Paper detail

Spitzer/MIPS 24 micron Observations of HD 209458b: 3 eclipses, 2.5 transits, and a Phase Curve Corrupted by Instrumental Sensitivity Variations

We report the results of an analysis of all Spitzer/MIPS 24 micron observations of HD 209458b, one of the touchstone objects in the study of irradiated giant planet atmospheres. Altogether we analyze 2.5 transits, 3 eclipses, and a 58-hour near-continuous observation designed to detect the planet's thermal phase curve. The results of our analysis are: (1) A mean transit depth of 1.484% +/- 0.035%, consistent with previous measurements and showing no evidence of variability in transit depth at the 3% level. (2) A mean eclipse depth of 0.332% +/- 0.026%, somewhat higher than that previously reported for this system; this new value brings observations into better agreement with models. The dayside flux shows no evidence of variability at the 12% level. (3) Eclipses in the system occur 32 s +/- 129 s earlier than would be expected from a circular orbit, which constrains the orbital quantity (e cos omega) to be 0.00004 +/- 0.00033. This result is fully consistent with a circular orbit and sets an upper limit of 140 m/s (3 sigma) on any eccentricity-induced velocity offset during transit. The phase curve observations (including one of the transits) exhibit an anomalous trend similar to the detector ramp seen in previous Spitzer/IRAC observations; by modeling this ramp we recover the system parameters. The photometry which follows the ramp and transit exhibits a gradual, ~0.2% decrease in flux, similar to that seen in pre-launch calibration data. The large uncertainties associated with this poorly-understood, likely instrumental effect prevent us from usefully constraining the planet's thermal phase curve. Our observations highlight the need for a thorough understanding of detector-related instrumental effects on long time scales when making the high-precision mid-infrared measurements planned for future missions such as EChO, SPICA, and JWST. [abridged]

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.

Institutions

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.