Figure 1. Revised masses
and radii for the seven planets of TRAPPIST-1, as estimated by Wang &
colleagues (2017). Results from Gillon & colleagues (2017) are shown for
comparison. Image source: Figure 5 of Wang et al. 2017, with new labels.
------------------------------------------
A few months ago, Michaël Gillon & colleagues reported
a remarkable seven-planet architecture for a nearby ultra-cool red dwarf, TRAPPIST-1. In
their analysis, six out of the seven transiting planets in this tightly packed
system have densities in the range of Earth, Venus, and Mars – and no fewer
than three occupy the system habitable zone. Those findings were based in part
on a 20-day campaign of nearly continuous observation by the Spitzer Space
Telescope.
Now Songhu Wang & colleagues have presented a rather
different picture of the TRAPPIST-1 family, based on more than 70 days of
monitoring by the Kepler Space Telescope during the K2 Mission. Even though Kepler’s
current precision is inferior to that of Spitzer, the availability of data
covering a much longer period of time still permits a more robust
characterization of these planets than was possible for Gillon’s group. Like
their predecessors, Wang & colleagues analyzed variations in transit times
to estimate the masses and densities of the planets. Thanks to their augmented
dataset, they were able to include all seven in their calculations, and not
just the inner six.
The periods, semimajor axes, and equilibrium temperatures
of the TRAPPIST planets are unchanged, and only two of them have smaller radii. Nevertheless, many planetary masses,
and all densities, are dramatically different. Figure 1 and Table 1 contrast
the results of Wang & colleagues with those of Gillon & colleagues. Figure 2 depicts the planets at their
relative sizes and densities according to Wang’s group (revised from the first
figure in my previous post on TRAPPIST-1).
Table 1. Comparison of TRAPPIST-1 parameters from
Wang et al. and Gillon et al.
Period is expressed in Earth days; radius, mass, and
density are expressed in Earth units.
(W) = Wang et al. 2017; (G) = Gillon et al.
2017.
------------------------------------------
a super mercury among super ganymedes?
As we compare the findings of these two teams, we need to
remember that both of them reported their results with large uncertainties (as
shown in Table 1). For five out of seven planets, the results on mass from both
groups are formally equivalent. The exceptions are planet e, for which the difference between Wang’s highest estimate and
Gillon’s lowest is only 2% of an Earth mass (0.02 Mea), and planet h, for which Gillon’s group reported no
mass at all. Moreover, for the three innermost planets (b, c, d), the densities estimated by Wang’s group are formally
consistent with a rocky composition like Earth’s, again within uncertainties.
But if we focus on the interpretations that each group
actually prefers, the differences become too wide to bridge. According to Wang’s
group, only the three innermost planets might be rocky in composition, with
planet c requiring major enrichment
in iron to explain its large mass. Planets b
and d, on the other hand, must be either
depleted in metals or enriched in volatiles, or both, to achieve their proposed
densities. At 62% and 72% of Earth, respectively, their closest analogs in our
Solar System are the Moon and Mars.
Figure 2.
Revised densities for the planets of TRAPPIST-1
The seven planets of TRAPPIST-1 are shown at
their relative sizes, with colors corresponding to the densities estimated by Wang
et al. 2017. Yellow shading marks the system habitable zone. Except for planet c, all densities are lower than those
preferred by Gillon et al. 2017. This result suggests an internal composition
with a rocky core enveloped in a layer of ice. (Update of Figure 1 in a previous post on the same system.)
------------------------------------------
The next three planets (e, f, g), which occupy the habitable zone, have densities similar
to those of Ganymede, Titan, and Callisto, the largest moons of Jupiter and
Saturn. The bulk composition of those moons is approximately one-third water
ice and two-thirds rock (Hussmann et al. 2015). A similar abundance of ice,
possibly accompanied by depletion in metals, is needed to explain the relatively
large radii and low masses of this temperate TRAPPIST trio.
For planet h,
the smallest and coolest member of the family, the estimated density has such
large uncertainties that we can say only that the numbers are equally consistent
with a substantial hydrogen envelope (like Uranus), a composition completely
dominated by hydrogen (like Saturn), or a rock/metal object with a modest
percentage of water ice but no gaseous hydrogen at all (like Europa).
Nevertheless, the transit timing data also provide an upper limit on this
object’s mass, so we know that planet h
is too lightweight to retain a hydrogen atmosphere unless it is constantly
replenished by volcanic outgassing. Therefore, this little world’s bulk composition
is probably similar to that of the three planets in the habitable zone.
From the new perspective offered by Wang &
colleagues, the seven planets of TRAPPIST-1 present far more variety in bulk
composition and surface environments than earlier data suggested. Indeed, if we
accept the accuracy of these new findings – and I don’t see why we shouldn’t –
we can no longer describe TRAPPIST-1 as a system with several Earth-like
planets. Instead, we see a single terrestrial planet (c) enriched in iron, with an equilibrium temperature too high to
permit surface bodies of water, accompanied by six lightweight planets that variously
resemble scaled-up versions of Mars (density 0.71 Earth) and the three largest
moons in our Solar System (Callisto, Titan, and Ganymede; respective densities
0.33, 0.34, and 0.35 Earth). Because three of the least dense planets (e, f, g) occupy the system habitable
zone, our most optimistic conjecture is that they are ocean worlds with liquid
seas sloshing atop layers of high-pressure ice (Kuchner 2003, Leger et al. 2004).
This isn’t an especially promising outlook for anyone who
seeks exotic alien organisms, but if your models allow low-density ocean
planets to support life (Noack et al. 2016), you can still imagine undulant sea
creatures populating the hydrospheres of one or more of these little worlds.
Figure 3. Exotic
aquatic life on Earth
Nembrotha cristata (left), a
tropical sea slug, by Chriswan Sungkono; Hapalochlaena
lunulata (right), a highly venomous octopus native to the Philippines, photographer
unknown.
------------------------------------------
younger
star, fatter planets
In
related news, a team led by Megan Bedell has offered revised masses and
densities for the six transiting planets of Kepler-11. This is the benchmark system for all
studies of extrasolar planetology, as it was the first place where astronomers could
obtain sufficiently precise data on the transit times of multiple interacting planets
to permit estimation of their masses. Back in 2011, when the system was
announced, everyone was shocked to learn that planets not much heavier than
Earth could support greenhouse atmospheres inflated with hydrogen and helium.
By now,
of course, that weirdness is pretty well digested, but Kepler-11 still retains
the power to amaze. With transit data extending over the full Kepler mission,
this system has already benefited from repeated analyses that led to revisions
(mostly downward) in the masses of its six planets. Improved results became
available for the first time in 2013, when Jack Lissauer and colleagues
published new physical and orbital parameters for the whole system (blogged here).
Now,
four years later, we have another update. It’s important to note that the new findings
are not based on any new transit data. (As far as I know, no transits of
Kepler-11 have been observed since the termination of data collection by the
Kepler Mission in 2013.) Instead, the revised parameters are based on precise observations
of the host star. Although previous studies have always noted a close
resemblance between Kepler-11 and our Sun, Bedell & colleagues go further:
they characterize the star as a “Solar twin.”
Contrary
to Lissauer’s group, who estimated a stellar age in the range of 7 to 10
billion years, a stellar mass 96% Solar (0.96 Msol), and a stellar radius 105%
Solar (1.05 Rsol), Bedell’s group finds that the star is a bit younger than our
Sun (3.2 ±0.9 billion years versus 4.55 billion years), with a larger mass (1.04
Msol) and a slightly revised radius (1.02 Rsol). Because most planetary data
depend sensitively on the properties of the host star, these new values lead to
further revisions in our understanding of the planets.
Table 2. Comparison of Kepler-11
parameters from Bedell et al. and Lissauer et al.
Notes: a
= semimajor axis in astronomical units; period = orbital period in days.
B 17 = Bedell et al. 2017; L 13, L 11 = Lissauer et al. 2013, 2011.
------------------------------------------
Table 2 compares three generations
of data on Kepler-11. It’s readily
apparent that most of the new parameters offered by Bedell’s group represent a
reversion in the direction of the initial findings from 2011. Specifically, all
the masses proposed by Bedell’s group are larger than the ones published by
Lissauer & colleagues in 2013, as are all radii except for planet g, where we see no change. Yet in
comparison with the 2013 update, the latest estimates have less extreme consequences
for planetary composition.
As the authors note, the upward revisions in masses and
radii result in an average increase of almost 50% in the planets’ bulk density.
But the big picture stays mostly the same. As before, all Kepler-11 planets
with well-constrained masses are more lightweight than Uranus (14.5 Mea). As
before, planets c through f are unambiguously puffy, requiring
hydrogen envelopes to bring their ample radii in line with their relatively
puny masses (all <10 Mea).
The most consequential change involves planet b, to which the parameters announced in
2013 allowed Lopez & Fortney (2014) to attribute a bulk mass fraction in
hydrogen of about 0.5%. Their interpretation seems counterintuitive – I mean, how
could an object under 2 Mea retain any hydrogen at all after aeons of extreme
irradiation? Nevertheless, to my knowledge, it has been broadly accepted.
The newly estimated density of 0.445 Earth strengthens
the argument that planet b is an amalgam
of rock and ice, rather like Europa, which has a bulk density of 0.55 Earth. No
lightweight envelope is needed to explain its radius. Although I doubt that the
findings of Bedell’s group are the last word on Kepler-11b, they offer a
physically plausible model of the bulk composition of this benchmark extrasolar
planet.
REFERENCES
Bedell M, Bean JL, Meléndez
J, Mills SM, Fabrycky DC, Freitas FC, Ramírez I, Asplund M, Liu F, Yong D.
(2017) Kepler-11 is a Solar Twin: Revising the masses and radii of benchmark
planets via precise stellar characterization. Astrophysical Journal 839, 94.
Gillon M, Jehin E,
Lederer SM, Delrez L, de Wit J, Burdanov A, Van Grootel V, Burgasser A, Triaud
A, Opitom C, Demory B-O, Sahu DK, Bardalez-Gagliuffi D, Magain P, Queloz D.
(2016) Temperate Earth-sized planets transiting a nearby ultracool dwarf star. Nature 533, 221-224. Abstract: 2016Natur.533..221G
Gillon M, Triaud A,
Demory B-O, Jehin E, Agol E, Deck KM, Lederer SM, de Wit J, Burdanov A, Ingalls
JG, Bolmont E, Leconte J, Raymond SN, Selsis F, Turbet M, Barkaoui K, Burgasser
A, Burleigh MR, Carey SJ, Chaushev A, Copperwheat CM, Delrez L, Fernandes CS,
Holdsworth DL, Kotze EJ, Van Grootel V, Almleaky Y, Benkhaldoun Z, Magain P, Queloz
D. (2017) Seven temperate terrestrial planets around the nearby ultracool dwarf
star TRAPPIST-1. Nature 542, 456-460.
Abstract: 2017Natur.542..456G
Hussmann H, Sotin C,
Lunine J. (2015) Interiors and evolution of icy satellites. In Treatise on Geophysics, Volume 10: Physics
of Terrestrial Planets and Moons, ed. G. Schubert. Elsevier B.V.
Kuchner MJ. (2003)
Volatile-rich Earth-mass planets in the habitable zone. Astrophysical Journal 596, L105-L108.
Leger A, Selsis F, Sotin C,
et al. (2004) A new family of planets? “Ocean Planets.” Icarus 169, 499-504.
Lissauer JJ,
Jontof-Hutter D, Rowe JF, Fabrycky DC, Lopez ED, Agol E, et al. (2013) All six
planets known to orbit Kepler-11 have low densities. Astrophysical Journal 770, 131. Abstract: 2013ApJ...770..131L
Luger R, Sestovic
M, Kruse E, Grimm SL, Demory B-O, Agol E, Bolmont E, Fabrycky D, Fernandes CS,
Van Grootel V, Burgasser A, Gillon M, et al. (2017) A terrestrial-sized
exoplanet at the snow line of TRAPPIST-1. In press.
Noack L, Höning D,
Rivoldini A, Heistracher C, Zimov N, Journaux B, Lammer H, Van Hoolst T,
Bredehöft JH. (2016) Water-rich planets: How habitable is a water layer deeper
than on Earth? Icarus 277, 215-236.
Wang S, Wu DH,
Barclay T, Laughlin GP. (2017) Updated masses for the TRAPPIST-1 planets. In press. Abstract:
2017arXiv170404290W
No comments:
Post a Comment