Paper detail

Strict Upper Limits on the Carbon-to-Oxygen Ratios of Eight Hot Jupiters from Self-Consistent Atmospheric Retrieval

The elemental compositions of hot Jupiters are informative relics of planet formation that can help us answer long-standing questions regarding the origin and formation of giant planets. Here, I present the main conclusions from a comprehensive atmospheric retrieval survey of eight hot Jupiters with detectable molecular absorption in their near-infrared transmission spectra. I analyze the eight transmission spectra using the newly-developed, self-consistent atmospheric retrieval framework, SCARLET. Unlike previous methods, SCARLET combines the physical and chemical consistency of complex atmospheric models with the statistical treatment of observational uncertainties known from atmospheric retrieval techniques. I find that all eight hot Jupiters consistently require carbon-to-oxygen ratios (C/O) below 0.9. The finding of C/O<0.9 is highly robust for HD209458b, WASP-12b, WASP-19b, HAT-P-1b, and XO-1b. For HD189733b, WASP-17b, and WASP-43b, I find that the published WFC3 transmission spectra favor C/O<0.9 at greater than 95% confidence. I further show that the water abundances on all eight hot Jupiters are consistent with solar composition. The relatively small depth of the detected water absorption features is due to the presence of clouds, not due to a low water abundance as previously suggested for HD209458b. The presence of a thick cloud deck is inferred for HD209458b and WASP-12b. HD189733b may host a similar cloud deck, rather than the previously suggested Rayleigh hazes, if star spots affect the observed spectrum. The approach taken in SCARLET can be regarded as a new pathway to interpreting spectral observations of planetary atmospheres. In this work, including our prior knowledge of H-C-N-O chemistry enables me to constrain the C/O ratio without detecting a single carbon-bearing molecule.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

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.