Will NASA Reveal Oxygen in TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanet Atmospheres?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mfb
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exoplanets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the upcoming NASA announcement regarding the TRAPPIST-1 exoplanet system, specifically focusing on the potential detection of oxygen in the atmospheres of its Earth-sized planets. Participants speculate on the implications of such findings for understanding atmospheric composition and the possibility of life, as well as the methods used to observe these exoplanets.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Speculative reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confidence that the announcement will relate to atmospheric composition, particularly regarding oxygen detection during transit observations.
  • Speculation includes the idea that oxygen, particularly in combination with methane, would indicate processes that are rare without biological activity, although detecting such gases is challenging.
  • Concerns are raised about whether looking for oxygen alongside industrial pollution is overly optimistic given current technological limitations.
  • Participants discuss the potential for detecting life based on atmospheric alterations, emphasizing that significant changes would be necessary for current technology to identify such signatures.
  • Details about the TRAPPIST-1 system are shared, including the number of planets, their sizes, and their locations within the habitable zone, with some planets potentially capable of supporting liquid water.
  • There is mention of the JWST's role in future observations, including measuring greenhouse gases and searching for oxygen and ozone.
  • Some participants note the historical context of life on Earth and the timeline of oxygen production, questioning the implications of oxygen detection for life elsewhere.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the announcement will likely involve atmospheric composition, but there is no consensus on the implications of oxygen detection or the feasibility of observing it alongside other gases. Multiple competing views remain regarding the significance of these findings and the methods of detection.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the difficulty in observing certain gases like nitrogen and the challenges in distinguishing between natural and industrial sources of atmospheric gases. The discussion also highlights the uncertainty surrounding the conditions necessary for detecting life signatures.

Who May Find This Useful

Astronomy enthusiasts, researchers in exoplanet studies, and those interested in astrobiology may find the discussion relevant, particularly regarding the implications of atmospheric composition for the search for extraterrestrial life.

  • #61
TRAPPIST-1 also has sizable starspots, judging from its light curve in Figure 2 of the improved-masses paper. The star rotates with a period of around 3 days.

Figure 3 in that paper shows how orbit fits were improved by adding the Kepler "K2" observations. It shows observed TTV's and calculated TTV curves from a large number of randomly-generated orbits. That random generation was a result of Markov-Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) fitting, something that seems much like simulated annealing. Randomly change the parameters, and if they improve the fit, accept them, but if they don't, then accept them with probability exp(-(Enew - Eold)/T), where the E's are error values and T is a sort of temperature.

For b to g, the new curves are well inside the old curves, meaning that the with-K2 mass estimates are both smaller and with smaller error bars than the without-K2 ones. My estimated amplitudes: b: 2 min, c: 2 min, d: 25 min?, e: 10 min?, f: 40 min, g: 30 min.

Planet h has three distinct sets of TTV fits, with a few outlying fits. The most populous set having an amplitude of about 100 min.

From the seven-planets announcement paper, transit durations are b: 36.40+-0.17 min, c: 42.37+-0.22 min, d: 49.13+-0.65 min, e: 57.21+-0.71 min, f: 62.60+=0.60 min, g: 68.40+-0.66 min, h: 76.7+2.7-2.0 min

This may explain the error bars and scatter of the b and c TTV measurements. The scatter is much less for the outer ones.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #64
[1802.01377] The nature of the TRAPPIST-1 exoplanets -- the most recent paper on them at arxiv.

Not So Strange New Worlds - NASA Spitzer Space Telescope, Imagining the Planets of TRAPPIST-1 - NASA Spitzer Space Telescope

These planets likely have a few percent of water by mass, and this translates into something like

b: 400, c: 200, d: 250, e: ~0, f: 250, g: 400, h: 150, all km of depth

with error bars around 100 km of depth. The Earth has 0.023% water by mass, with average depth 3.7 km and planetwide average 2.6 km.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Stavros Kiri
  • #65
How reliable is the relationship between mean density and water content? Are there alternative explanations for low densities (e.g. small metal cores)?
 
  • #66
DrStupid said:
How reliable is the relationship between mean density and water content? Are there alternative explanations for low densities (e.g. small metal cores)?
Small iron cores would work, yes. In fact, that likely explains the densities of Mars and the Moon -- they are less dense than what one would expect from the Earth's composition.

So in the case of as much rock as possible, only three of the moons would have sizable oceans -- b: 250, d: 150, g: 250 km depth.
 
  • #67
lpetrich said:
[1802.01377] The nature of the TRAPPIST-1 exoplanets -- the most recent paper on them at arxiv.

Not So Strange New Worlds - NASA Spitzer Space Telescope, Imagining the Planets of TRAPPIST-1 - NASA Spitzer Space Telescope

These planets likely have a few percent of water by mass, and this translates into something like

b: 400, c: 200, d: 250, e: ~0, f: 250, g: 400, h: 150, all km of depth

with error bars around 100 km of depth. The Earth has 0.023% water by mass, with average depth 3.7 km and planetwide average 2.6 km.
Planets b, c, and possibly d are all in runaway greenhouse state, so their low densities are likely the result of massive and thick steam atmospheres not a layer of ocean or ice. Little water building up bars of water vapor envelope can already explain the radius and masses of the inner three planets without involving large quantity of water in the condensed form.
 
  • #68
There's a little something called Scale height - Wikipedia:

H = \frac{kT}{mg}

For our planet's atmosphere at the surface and 290 K, it is 8.5 km.

At 1000 K and 1 Earth gravity, the scale height is 47 km -- not much compared to the sizes of these planets.

Hydrogen has a much larger scale height, about 420 km.

Hubble delivers first insight into atmospheres of potentially habitable planets orbiting TRAPPIST-1 | ESA/Hubble planets d, e, and f likely do not have a lot of hydrogen in their atmospheres, or else that telescope would have observed different effective sizes at different wavelengths.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
Replies
28
Views
28K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
12K