Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T15:46:36.654Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The properties of super-Earth atmospheres

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2011

Eliza M. R. Kempton*
Affiliation:
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064USA 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.

Extrasolar super-Earths likely have a far greater diversity in their atmospheric properties than giant planets. Super-Earths (planets with masses between 1 and 10 M) lie in an intermediate mass regime between gas/ice giants like Neptune and rocky terrestrial planets like Earth and Venus. While some super-Earths (especially the more massive ones) may retain large amounts of hydrogen either from accretion processes or subsequent surface outgassing, other super-Earths should have atmospheres composed of predominantly heavier molecules, similar to the atmospheres of the rocky planets and moons of our Solar System. Others still may be entirely stripped of their atmospheres and remain as bare rocky cores. Of the two currently known transiting super-Earths one (GJ 1214b) likely falls into the former category with a thick atmosphere, while the other (CoRoT-7b) falls into the latter category with a very thin or nonexistent atmosphere. I review some of the theoretical work on super-Earth atmospheres, and I present methods for determining the bulk composition of a super-Earth atmosphere.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2011

References

Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., & Sauval, A. J. 2005, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 336, Cosmic Abundances as Records of Stellar Evolution and Nucleosynthesis, ed. Barnes, T. G. III, & Bash, F. N., 25–+Google Scholar
Charbonneau, D., et al. 2009, Nature, 462, 891Google Scholar
Deming, D., et al. 2009, PASP, 121, 952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortney, J. J., Lodders, K., Marley, M. S., & Freedman, R. S. 2008, ApJ, 678, 1419Google Scholar
Fortney, J. J., Marley, M. S., & Barnes, J. W. 2007, ApJ, 659, 1661Google Scholar
Léger, A., et al. 2009, A&A, 506, 287Google Scholar
Miller-Ricci, E., Seager, S., & Sasselov, D. 2009, ApJ, 690, 1056Google Scholar
Miller-Ricci, E. & Fortney, J. J. 2010, ApJ (Letters), 716, L74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nettelmann, N., Fortney, J. J., Kramm, U., & Redmer, R. 2011, ApJ, 733, id.2Google Scholar
Rogers, L. A. & Seager, S. 2010, ApJ, 716, 1208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valencia, D., Ikoma, M., Guillot, T., & Nettelmann, N. 2010, A&A, 516, A20Google Scholar