Hot nights on extrasolar planets: mid‐infrared phase variations of hot Jupiters

By N. Cowan, E. Agol, D. Charbonneau. 2007

141 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present results from Spitzer Space Telescope observations of the mid-infrared phase variations of three short-period extrasolar planetary systems: HD 209458, HD 179949 and 51 Peg. We gathered Infrared Array Camera (IRAC) images in multiple wavebands (3.6 or 4.5 and 8 μm) at eight phases of each planet's orbit. We find the uncertainty in relative photometry from one epoch to the next to be significantly larger than the photon counting error at 3.6 and 4.5 μm. We are able to place 2σ upper limits of only ∼2 per cent on the phase variations at these wavelengths. At 8 μm, the epoch-to-epoch systematic uncertainty is comparable to the photon counting noise and we detect a phase function for HD 179949 which is in phase with the planet's orbit and with a relative peak-to-trough amplitude of 0.001 41 (33). Assuming that HD 179949b has a radius R j < R p < 1.2R j , it must recirculate less than 21 per cent of incident stellar energy to its night side at the 1 σ level (less than 26 per cent at the 2σ level, where 50 per cent signifies full recirculation). If the planet has a small Bond albedo, it must have a mass less than 2.4M j (1σ). We do not detect phase variations for the other two systems but we do place the following 2σ upper limits: 0.0007 for 51 Peg and 0.0015 for HD 209458. Due to its edge-on configuration, the upper limit for HD 209458 translates, with appropriate assumptions about Bond albedo, into a lower limit on the recirculation occuring in the planet's atmosphere. HD 209458b must recirculate at least 32 per cent of incident stellar energy to its night side, at the 1σ level (at least 16 per cent at the 2σ level), which is consistent with other constraints on recirculation from the depth of secondary eclipse depth at 8 μm and the low optical albedo. These data indicate that different hot Jupiter planets may experience different recirculation efficiencies.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/aeae3317a44d3ef5cfe72e960227643ce67ac423

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

  1. Jon Fortney
  2. N. Madhusudhan
  3. A. Showman
  4. M. Marley
  5. H. Knutson
  6. D. Deming
  7. M. Line
  8. D. Charbonneau

In Instrumentation

  1. Jon Fortney
  2. N. Madhusudhan
  3. A. Showman
  4. M. Marley
  5. H. Knutson
  6. M. Line
  7. D. Deming
  8. D. Charbonneau

Citations in the corpus