TPF-I SWG Report - Exoplanet Exploration Program - NASA
TPF-I SWG Report - Exoplanet Exploration Program - NASA
TPF-I SWG Report - Exoplanet Exploration Program - NASA
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
C HAPTER 2<br />
trivial in the absence of any other information on the observed planet. For an Earth-like planet there are<br />
some atmospheric windows that can be used in most of the cases, especially between 8 and 11 µm. This<br />
window would, however, become opaque at high H 2 O partial pressure (e.g., the inner part of the HZ<br />
where a lot of water is vaporized) and at high CO 2 pressure (e.g., a very young Earth or the outer part of<br />
the HZ).<br />
Let us look at the case of the three known terrestrial planets, Venus, Earth and Mars. For Mars, the<br />
temperature deduced from the shape of the infrared spectrum is a good approximation to the surface<br />
temperature, except in the CO 2 band. On Earth, the infrared spectrum is a mixture of surface and cloud<br />
emission, the latter occurring at lower temperature. The temperature given by the envelope of the<br />
spectrum is thus slightly lower, by about 10 K on average, than the average surface temperature. In the<br />
extreme case of Venus, the spectrum envelope gives a temperature of 277 K, much lower than the 740 K<br />
of the surface. The reason for this discrepancy comes from the fact that the atmosphere of Venus is<br />
completely opaque below 60 km because of the permanent cloud cover and the absorption continuum,<br />
induced at high pressure by CO 2 –CO 2 collisions.<br />
With low-resolution spectral observations, it is difficult to determine if the lower atmosphere contributes<br />
to the spectrum and therefore, if the temperature reflects the surface conditions. The accuracy of the<br />
radius and temperature determination will depend on the quality of the fit (and thus on the sensitivity and<br />
resolution of the spectrum), the precision of the Sun–star distance, and also the distribution of brightness<br />
temperatures over the planetary surface.<br />
Finally, if the effective temperature is measured in the infrared, then the visible albedo can be inferred,<br />
using F star (1 – A) = 4σT eff 4 .<br />
2.3.2 Orbital Flux Variation<br />
The variation or constancy of infrared flux with orbital position (i.e., with phase angle) provides us some<br />
information about the surface of the planet. One approach is to note that the orbital flux variation in the<br />
infrared can distinguish planets with and without an atmosphere (Selsis et al. 2003, Gaidos and Williams<br />
2004). A strong variation of the thermal flux with phase angle can be consistent with the absence of an<br />
atmosphere, because here we are looking at a rocky surface with low thermal inertia; and therefore, a<br />
strong day–night temperature variation. Examples are Mercury and the Moon. In such a case one has to<br />
readjust the inferred radius estimate of the planet by taking the viewing geometry of the system into<br />
account.<br />
The opposite case, when the apparent effective temperature is constant along the orbit, implies a large<br />
thermal inertia from, for example an ocean, and/or a rapid circulation of incident energy through large<br />
scale atmospheric motions.<br />
Therefore, habitable planets are potentially distinguishable from airless or Mars-like planets by the<br />
amplitude of the observed variations of effective temperature, however since Venus and Earth are roughly<br />
similar in this way, additional spectroscopy is needed to separate such cases.<br />
An exception to the above cases is υ Andromedae b, a tidally locked hot Jupiter with an observed day–<br />
night temperature difference of about 1400 K (Harrington et al. 2006). Here, unlike Venus, the massive<br />
16