Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:49:55.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Exoplanet Transit Spectroscopy of Hot Jupiters Using HST/WFC3

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2014

Korey Haynes*
Affiliation:
Solar System Exploration Division, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA Department of Physics and Astronomy, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA
Avi M. Mandell
Affiliation:
Solar System Exploration Division, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
Evan Sinukoff
Affiliation:
Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
Nikku Madhusudhan
Affiliation:
Department of Astronomy, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
Adam Burrows
Affiliation:
Yale Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511, USA
Drake Deming
Affiliation:
Department of Astrophysical Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA
*
7Corresponding 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.

We present analysis of transit spectroscopy of three extrasolar planets, WASP-12 b, WASP-17 b, and WASP-19 b, using the Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) on the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). Measurement of molecular absorption in the atmospheres of these planets offers the chance to explore several outstanding questions regarding the atmospheric structure and composition of these highly irradiated, Jupiter-mass objects. We analyze the data for a single transit for each planet, using a strategy similar in certain aspects to the techniques used by Berta (2012), and achieve almost photon-limited results for individual spectral bins. Our final transit spectra are consistent with the presence of a broad absorption feature at 1.4 μm most likely due to water, but the amplitude of the absorption is less than expected based on previous observations with Spitzer, possibly due to hazes absorbing in the NIR. However, the degeneracy of models with different compositions and temperature structures combined with the low amplitude of any features in the data preclude our ability to place unambiguous constraints on the atmospheric composition without a comprehensive multi-wavelength analysis.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2013 

References

Anderson, D. R., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 416, 2108Google Scholar
Bergfors, C., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 428, 182Google Scholar
Berta, Z. K., et al. 2012, ApJ, 747, 35Google Scholar
Burrows, A., Marley, M. S., & Sharp, C. M. 2000, ApJ, 531, 438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrows, A., Sudarsky, D., & Hubeny, I. 2006, ApJ, 650, 1140Google Scholar
Burrows, A., Budaj, J., & Hubeny, I. 2008, ApJ, 678, 1436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campo, C. J., et al. 2011, ApJ, 727, 125Google Scholar
Croll, B., et al. 2011, ApJ, 141, 30Google Scholar
Crossfield, I. J. M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 760, 140Google Scholar
Dressel, L. 2012, “Wide Field Camera 3 Instrument Handbook, Version 5.0” (Baltimore: STScI)Google Scholar
Ford, E. B. 2005, ApJ, 129, 1706Google Scholar
Howe, A. R. & Burrows, A. S. 2012, ApJ, 756, 176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huitson, C. M.et al. 2013, MNRAS, 434, 3252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madhusudhan, N., & Seager, S. 2009, ApJ, 707, 24Google Scholar
Madhusudhan, N., Mousis, O., Johnson, T. V., & Lunine, J. I. 2011, ApJ, 743, 191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madhusudhan, N. 2012, ApJ, 758, 36Google Scholar
Mandel, K., & Agol, E. 2002, ApJ, 580, L171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, K. B.et al. 2013, arXiv:1305.1670Google Scholar
Swain, M., et al. 2013, Icarus, 225, 432Google Scholar