Exoplanet atmospheres

Abstract:

<p>Water vapour in the stratospheres of Uranus and Neptune has previously been shown to originate from external sources. These sources could include comet impacts [4], interplanetary dust particles [8], or rings and moons [1]. Stratospheric water was first detected on Uranus and Neptune by the Short-Wavelength Spectrometer (SWS) on the Infrared Space Observatory (ISO) [2], but the uncertainties were relatively large due to lack of constraint on the vertical water profiles and relatively low spectral resolution of the observations.</p> <p>Here we present new observational constraints on Uranus’ and Neptune’s externally sourced stratospheric water abundance using disc-averaged high spectral resolution observations of the 557 GHz water emission line from Herschel’s Heterodyne Instrument for the Far-Infrared (HIFI). On both planets the emission line is significantly broadened by disc-averaging of Doppler shifts from planetary rotation, which was carefully accounted for in our analysis [10]. Derived stratospheric column water abundances are 0.56<sup>+0.26</sup><sub>-0.06</sub> x 10<sup>14</sup> cm<sup>-2 </sup>for Uranus and 1.9<sup>+0.2</sup><sub>-0.3</sub> x 10<sup>14</sup> cm<sup>-2</sup> for Neptune. These results imply Neptune has about four times as much stratospheric water as Uranus, and are consistent with previous determinations from ISO-SWS and Herschel-PACS, but with improved precision.</p> <p>For Uranus excellent observational fits are obtained by scaling photochemical model profiles [3,7] or with step-type profiles with water vapor limited to <=0.6mbar. However, Uranus’ cold stratospheric temperatures imply a ~0.03mbar condensation level, which further limits water vapor to pressures <=0.03 mbar. Neptune’s warmer stratosphere has a deeper ~1 mbar condensation level, so emission-line pressure broadening can be used to further constrain the water profile. For Neptune, excellent fits are obtained using step-type profiles with cutoffs of ~0.3-0.6 mbar or by scaling a photochemical model profile [7]. Step-type profiles with cutoffs >=1.0 mbar or <=0.1 mbar can be rejected with 4σ significance. Rescaling photochemical model profiles from [7] to match our observed column abundances implies similar external water fluxes for both planets: 8.3<sup>+4.0</sup><sub>-0.9</sub> x 10<sup>4</sup> cm<sup>-2</sup>s<sup>-1</sup> for Uranus and 12.7<sup>+1.3</sup><sub>-2.0</sub> x 10<sup>4</sup> cm<sup>-2</sup>s<sup>-1</sup> for Neptune.</p> <p>This inferred water influx rates suggest that Uranus and Neptune may in fact have very similar IDP fluxes, unless there are significant water-loss processes that are not accounted for in current photochemical models [3,7]. This is unexpected as the IDP flux on Neptune is expected to be higher due to its closer proximity to the Kuiper belt. For example, the dynamical model of [8] predicts that the flux of IDP grains is around seven times higher on Neptune than on Uranus, but model uncertainties are large enough so as not to preclude a similar flux. The comet impact rates on Uranus and Neptune are also predicted to be quite similar [5,11], so both planets may experience similar external flux processes.</p> <p>Our new analysis suggests that Neptune’s approximately four times greater observed water column abundance is primarily caused by its warmer stratosphere preventing loss by condensation, rather than by a significantly more intense external source. Larger error bars on the Uranus estimates are due to greater uncertainty in the high-altitude temperature profile. To reconcile these water fluxes with other observed stratospheric oxygen species (CO and CO<sub>2</sub>) requires either a significant CO component in interplanetary dust particles (Uranus) or contributions from cometary impacts (Uranus, Neptune). In particular, the large CO abundance in Neptune’s stratosphere suggests that we just happen to be observing Neptune at a time shortly after a large comet impact [4,6,9].</p> <p>Further details of our results and analysis are available in our recent publication [10].</p> <p><img src="" alt="" width="1036" height="882" /></p> <p>Fig1: Herschel-HIFI line-to-continuum ratio spectra of the 557GHz water line for HRS and WBS spectrometers. The water line is clearly visible at high signal to noise on both planets, but the line is broadened due to Doppler shift combined with the disc-broadened nature of the HIFI spectra. (Figure from https://doi.org/10.3847/PSJ/ac650f, see reference [10]).</p> <p> </p> <p><img src="" alt="" width="1013" height="680" /></p> <p>Fig2: Fits to Uranus and Neptune HIFI-HRS spectra 557GHz water line. (a,b) Uranus can be fitted with step profiles with a step pressure less than ~0.6mbar or by scaling photochemical profiles. However, significant water vapour is unlikely at pressures above ~0.03mbar due to saturation. (c,d) Neptune can be fitted with step profiles with a step in the pressure range 0.3-0.6mbar or by scaling photochemical profiles. (Figure from https://doi.org/10.3847/PSJ/ac650f, see reference [10]).</p> <p><strong>References</strong></p> <p>[1] Cavalié+ 2019. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A%26A...630A..87C/abstract</p> <p>[2] Feuchtgruber+ 1997. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997Natur.389..159F/abstract</p> <p>[3] Lara+ 2019. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A%26A...621A.129L/abstract</p> <p>[4] Lellouch+ 2005. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A%26A...430L..37L/abstract</p> <p>[5] Levison 2000. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000Icar..143..415L/abstract</p> <p>[6] Moreno+ 2017. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A%26A...608L...5M/abstract</p> <p>[7] Moses+Poppe 2017. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Icar..297...33M/abstract</p> <p>[8] Poppe 2016. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016Icar..264..369P/abstract</p> <p>[9] Teanby+ 2019. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019Icar..319...86T/abstract</p> <p>[10] Teanby+ 2022. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022PSJ.....3...96T/abstract</p> <p>[11] Zahnle 2003. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003Icar..163..263Z/abstract</p> <p> </p>

Abstract:

K2-141 b is a transiting, small (1.5 R⊕) ultra-short-period (USP) planet discovered by the Kepler space telescope orbiting a K-dwarf host star every 6.7 h. The planet's high surface temperature of more than 2000 K makes it an excellent target for thermal emission observations. Here we present 65 h of continuous photometric observations of K2-141 b collected with Spitzer's Infrared Array Camera (IRAC) Channel 2 at 4.5 μm spanning ten full orbits of the planet. We measured an infrared eclipse depth of ppm and a peak to trough amplitude variation of ppm. The best fit model to the Spitzer data shows no significant thermal hotspot offset, in contrast to the previously observed offset for the well-studied USP planet 55 Cnc e. We also jointly analyzed the new Spitzer observations with the photometry collected by Kepler during two separate K2 campaigns. We modeled the planetary emission with a range of toy models that include a reflective and a thermal contribution. With a two-temperature model, we measured a dayside temperature of Tp,d = 2049 ³⁶²_-359 K and a night-side temperature that is consistent with zero (Tp,n < 1712 K at 2σ). Models with a steep dayside temperature gradient provide a better fit to the data than a uniform dayside temperature (ΔBIC = 22.2). We also found evidence for a nonzero geometric albedo A_g = 0.282^0.070_-0.078. We also compared the data to a physically motivated, pseudo-2D rock vapor model and a 1D turbulent boundary layer model. Both models fit the data well. Notably, we found that the optical eclipse depth can be explained by thermal emission from a hot inversion layer, rather than reflected light. A thermal inversion may also be responsible for the deep optical eclipse observed for another USP, Kepler-10 b. Finally, we significantly improved the ephemerides for K2-141 b and c, which will facilitate further follow-up observations of this interesting system with state-of-the-art observatories such as James Webb Space Telescope.

Abstract:

Context. Growing evidence has indicated that the global composition distribution plays an indisputable role in interpreting observational data. Three-dimensional general circulation models (GCMs) with a reliable treatment of chemistry and clouds are particularly crucial in preparing for upcoming observations. In attempts to achieve 3D chemistry-climate modeling, the challenge mainly lies in the expensive computing power required for treating a large number of chemical species and reactions.
Aims. Motivated by the need for a robust and computationally efficient chemical scheme, we devise a mini-chemical network with a minimal number of species and reactions for H2-dominated atmospheres.
Methods. We apply a novel technique to simplify the chemical network from a full kinetics model, VULCAN, by replacing a large number of intermediate reactions with net reactions. The number of chemical species is cut down from 67 to 12, with the major species of thermal and observational importance retained, including H2O, CH4, CO, CO2, C2H2, NH3, and HCN. The size of the total reactions is also greatly reduced, from ~800 to 20. We validated the mini-chemical scheme by verifying the temporal evolution and benchmarking the predicted compositions in four exoplanet atmospheres (GJ 1214b, GJ 436b, HD 189733b, and HD 209458b) against the full kinetics of VULCAN.
Results. The mini-network reproduces the chemical timescales and composition distributions of the full kinetics well within an order of magnitude for the major species in the pressure range of 1 bar–0.1 mbar across various metallicities and carbon-to-oxygen (C/O) ratios.
Conclusions. We have developed and validated a mini-chemical scheme using net reactions to significantly simplify a large chemical network. The small scale of the mini-chemical scheme permits simple use and fast computation, which is optimal for implementation in a 3D GCM or a retrieval framework. We focus on the thermochemical kinetics of net reactions in this paper and address photochemistry in a follow-up paper.

Abstract:

High spectral resolution observations of Venus were obtained with the TEXES instrument at NASA’s Infrared Telescope Facility. These observations focus on a CO2 absorption feature at 791.4 cm-1 as the shape of this absorption feature can be used to retrieve the vertical temperature profile in Venus’ mesosphere. By scan-mapping the planet, we are able to build up three-dimensional temperature maps of Venus’ atmosphere, covering one Earth-facing hemisphere and an altitude range of 60–83 km. A temperature map from February 12, 2019 clearly shows the three-dimensional structure of a planetary-scale thermal wave. This wave pattern appears strongest in the mid-latitudes of Venus, has a zonal wavenumber of 2–4 and the wave fronts tilt eastward with altitude at an angle of 8–15 degrees per km. This is consistent with a thermal tide propagating upwards from Venus’ upper cloud decks. Ground-based observations provide the opportunity to study Venus’ temperature structure on an ongoing basis.