Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-j4qg9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-12T04:52:47.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Planetary Messages in the Doppler Residuals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2016

Geoffrey W. Marcy ,
Debra A. Fischer ,
R. Paul Butler  and
Steven S. Vogt
Geoffrey W. Marcy
Affiliation:
Astronomy Dept., University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
Debra A. Fischer
Affiliation:
Astronomy Dept., University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
R. Paul Butler
Affiliation:
Dept. of Terrestrial Magnetism, Carnegie Inst. of Washington, 5243 Broad Branch Rd, NW, Washington DC, 20015-1305 USA
Steven S. Vogt
Affiliation:
UCO/Lick Observatories, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064 USA

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.

The Doppler residuals to the Keplerian fits for extrasolar planets reveal important properties of the planets and host stars. Stellar magnetic fields modify the photospheric velocity fields, causing Doppler fluctuations with unknown time scales. This Doppler “jitter”, seen prominently in the magnetic stars Epsilon Eridani and ξ Boo A, compromises the detectability of planets. The Doppler residuals during the transit of HD209458 reveal that the planet orbits in the same direction as the star spins. Moreover, the transit path across the star is nearly parallel to the stellar equator. Most interestingly, the Doppler residuals of known planets often reveal additional coherent variations, probably caused by additional companions. Both 55 Cancri and HD168443 reveal such coherent Doppler residuals. Another five planet–bearing stars observed at Lick show trends in the Doppler residuals indicating the presence of additional companions. Remarkably, about half of the known extrasolar planets reveal such coherent variations. This suggests that stars with planets have a high occurrence rate of harboring more distant companions, planetary or otherwise.

Type
Part I: Discovery and study of extrasolar planets - current
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 202: Planetary Systems in the Universe – Observation, Formation and Evolution , 2004 , pp. 20 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of the Pacific 2004 

References

Bundy, K., & Marcy, G.W. 2000, PASP, 112, in press.Google Scholar
Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., Williams, E., McCarthy, C., Dosanjh, P., & Vogt, S. S. 1996, PASP, 108, 500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., Fischer, D. A., Brown, T. M., Contos, A. R., Korzennik, S. G., Nisenson, P., & Noyes, R. W. 1999, ApJ, 526, 916.Google Scholar
Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., Vogt, S.S., & Fischer, D. A. 2000, this volume.Google Scholar
Charbonneau, D., Brown, T. M., Latham, D. W., & Mayor, M. 2000, ApJ, 529, L49.Google Scholar
Carney, B.W., Latham, D.W., Laird, J.B., & Aguilar, L.A. 107, 2240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cumming, A., Marcy, G., & Butler, R.P. 1999, ApJ, 526, 890.Google Scholar
Fischer, D. A., Marcy, G. W., Butler, R. P., Vogt, S. S., & Apps, K. 1999, PASP, 111, 50.Google Scholar
Fischer, D. A., Marcy, G. W., Butler, R. P., Vogt, S. S., & Apps, K. 2000, ApJ, in press,Google Scholar
Hatzes, A., & Cochran, W.D. et al. 2000, preprint.Google Scholar
Henry, G. W., Marcy, G. W., Butler, R. P., & Vogt, S. S. 2000a, ApJ, 529, L45.Google Scholar
Laughlin, G., & Adams, F.C. 1999, ApJ, 526, 881.Google Scholar
Levison, H. F., Lissauer, J. J., & Duncan, M. J. 1998, AJ, 116, 1998.Google Scholar
Lloyd, J., & Patience, J. et al. 2000, this volume.Google Scholar
Marcy, G.W., & Benitz, K.J. 1989, ApJ, 344, 441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcy, G. W., & Butler, R. P. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 57.Google Scholar
Marcy, G. W., Butler, R. P., Vogt, S. S., Fischer, D. A., & Liu, M. 1999 ApJ, 520, 239.Google Scholar
Marcy, G. W., Cochran, W. D., & Mayor, M. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, ed Mannings, V., Boss, A. P. & Russell, S. S. (Tucson: University of Arizona Press), p.1285.Google Scholar
Queloz, D., Eggenberger, A., Mayor, M., Perrier, C., Beuzit, J. L., Naef, D., Sivan, J. P., & Udry, S. 2000, A&A, 359, L13.Google Scholar
Rivera, E.J., & Lissauer, J.J. 2000, ApJ, 530, 454.Google Scholar
Saar, S. H., Butler, R. P., & Marcy, G. W. 1998, ApJ, 498, L153.Google Scholar
Saar, S. H., Steven, H., & Fischer, D. 2000, ApJ, 534 L105.Google Scholar
Udry, S., Mayor, M., Naef, D., Pepe, F., Queloz, D., Santos, N. C., Burnet, M., Confino, B., & Melo, C. 2000, A&A, 356, 590.Google Scholar
Udry, S., Mayor, M., Naef, D., Pepe, F., Queloz, D., & Santos, N. C. 2000, this volume.Google Scholar
Vogt, S. S. 1987, PASP, 99, 1214.Google Scholar
Vogt, S. S., Marcy, G. W., & Butler, R. P., & Apps, K. 2000, ApJ, 536, 902.Google Scholar
Weidenschilling, S.J., & Marzari, F. 1996, Nature, 384, 619.Google Scholar