Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Series

Exoplanet atmospheres — the series

3 essays on one idea, from the one that introduces it to the one that assumes the rest.
  1. A radius that depends on the colour it is measured in. Transit depth against wavelength for a planet of 1.38 Jupiter radii at 1400 K, whose atmosphere has a scale height of 538 km — computed from H = kT/µg, not assumed. One scale height of extra opacity adds 153 parts per million to a transit of 1.40 per cent, so the whole spectral signal is 862 ppm at its strongest: one part in 16 of the transit that carries it. The features are at real band centres — sodium at 0.589 µm, water at 1.4 µm, carbon dioxide at 4.3 µm — with the rise at the blue end the Rayleigh slope of scattering off the smallest particles.

    A radius that depends on the colour it is measured in

    Measure a transit in one colour and then another, and the planet is a different size. The difference is a few atmospheric scale heights, which is a few hundred parts per million of an already tiny signal.

    part 1 · exoplanets
  2. One whole orbit. The system's total brightness through one orbit: the transit at phase 0, the slow rise and fall of the planet's illuminated hemisphere between, and the secondary eclipse at phase 0.5 where the planet's own light is removed. The transit is 1.05%; the secondary eclipse is 1800 ppm, about 6 times shallower.

    The planet is seen when it disappears

    Half an orbit after the transit the planet passes behind its star, and the light that vanishes is the planet's own. Subtracting two brightnesses taken hours apart isolates a body nothing has ever resolved.

    part 2 · exoplanets
  3. Three planets that are the same spectrum. A model transmission spectrum, in scale heights of apparent radius, drawn three times: once as it is, once with the reference radius raised by 0.45 scale heights and the abundance reduced to compensate, and once with a cloud deck truncating the features. The three differ by 0.21 scale heights root-mean-square against features of 2.1, which is well inside the error bars of any real observation. The reason is structural rather than observational: a transmission spectrum measures a difference in apparent radius with wavelength and never an absolute radius, so the level is a free parameter, and shifting the level trades against the abundance almost exactly. Adding a cloud deck adds a third parameter that flattens features and trades against both. Three unknowns and one curve is why the quoted abundance uncertainties from transmission spectroscopy are so much larger than the photometric precision suggests.

    A spectrum flattened by cloud, or by nothing

    A transmission spectrum measures how a planet's apparent radius changes with wavelength, and never the radius itself. That missing level is a free parameter, it trades almost exactly against the abundance of whatever is absorbing, and a cloud deck adds a third unknown to a curve that constrains two.

    part 3 · exoplanets

All series