during which the planets were subjected to heavy
bombardment by the remaining rocky & icy pieces leftover from planet formation.
Light from the Sun dispersed the remaining gas in the Solar Nebula gas into the
interstellar medium.
Planetary motions reflect the history of their formation.
Planets share the same sense of rotation, but have been perturbed from perfect
alignment by strong collisions during formation.
The Sun "remembers" this original rotation. Rotates in the same direction with its
axis aligned with the plane of the Solar System.
Planetary compositions reflect the formation conditions.
Terrestrial planets are rock & metal:

They formed in the hot inner regions of the Solar Nebula.

Too hot to capture Hydrogen/Helium gas from the Solar Nebula.
Jovian planets contain ice, H & He:

They formed in the cool outer regions of the Solar Nebula.

Grew large enough to accrete lots of H & He.
.
Two obvious differences between the exoplanets and the giant planets in
the Solar System:
• Existence of planets at small orbital radii, where our previous theory
suggested formation was very difficult.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
54
• Substantial eccentricity of many of the orbits. No clear answers to
either of these surprises, but lots of ideas...
It is very difficult to form planets close to the stars in a standard theory of planet
formation using minimum mass solar nebula, because

it's too hot there for grain condensation and

there's too little solid material in the vicinity to built protoplanet's core of 10 ME
(applies to r~1 AU as well).

problematic to build it quickly enough (< 3 Myr)

there's too little gas to build a massive envelope
Most conservative (accepted) possibility:
• Planet formation in these extrasolar systems was via the core accretion model –
i.e. same as dominant theory for the Solar System
• Subsequent orbital evolution modified the planet orbits to make them closer to
the star and / or more eccentric
We will focus on this option. However, more radical options in which exoplanets form
directly from gravitational instability are also possible.
Gas+dust discs:
Stage 1:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
55
Settling and growth of dust grains: quite well-coupled to gas, rapid only if
turbulent?
Gas orbits slightly slower than Keplerian, because the gas pressure is higher
nearer the centre, providing an outward force in additional to the centrifugal force
From pebbles to planetesimals (km size): inward drift due to gas drag.
So the pebble must grow quickly to avoid spiraling in.
Stage 2:
Planetesimal to rocky planet/gas-giant core: independent of gas. It is a slow process
– gravitational dynamics (gravity increase the collision cross-section).
Stage 3:
Gas accretion onto core,
Stage 4: Orbital evolution – migration
Giant planets can form at large orbital radii.
Need a migration mechanism that can move giant planets from formation at ~5 AU to a
range of radii from 0.04 AU upwards.
Three theories have been proposed:
• Gas disc migration: planet forms within a protoplanetary disc and is swept
inwards with the gas as the disc evolves and material accretes onto the star. The
most popular theory, as by definition gas must have been present when gas giants
form.
• Planetesimal disc migration: as above, but planet interacts with a disc of rocks
rather than gas. Planet ejects the rocks, loses energy, and moves inwards.
• Planet scattering: several massive planets form – subsequent chaotic orbital
interactions lead to some (most) being ejected with the survivors moving inwards
as above.
Gas disc migration
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
56
Planet interacts with gas in the disc via gravitational force.
Strong interactions at resonances, e.g. where

disc = nplanet,
with n an integer. For example the 2:1 resonance, where n = 2, which lies at 2-2/3 rp
= 0.63 rp
Resonances at r < rp: Disc gas has greater angular velocity than planet. Loses
angular momentum to planet -> moves inwards
Resonances at r > rp: Disc gas has smaller angular velocity than planet. Gains
angular momentum from planet -> moves outwards.
Migration type I - no gap
If the object has too small a mass to open a gap, it will drift inwards. The
analysis of Type I migration relies on the (near) exact cancelling of the various
torques. The planet, unless more massive than the surrounding disk, follows
the disk's viscous flow.
It is thought that the intrinsic imbalance of torques from the inner and outer disk
determines this.
It is very rapid, and may shift the protoplanetary core to arbitrarily small
distance from the star in the allotted ~3 Myr time frame.
Migration type II - inside an open gap
Interaction tends to clear gas away from location of planet.
Result: planet orbits in a gap largely cleared of gas and dust.
Tidal locking of the planet in the gap.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
57
This process occurs for massive planets (~ Jupiter mass) only.
Earth mass planets remain embedded in the gas though gravitational torques can be
very important source of orbital evolution for them too.
How does this lead to migration?
1. Angular momentum transport in the gas (viscosity) tries to close the gap (diffusive
evolution of an accretion disc).
2. Gravitational torques from planet try to open gap wider.
3. Gap edge set by a balance:
-> Internal viscous torque = planetary torque
4. Planet acts as an angular momentum ‘bridge’:
• Inside gap, outward angular momentum flux transported by viscosity within disc
• At gap edge, flux transferred to planet via gravitational torques, then outward
again to outer disc
• Outside gap, viscosity again operative
Typically, gap extends to around the 2:1 resonances interior and exterior to the planet’s
orbit.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
58
As disc evolves, planet moves within gap like a fluid element in the disc – i.e. usually
inwards.
Inward migration time ~ few x 105 yr from 5 AU.
Mechanism can bring planets in to the hot Jupiter regime.
This mechanism is quantitatively consistent with the distribution of exoplanets at
different orbital radii – though the error bars are still very large!
Eccentricity generation mechanisms
Substantial eccentricities of many exoplanets orbits do not have completely satisfactory
explanation. The theories can be divided into groups corresponding to different
formation mechanisms:
(A) Direct molecular cloud fragmentation
(B) Protostellar disk fragmentation theories
(C) Companion star-planet interaction (in double star like 16 Cyg)
(D) Classical giant planet formation with planet-planet interaction
(E) Resonant disk-planet interaction
(D) Scattering among several massive planets
Assumption: planet formation often produces a multiple system
which is unstable over long timescales:
• Chaotic evolution of a, e (especially e)
• Orbit crossing
• Eventual close encounters -> ejections
• High eccentricity for survivors
Advantages:
• Given enough planets, close together, definitely works
• Can produce very eccentric planets cf e=0.92 example discovered
• Some (stable) multiple systems are already known
Disadvantages:
• Requires planets to form very close together.
Is it plausible that unstable systems formed in a large fraction of
extrasolar planetary systems?
• Collisions may produce too many low e systems
(E) Disc interactions
Assumption: gravitational interaction with disc generates eccentricity
Advantages:
• Same mechanism as invoked for migration
• Works for just one planet in the system
• Theoretically, interaction is expected to increase eccentricity
if dominated by 3:1 resonance
Disadvantages:
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
59
• Gap is only expected to reach the 3:1 resonance for brown dwarf type
masses, not massive planets. Smaller gaps definitely tend to circularize the
orbit instead.
• Seems unlikely to give very large eccentricities
(B) Protoplanetary disc itself is eccentric
Assumption: why should discs have circular orbits anyway?
Eccentric disc -> eccentric planet?
Not yet explored in much depth. A possibility, though again seems unlikely to lead to
extreme eccentricities.
Scattering theory is currently most popular, possibly augmented
by interactions with other planets in resonant orbits.
ADVANCED TOPICS
The COROT instrument will make it possible, with a method called stellar seismology, to
probe the inner structure of the stars, as well as to detect many extrasolar planets, by
observing the periodic micro-eclipses occurring when these bodies transit in front of their
parent star. Its launch is scheduled in 2006.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
60
Direct imaging detection and spectroscopic characterization of nearby Earthlike planets will
be undertaken by the Terrestrial Planet Finder missions. The TPF Coronagraph
(TPF-C), planned for launch in 2014, will operate at visible wavelengths. It will suppress
the light of the central star to unprecedented levels, allowing it to search for terrestrial
planets in ~150 nearby planetary systems. TPF-C will be followed about five years later by
the TPF Interferometer (TPF-I). TPF-I will operate in the mid-IR and will survey a larger
volume of our solar neighborhood, searching for terrestrial planets around as many as 500
nearby stars.
Life?
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
61
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
62
Workshop Example: the first transit
1. \Hubble Space Telescope Time-Series Photometry of
the Transiting Planet of HD 2094581
Timothy M. Brown etal
The Astrophysical Journal, 552:699-709, 2001 May 10
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
63
We have observed four transits of the planet of HD 209458 using the STIS spectrograph
on the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). Summing the recorded counts over wavelength
between 582 and 638 nm yields a photometric time series with 80 s time sampling and
relative precision of about 1.1 × 10-4 per sample. The folded light curve can be fitted
within observational errors using a model consisting of an opaque circular planet
transiting a limb-darkened stellar disk. In this way we estimate the planetary radius Rp =
1.347 ± 0.060 RJup, the orbital inclination i = 86 6 ± 0 14, the stellar radius R* = 1.146 ±
0.050 R , and one parameter describing the stellar limb darkening. Our estimated radius
is smaller than those from earlier studies but is consistent within measurement errors and
also with theoretical estimates of the radii of irradiated Jupiter-like planets. Satellites or
rings orbiting the planet would, if large enough, be apparent from distortions of the light
curve or from irregularities in the transit timings. We find no evidence for either
satellites or rings, with upper limits on satellite radius and mass of 1.2 R and 3 M ,
respectively. Opaque rings, if present, must be smaller than 1.8 planetary radii in radial
extent. The high level of photometric precision attained in this experiment confirms the
feasibility of photometric detection of Earth-sized planets circling Sun-like stars.
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
64
The low-mass companion to HD 209458 is the first extrasolar planet found to
transit the disk of its parent star (Charbonneau et al. 2000; Henry et al. 2000).
The primary star (G0 V, V = 7.64, B-V = 0.58; Høg et al. 2000) lies at distance of
47 pc as determined by Hipparcos (Perryman et al. 1997). An analysis of radial
velocity measurements by Mazeh et al. (2000) gave an orbital period of 3.524
days, with Mp sin i = 0.69 ± 0.05 MJup and a = 0.0468 AU, using the derived value
of 1.1 ± 0.1 M for the stellar mass. When combined with the early photometric
light-curve data, the same analysis yielded an orbital inclination i = 86 1 ± 1 6
and a planetary radius Rp = 1.40 ± 0.17 RJup. The planetary radius is at once the
most interesting and the most uncertain of these parameters, largely because of
uncertainty in the value of the stellar radius R*. Knowledge of Rp is important
because it allows inferences about the planet's composition and evolutionary
history (Guillot et al. 1996; Guillot 1999; Burrows et al. 2000). Unfortunately, the
measured quantity that emerges most easily from the photometric transit data is
the ratio Rp/R*, and residual errors in the astrometry and effective stellar
temperature suffice to make the estimate of R*, and hence Rp, uncertain by about
10%. Additional small errors in Rp result from uncertainties about the stellar
limb darkening.
2 An Upper Limit on the Albedo of HD 209458b: Direct Imaging
Photometry with the MOST Satellite
Rowe et al.
The Astrophysical Journal, Volume 646, Issue 2, pp. 1241-1251
We present space-based photometry of the transiting exoplanetary system HD
209458 obtained with the Microvariablity and Oscillations of Stars (MOST)
satellite, spanning 14 days and covering 4 transits and 4 secondary eclipses. The
HD 209458 photometry was obtained in MOST's lower precision direct imaging
mode, which is used for targets in the brightness range 6.5>=V>=13. We
describe the photometric reduction techniques for this mode of observing, in
particular the corrections for stray earthshine. We do not detect the secondary
eclipse in the MOST data, to a limit in depth of 0.053 mmag (1 sigma). We set a
1 sigma upper limit on the planet-star flux ratio of 4.88×10-5 corresponding to
a geometric albedo upper limit in the MOST bandpass (400-700 nm) of 0.25. The
corresponding numbers at the 3 sigma level are 1.34×10-4 and 0.68, respectively.
HD 209458b is half as bright as Jupiter in the MOST bandpass. This low
geometric albedo value is an important constraint for theoretical models of the
HD 209458b atmosphere, in particular ruling out the presence of reflective
clouds. A second MOST campaign on HD 209458 is expected to be sensitive to
an exoplanet albedo as low as 0.13 (1 sigma), if the star does not become more
intrinsically variable in the meantime.
3. Subaru HDS Transmission Spectroscopy of the
Transiting Extrasolar Planet HD 209458b
Narita et al 2005
Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan, Vol.57, No.3, pp. 471-480
PH507
Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
65
We have searched for absorption in several common atomic species due to the
atmosphere or exosphere of the transiting extrasolar planet HD 209458b, using
high precision optical spectra obtained with the Subaru High Dispersion
Spectrograph (HDS). Previously we reported an upper limit on Halpha
absorption of 0.1% (3 sigma) within a 5.1Å band. Using the same procedure, we
now report upper limits on absorption due to the optical transitions of Na D, Li,
Halpha, Hbeta, Hgamma, Fe, and Ca. The 3 sigma upper limit for each
transition is approximately 1% within a 0.3Å band (the core of the line), and a
few tenths of a per cent within a 2Å band (the full line width). The wide-band
results are close to the expected limit due to photon-counting (Poisson)
statistics, although in the narrow-band case we have encountered unexplained
systematic errors at a few times the Poisson level. These results are consistent
with all previously reported detections and upper limits, but are significantly
more sensitive.
Remarks:
22 Mar 05: Direct thermal emission found with Spitzer by Deming et al (2005)
4 Feb 04: Oxygen and Carbon detected in the atmosphere (Vidal-Madjar et al
2004)
Nov 01: Na detected in the planet atmosphere (Charbonneau et al 2001)
12 Mar. 03: Detection of an extended cometary-shaped atmosphere (Vidal
Madjar et al 2003)
Infrared radiation from an extrasolar planet
Deming et al 2005
Nature, Volume 434, Issue 7034, pp. 740-743
A class of extrasolar giant planets-the so-called `hot Jupiters' (ref. 1)-orbit within
0.05AU of their primary stars (1AU is the Sun-Earth distance). These planets
should be hot and so emit detectable infrared radiation. The planet HD209458b
(refs 3, 4) is an ideal candidate for the detection and characterization of this
infrared light because it is eclipsed by the star. This planet has an anomalously
large radius (1.35 times that of Jupiter), which may be the result of ongoing
tidal dissipation, but this explanation requires a non-zero orbital eccentricity (~
0.03; refs 6, 7), maintained by interaction with a hypothetical second planet.
Here we report detection of infrared (24µm) radiation from HD209458b, by
observing the decrement in flux during secondary eclipse, when the planet
passes behind the star. The planet's 24-µm flux is 55 +/- 10µJy (1sigma), with a
brightness temperature of 1,130 +/- 150K, confirming the predicted heating by
stellar irradiation. The secondary eclipse occurs at the midpoint between
transits of the planet in front of the star (to within +/- 7min, 1sigma), which
means that a dynamically significant orbital eccentricity is unlikely.
PH507

Astrophysics
Professor Michael Smith
Basic data:
HD 209458 b
Name:
0.69 ± 0.05 MJ
M.sini:
1.32 ± 0.05 RJup
Radius
1,130 ± 150 K
Temperature
0.045 AU
Semi-major axis:
3.52474541 ± 0.00000025 d.
Orbital period:
0.0
Eccentricity:
83
Omega (deg):
T_peri (Mid-transit time - HJD): 2 452 854.825415 ± 0.000060
86.1 ± 0.1
Inclination:
66