Paper detail

No umbrella needed: Confronting the hypothesis of iron rain on WASP-76b with post-processed general circulation models

High-resolution spectra are unique indicators of three-dimensional processes in exoplanetary atmospheres. For instance, in 2020, Ehrenreich et al. reported transmission spectra from the ESPRESSO spectrograph yielding an anomalously large Doppler blueshift from the ultra-hot Jupiter WASP-76b. Interpretations of these observations invoke toy model depictions of gas-phase iron condensation in lower-temperature regions of the planet's atmosphere. In this work, we forward model the atmosphere of WASP-76b with double-gray general circulation models (GCMs) and ray-striking radiative transfer to diagnose the planet's high-resolution transmission spectrum. We confirm that a physical mechanism driving strong east-west asymmetries across the terminator must exist to reproduce large Doppler blueshifts in WASP-76b's transmission spectrum. We identify low atmospheric drag and a deep radiative-convective boundary as necessary components of our GCM to produce this asymmetry (the latter is consistent with existing Spitzer phase curves). However, we cannot reproduce either the magnitude or the time-dependence of the WASP-76b Doppler signature with gas-phase iron condensation alone. Instead, we find that high-altitude, optically thick clouds composed of $\rm Al_2O_3$, Fe, or $\rm Mg_2SiO_4$ provide reasonable fits to the Ehrenreich et al. observations -- with marginal contributions from condensation. This fit is further improved by allowing a small orbital eccentricity ($e \approx 0.017$), consistent with prior WASP-76b orbital constraints. We additionally validate our forward-modeled spectra by reproducing lines of nearly all species detected in WASP-76b by Tabernero et al. 2021. Our procedure's success in diagnosing phase-resolved Doppler shifts demonstrates the benefits of physical, self-consistent, three-dimensional simulations in modeling high-resolution spectra of exoplanet atmospheres.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 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.