Paper detail

3.6 and 4.5 $μ$m ${\it Spitzer}$ Phase Curves of the Highly-Irradiated Hot Jupiters WASP-19b and HAT-P-7b

We analyze full-orbit phase curve observations of the transiting hot Jupiters WASP-19b and HAT-P-7b at 3.6 and 4.5 $μ$m obtained using the Spitzer Space Telescope. For WASP-19b, we measure secondary eclipse depths of $0.485\%\pm 0.024\%$ and $0.584\%\pm 0.029\%$ at 3.6 and 4.5 $μ$m, which are consistent with a single blackbody with effective temperature $2372 \pm 60$ K. The measured 3.6 and 4.5 $μ$m secondary eclipse depths for HAT-P-7b are $0.156\%\pm 0.009\%$ and $0.190\%\pm 0.006\%$, which are well-described by a single blackbody with effective temperature $2667\pm 57$ K. Comparing the phase curves to the predictions of one-dimensional and three-dimensional atmospheric models, we find that WASP-19b's dayside emission is consistent with a model atmosphere with no dayside thermal inversion and moderately efficient day-night circulation. We also detect an eastward-shifted hotspot, suggesting the presence of a superrotating equatorial jet. In contrast, HAT-P-7b's dayside emission suggests a dayside thermal inversion and relatively inefficient day-night circulation; no hotspot shift is detected. For both planets, these same models do not agree with the measured nightside emission. The discrepancies in the model-data comparisons for WASP-19b might be explained by high-altitude silicate clouds on the nightside and/or high atmospheric metallicity, while the very low 3.6 $μ$m nightside planetary brightness for HAT-P-7b may be indicative of an enhanced global C/O ratio. We compute Bond albedos of 0 ($<0.08$ at $1σ$) and $0.38\pm 0.06$ for WASP-19b and HAT-P-7b, respectively. In the context of other planets with thermal phase curve measurements, we show that WASP-19b and HAT-P-7b fit the general trend of decreasing day-night heat recirculation with increasing irradiation.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access18 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.