HAT-P-7b: An Extremely Hot Massive Planet Transiting a Bright Star in the Kepler Field

By A. Pál, Gáspár Á. Bakos, G. Torres, R. W. Noyes, D. Latham, G. Kovacs, G. Marcy, Debra A. Fischer, R. P. Butler, D. Sasselov and 17 more. 2008

188 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We report on the latest discovery of the HATNet project: a very hot giant planet orbiting a bright (V = 10.5) star with a small semimajor axis of a = 0.0377 ± 0.0005 AU. Ephemeris for the system is P = 2.2047299 ± 0.0000040 days, midtransit time E = 2,453,790.2593 ± 0.0010 (BJD). Based on the available spectroscopic data on the host star and photometry of the system, the planet has a mass of Mp = 1.78+ 0.08−0.05 MJ and radius of Rp = 1.36+ 0.20−0.09 RJ. The parent star is a slightly evolved F6 star with M⋆ = 1.47+ 0.08−0.05 M☉, R⋆ = 1.84+ 0.23−0.11 R☉, Teff = 6350 ± 80 K, and metallicity [ Fe/H ] = + 0.26 ± 0.08. The relatively hot and large host star, combined with the close orbit of the planet, yield a very high planetary irradiance of 4.71+ 1.44−0.05 × 109 erg cm−2 s−1, which places the planet near the top of the pM class of irradiated planets as defined by Fortney et al. If as predicted by Fortney et al. the planet reradiates its absorbed energy before distributing it to the night side, the day-side temperature should be about 2730+ 150−100 K. Because the host star is quite bright, measurement of the secondary eclipse should be feasible for ground-based telescopes, providing a good opportunity to compare the predictions of current hot Jupiter atmospheric models with the observations. Moreover, the host star falls in the field of the upcoming Kepler mission; hence extensive space-borne follow-up, including not only primary transit and secondary eclipse observations but also asteroseismology, will be possible.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fb8369f7903e63cc7424f0d0c053a6727bacd65c

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

In Instrumentation

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

The California-Kepler Survey. I. High-resolution Spectroscopy of 1305 Stars Hosting Kepler Transiting Planets (2017, methodology): “Figure 3 shows the output from an SME@XSEDE analysis of Kepler-2 (also known as HAT-P-7; Pál et al. 2008).”
Ages and fundamental properties of Kepler exoplanet host stars from asteroseismology (2015, unknown): “…80 0.26±0.08 1.497+0.042−0.040 1.986 +0.018 −0.015 0.269 +0.004 −0.005 4.017 +0.007 −0.009 5.754 +0.304 −0.322 2.11 +0.29 −0.24 386.44 +12.11 −11.95 HAT-P7 Pál et al. (2008) 5 8554498 5945± 60 0.17±0.05 1.197+0.021−0.029 1.794 +0.015 −0.015 0.292 +0.003 −0.003 4.007 +0.003 −0.003 3.684 +0.130…”
OBLIQUITIES OF HOT JUPITER HOST STARS: EVIDENCE FOR TIDAL INTERACTIONS AND PRIMORDIAL MISALIGNMENTS (2012, background): “The HAT-P-7 system is the only system in our sample where there exists a significant disagreement between several independent measures of λ.”
Homogeneous studies of transiting extrasolar planets – IV. Thirty systems with space-based light curves (2011, background): “Discovered by Pál et al. (2008), HAT-P-7 was the second TEP found in theKeplerfield.”
PLANET OCCURRENCE WITHIN 0.25 AU OF SOLAR-TYPE STARS FROM KEPLER (2011, background): “Borucki et al. (2011b) include three planets discovered in the Kepler field before launch: TrES-2b (O’Donovan et al. 2006), HAT-P-7b (Pál et al. 2008), and HAT-P-11b (Bakos et al. 2010).”
HAT-P-11b: A SUPER-NEPTUNE PLANET TRANSITING A BRIGHT K STAR IN THE KEPLER FIELD (2009, background): “The planetary parameters and their uncertainties can be derived by the direct combination of the a posteriori distributions of the light curve, radial velocity and stellar parameters (see also Pál et al. 2008a).”
FRIENDS OF HOT JUPITERS. I. A RADIAL VELOCITY SEARCH FOR MASSIVE, LONG-PERIOD COMPANIONS TO CLOSE-IN GAS GIANT PLANETS (2013, methodology): “We convert this angular separation to a physical separation of 1240 AU using the estimated distance of 320+50 −40 pc from Pál et al. (2008).”
SOPHIE velocimetry of Kepler transit candidates VII. A false-positive rate of 35% for Kepler close-in giant candidates (2012, unknown): “01, also named TrES-2 (O’Donovan et al. 2006), HAT-P-7b (Pál et al. 2008) and A76, page 3 of 16 HAT-P-11b (Bakos et al. 2010), respectively.”