1 / 7

Exosolar Giant Planet Science GSMT vs. JWST

Exosolar Giant Planet Science GSMT vs. JWST. Terry Herter February 12, 2004. Based on material from: “Exosolar Planets” by Lunine for GSMT 4/28/03 “Planet Detection, Characterizing Extra-solar Planets” by Najita, Mueller, Mountain & Strom for GSMT 3/17/03 And GSMT-Report and JWST website.

aradia
Download Presentation

Exosolar Giant Planet Science GSMT vs. JWST

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Exosolar Giant Planet Science GSMT vs. JWST Terry Herter February 12, 2004 • Based on material from: • “Exosolar Planets” by Lunine for GSMT 4/28/03 • “Planet Detection, Characterizing Extra-solar Planets” by Najita, Mueller, Mountain & Strom for GSMT 3/17/03 • And GSMT-Report and JWST website

  2. EGP science • What are the origins of the range of orbital distances and eccentricities? • Metallicity contrast between the planet and star will help understand formation mechanism • Characterize Exo-solar planets: • Atmospheric structure, chemistry, rotation, weather, etc. (R = 10 & 200) • Key Measurements: • Detection and analysis of free floating EGPs • R = 100 - 1000 • Detection and analysis of bound EGPs • R = 100 - 1000 • Measurement of transits • High resolution spectroscopy, limited by systematics!

  3. 1 nJy It’s a hard problem • Planets are faint and near bright objects. Star suppressed by 106 Class II EGP: Cool Jupiter-Mass Planet at 1.5 AU Ammonia gaseous; water clouds in troposphere, enhancing NIR reflectivity

  4. Model of young EGP Figure from Lunine: Flux (mJy) at Earth vs. wavelength (microns) for a one Jupiter mass EGP at 108 years of age, 10 parsecs distance, isolated. Spectra for R = 1000, 100, and 10 are shown (the latter two displaced for clarity) along with corresponding GSMT sensitivities, displaced in proportion to the corresponding spectra. GSMT sensitivities, courtesy M. Mountain, are for a 104 second exposure, S/N=10, with 4 x 4 pixels across the point source and a GSMT emissivity of 10%.

  5. Sensitivity: GSMT vs. JWST GSMT is best for l < 3.5 mm

  6. Spatial Resolution GSMT wins big, but JWST has stability.

  7. Complementarity • GSMT – • Best in near-IR from both sensitivity and spatial resolution considerations • Look for EGPs closest to stars • JWST – • Best in thermal IR • Look for cooler, more distant EGPs • Look for “free floaters” • Highly stable PSF?

More Related