Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T15:17:01.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cloud Driven Variability on Young Brown Dwarfs and Giant Exoplanets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

Beth Biller
Beth Biller*
Affiliation:
Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Variability has now been robustly observed in a range of L and T type field brown dwarfs, primarily at near-IR and mid-IR wavelengths. The probable cause of this variability is surface inhomogeneities in the clouds of these objects, causing a semi-periodic variability signal when combined with the rotational modulation from the 3-12 hour period expected for these objects. Variability at similar or even higher amplitudes may be expected for young brown dwarfs and giant exoplanets, which share similar Teff as field brown dwarfs, but have considerably lower surface gravities. Variability studies of these objects relative to old field objects is then a direct probe of the effects of surface gravity on atmospheric structure. Here I discuss ongoing efforts to detect variability from these young objects, both for free-floating objects and companions to stars, including preliminary results from an ongoing survey of young, low surface gravity objects with NTT SOFI.

Keywords

infrared: planetary systems(stars:) brown dwarfsplanets and satellites: atmospheres
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 10 , Issue S314: Young Stars & Planets Near the Sun , November 2015 , pp. 99 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2016 

References

Barman, T. S., Macintosh, B., Konopacky, Q. M., & Marois, C. 2011, ApJ, 733, 65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beuzit, J.-L., Feldt, M., Dohlen, K., et al. 2008, proc. SPIE, 7014Google Scholar
Biller, B. A., Crossfield, I. J. M., Mancini, L., et al. 2013, ApJ Letters, 778, L10Google Scholar
Bowler, B. P., Liu, M. C., Dupuy, T. J., & Cushing, M. C. 2010, ApJ, 723, 850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buenzli, E., Apai, D., Radigan, J., Reid, I. N., & Flateau, D. 2014, ApJ, 782, 77Google Scholar
Burgasser, A. J., Sheppard, S. S., & Luhman, K. L. 2013, ApJ, 772, 129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrows, A., Sudarsky, D., & Lunine, J. I. 2003, ApJ, 596, 587Google Scholar
Crossfield, I. J. M., Biller, B., Schlieder, J. E., et al. 2014, Nature, 505, 654Google Scholar
Gagné, J., Lafrenière, D., Doyon, R., Malo, L. & Artigau, É. 2014, ApJ, 783, 121Google Scholar
Gagné, J., Lafrenière, D., Doyon, R., Malo, L. & Artigau, É. 2015, ApJ, 798, 73Google Scholar
Gillon, M., Triaud, A. H. M. J., Jehin, E., et al. 2013, A&A, 555, L5Google Scholar
Heinze, A. N., Metchev, S., Apai, D., et al. 2013, ApJ, 767, 173Google Scholar
Janson, M., Brandt, T. D., Kuzuhara, M., et al. 2013, ApJ letters, 778, L4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuzuhara, M., Tamura, M., Kudo, T., et al. 2013, ApJ, 774, 11Google Scholar
Lagrange, A.-M., Gratadour, D., Chauvin, G., et al. 2009, A&A, 493, L21Google Scholar
Lagrange, A.-M., Bonnefoy, M., Chauvin, G., et al. 2010, Science, 329, 57Google Scholar
Luhman, K. L. 2013, ApJ letters, 767, L1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macintosh, B., Graham, J. R., Ingraham, P., et al. 2014, PNAS, 111, 12661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., & Goldblatt, C. 2010, ApJ letters, 723, L117Google Scholar
Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., Cushing, M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marois, C., Macintosh, B., Barman, T., et al. 2008, Science, 322, 1348Google Scholar
Marois, C., Zuckerman, B., Konopacky, Q. M., et al. 2010, Nature, 468, 1080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metchev, S. A., Heinze, A., Apai, D., et al. 2015, ApJ, 799, 154Google Scholar
Radigan, J., Jayawardhana, R., Lafrenière, D., et al. 2012, ApJ, 750, 105Google Scholar
Radigan, J., Lafrenière, D., Jayawardhana, R., & Artigau, E. 2014, ApJ, 793, 75Google Scholar
Rameau, J., Chauvin, G., Lagrange, A.-M., et al. 2013, A&A, 553, A60Google Scholar
Rameau, J., Chauvin, G., Lagrange, A.-M., et al. 2013, arXiv:1305.7428Google Scholar
Schneider, J., Dedieu, C., Le Sidaner, P., Savalle, R., & Zolotukhin, I. 2011, A&A, 532, A79Google Scholar
Skemer, A. J., Hinz, P. M., Esposito, S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 753, 14Google Scholar
Snellen, I. A. G., Brandl, B. R., de Kok, R. J., et al. 2014, Nature, 509, 63Google Scholar
Wilson, P. A., Rajan, A., & Patience, J. 2014, A&A, 566, A111Google Scholar
Zapatero Osorio, M. R., Martín, E. L., Bouy, H., et al. 2006, ApJ, 647, 1405Google Scholar