Swinburne Astronomy Online

Project Cover Sheet

Student
Name

Phil McBean

SAO Unit

AST80001

Student ID

7168829

Project
Supervisor

Dr Emma Ryan Webber

Search for Other Worlds

Project Title

Project ID

P021

Total page
count

14

Number of
pages of text

12
Please complete all fields in the table

SAO Project Reports are required to consist of no more than 14 single-spaced A4

(US standard letter sized) pages written in 12-point font. Side, top and bottom
margins should be no less than 2 cm. Your reference list is not part of the 14-page
limit. All Project Reports are required to contain between 10-12 pages of text (the
actual number used is to be indicated on this Cover Sheet). All tables, diagrams,
images, figure captions and concise observing logs are included in the 14-page
limit.
Appendices or other supporting material that take your page count beyond 14
pages should only be used if they are directly related to the project, and their
inclusion needs to be discussed with and approved by your project supervisor well
in advance of submitting your project.
Student Declaration:

All of the work contained in this Project is my own original work, unless
otherwise clearly stated and referenced.
I have read and understood the SAO Plagiarism Page What is Plagiarism and How to
Avoid It at http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/sao/students/plagiarism/
Signed

Name:

phil mcbean

Please save and submit this document directly to your Project Supervisor using the
following file-naming convention, where nnn is the project ID, XX is the Unit
number and YName is your name:
PnnnCover_AST800XX_YName.doc (or .docx or .pdf are acceptable)
E.g. P021Cover_AST80002_JSmith.doc
Alternatively, you can include this document as the first page of your Project
Report.

Search for Other Worlds

Introduction
A burgeoning field that has captured the imagination of the broader scientific
community, and increasingly the general public, is the search for extra solar
planets (exoplanets). Not only do these discoveries enhance our understanding of
solar system dynamics, including our own, but they aid in our understanding of
other far reaching questions, particularly the conditions that may give rise to life.
We now realise that the formation of planets around stars is often an integral
component of stellar formation and perhaps the norm rather than the exception.
However, it remains to be seen whether the existence of life elsewhere is typical or
exceptional. To date, some 1832 planets and 461 multiple planet systems have
been confirmed (exoplanet.eu-web). In addition, Exoplanet.org-web indicates that
over 3000 unconfirmed Kelper candidates have been identified. The following
table is constructed from the exoplanet.eu-web database.
Table 1
Confirmed by
Detection Method
Radial Velocity
Transits-including TTV
Microlensing
Timing
Imaging
Total

Number of Planets
579
1154
32
16
51
1832

Multiple Planet
Systems
102
352
2
3
2
461

This paper briefly discusses the prime observational techniques and our increasing
understanding of the properties of planetary systems.

1-Indirect Methods Gravitational/Brightness Techniques

1.1- The Nature of Orbits
Radial velocity (RV) timing, and astrometry observations involve orbital mechanics.
Orbital systems revolve around a common barycentre determined by the inverse
square law of gravity as described by Newtons 2 body law (Murray & Correia
2010). The motions of astronomical bodies in terms of their mutual gravitational
attraction and the impact of the inverse square law and can be described as:
F=Gm1m2/r2; Where: F= force, G=Gravitational constant, m1m2 = the two masses,
r=the distance separation of m1m2 (Carroll & Ostlie 2007). The higher the mass (or
the closer its distance) of a planet relative to its star, the greater its RV motion. In
this respect, a major observational challenge is to find the position and velocity of
an orbiting planet. Given that most targeted stars are far away, directly measuring
2

their physical and orbital characteristics is limited. For example, where the angle of
inclination is not determinable under say the RV method, then only the lower limit
mass is measurable (Yaqoob 2011). That is, RVs are not accurate where the
observed motion is oblique in respect to the line of sight of the observer.

1.2-Radial Velocity (RV) Method

Measurement Technique- RV Doppler Shift
Perryman (2014) indicates that this technique has been one of the most successful
to date. It involves the line of sight observation of variations in the Doppler shifts
of light curves (LC) due to the gravity driven orbital motions of a host star and
around its barycentre. When a star moves around its barycentre, its light will be
blue shifted as it moves towards the observer and red shifted as it recedes.
Spectroscopy study of Doppler shift RVs may therefore indicate the presence of an
exoplanet (Perryman 2014). The periodic LC shifts represent orbital periods from
which the orbital radius can be determined. For example, App 1-illus 1 records
signal details of the RV variations and the orbital period of the LC of 51 Pegasi in its
interaction with orbiting Jupiter-mass planet (Fischer et al. 2013).
The mass and distance of a targeted host star must often be calculated first to
allow for certain measurements of the exoplanet. Once a host star distance is
known, its mass can be determined using the mass-luminosity relationship of stars.
Knowing the mass of a star, the amount of RV and its orbital radius allows for the
lower limit mass of the planet to be measured (Fischer et al. 2013).
Measurement and Instrumentation Accuracies
This method is best for detecting large planets that orbit close to their stars due to
the larger gravitational influences (Fischer et al. 2013). The line of sight Doppler
shifts will also be determined by the orbital inclination of the systems and
therefore measurements may only represent apparent RV which may differ to the
true RV. This limitation may result in inaccuracies in measured orbital
periods/diameter/eccentricity and mass (Lovis & Fischer 2010). Other factors
impacting on the observed spectrum include the target stars relative recession to
that of the observers own RV. LC atmospheric refraction and instrumentation
restrictions may also be limiting (Perryman 2014). Line shifts due to gravitational
redshift and stellar surface effects (e.g. convection, pulsations, etc) also require
correction (Perryman 2014).
According to Lovis & Fischer (2010), stars emit most of their energies in the UV and
mid IR ranges which are not accessible to ground based observatories due to
photosphere ionisation. Hence, observation of Doppler effects have traditionally
focussed on visible and near IR bands. Current RV focuses are on M-dwarf stars as
their reflex stellar velocities are about three times greater than for solar mass stars
(Lovis & Fischer 2010). Fischer et al. (2013) also estimate that a higher proportion
of lower mass Earth sized planets in habitable zones are expected to be around Mdwarf stars. However, given their lower luminosity, IR observations may still be
advantageous (Lovis & Fischer 2010).
Lovis & Fischer (2010) indicate that in the 1970s, iodine gas cells, through which
the light passed just above the focus of a telescope, were used to imprint iodine
absorption lines into the stellar spectrum. This allowed for an accurate grid
reference against which stellar shifts could be measured. This approach allowed for
a large number of absorption lines, but reduced flux by 20-30%. To improve
calibration to lower frequencies and flux levels, alternative gases such as thorium
argon have been used. Fischer et al. (2013) however suggest that this gas is
3

unsuitable for observation in the near IR range. The gas cell process is now
standard in many exoplanet searching telescopes (Lovis & Fischer 2010).
Prior to the 1990s, detection was generally limited to around 13 m s -1 but
improved to around 3 m s -1 by the end of the 1990s (Fischer et al. 2013). Hence,
detection of Earth sized planets was challenging, e.g. the Earth/ Sun deviation is
only about 0.1 m s -1. Pepe & Lovis (2008) indicate that subsequent
instrumentation standards have improved RV resolution to around 0.3-0.5 m s-1.
Better detection has also been achieved through more precise slit illumination,
CCD technologies and simulated reference techniques that adjust for
environmental influences (Lovis & Fischer 2010). They also indicate that expansion
of space observations has allowed for higher energy detection by obviating
atmospheric constraints, (e.g. Keppler, ESPRESSO, HARPS (2), CODEX, and Lick
Observatory (APF). The use of adaptive optics and interferometry has also been
instrumental in improving Doppler sensitivity (Perryman 2014).
Results and Future detection
Lovis & Fischer (2010), indicate that star 51 Pegasi was the host for the first
exoplanet orbiting a solar type star and the first hot Jupiter. This hot Jupiter
planet has a fast orbit around a close barycentre and raises questions of planetary
migration and solar system evolution. E.g., highly elliptical large planets may cast
out smaller terrestrial planets (Lovis & Fischer 2010).
Around the first 100 exoplanets were discovered using the RV method (Perryman
2014). This has grown substantially as a result of increased surveys, improved
accuracies and longer observational baselines. Longer baseline observations allow
for the capture of planets with longer periods. Reference to exoplanet.org-Web
indicates that the lower mass discoveries have increased substantially since the
year 2000. Perryman (2014) suggests that this reflects improved instrumentation,
higher sampling, and more precise wave calibration and should allow for amplitude
detection at close to 0.1 m s -1. Fischer et al. (2013) indicate that of more recent
times, direct spectroscopic detection of the orbit of non-transiting planets has been
somewhat successful. The traditional RV technique relies on the determination of
the stars RV only, whereas the direct spectroscopic detection technique relies on
observing the star-planet system in the near IR and to spectroscopically measure
the RV of both the star and the planet. This yields the mass ratio of the star-planet
system and can provide information about mass and planetary atmospheres that
would be difficult to determine otherwise.
1.3- ASTROMETRIC DISPLACEMENT (AD) Method
Technique
This method involves across the line of sight tracking of a stars apparent
transverse velocity using reference star parallaxes to isolate barycentre orbital
deviations (Quirrenbach 2010). The extent of the transverse motion in respect to
velocity and period can be used to determine mass, orbital period and radius.
According to Perryman (2014), one of the benefits of AD is the ability to measure
orbital inclinations for planets in multiple systems.
As the objective is to separate extremely small orbital deviations from proper
motion, expensive long baseline observations are usually required (Perryman
2014). This method, in isolation, has not had any confirmed prime detections. It
has, however, confirmed 2-3 observations that were detected by other means.
Because of the very narrow angular resolution restrictions and atmospheric
disturbances for ground based scopes, this method restricts observations to closer
4

target stars and is not, in isolation, considered a prime detection method.

However, interferometric astrometry has improved the angular resolution, and the
use of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) and Hipparcos, when it was in operation,
reduced atmospheric limitations. HST was instrumental in making the first secure
astronomic detection of an exoplanet being GI 876b (Quirrenbach 2010). New
CCD technologies could achieve microarcsecond observations, with future space
interferometers pushing this into the sub-microarcsecond resolution. Quirrenbach
(2010) suggests this method allows for:

Inclination to be derived and hence better mass determination.

Measurements not being influenced by spectral type or stellar orbital velocities.
Detection of planets around pre-main sequence stars that can provide data on
formation/migration.
Detection of multiple planets in a system where masses decrease from the
centre out.
In combination with RV, AD can enhance planetary masses.

Measurement and instrumentation Accuracies

Ground
Perryman (2014) suggests that positional error from photon noise resulting from
atmospheric and refraction influences is a somewhat limiting feature of ground
based telescopes. This is particularly the case when considering the narrow
angular resolutions under this method. However, the development of adaptive
optics has assisted in reducing these inaccuracies. Perryman (2014) further
indicates that inaccuracies can arise from other influences such as: light deflected
by the Sun, aberrations due to observers radial motion, changes in the sources
proper motion, and surface structure jitter resulting from star spots, granulations,
etc. The increasing use of interferometry methods is expected to improve
resolution accuracies even further. Interferometry involves the use of a number of
telescopes at the one time to simulate the results of a large telescope.
Interferometers at Keck I, and VLTI hold better prospects for future ground based
observations using the combined RV and AD methods. For example, when
operational, ESAs VLTI-PRIMA will have four fixed telescopes providing a baseline
of 200 metres with sensitivities in the milli-arcsec range (ESA-web).
Space
Hipparcos and HST observations were the leading space based platforms for
recording gravitational motions, but did not have the required resolution capacities
for distant AD determination (Perryman 2014). In this respect, the recently
launched Gaia mission is expected to make considerable advances in exoplanet
and other observational objectives. NASAs proposed Sim mission has been
cancelled/deferred. Other initiatives, such as Japans JASMINE mission, remain
under development.

Future expectations

According to ESA web, one of Gaias objectives is to record AD and RV

measurements with the accuracy needed to produce a census of about one billion
stars. Gaia is expected to indentify Jupiter-sized planets with an orbital period of
1.5 - 9 years at a distance of approximately 150 lys, and to detect some 10 000 50 000 planets.

1.4-Photometry and Transit Method

The transit method provides certain benefits over that of the RV method and has
dominated detection success over the mid 2000s and subsequently (Fischer et al.
2013). Transit photometry allows for the analysis of not only a host star but also
any transiting exoplanets. Eclipse details allow for the determination of a planets:
radius and mass (hence density), temperature, atmospheric composition, orbital
and rotational characteristics (Winn 2010). A significant limitation is that
observations are restricted to angles that are edge on between the observer and
the transiting planet. Transit observations are now one of the more successful
methods of detection, particularly with the introduction of the Kepler mission.
Launched in 2009 and concentrating on a field of some 105 stars for some 4 years,
Keplers focus, until recently, was on terrestrial planets, especially those Earth
sized planets in habitable zones (Winn 2010). Much of the Kepler data is still to
be analysed and when subjected to other methods of follow-up, should provide a
wealth of information on planetary formation conditions. Fischer et al. (2013)
indicate, however, that a significant proportion of the Kepler candidates lie out of
reach of current Doppler capabilities.
Technique
This method relies on photometric analysis of flux variations in the light curves
(LC) of a star as a result of a planet passing in front of, or behind it. The effect of
the flux variation is small, with drops in magnitude for a Jupiter sized planet of
approximately only 0.01% (Winn 2010). For an Earth sized planet the variation
could be as small as 8.4x10-5 (Perryman 2014).The size of the host star and the
planet will determine the decrease in flux during the transit. However, confirmation
from other observational methods is recommended as dips in flux can also arise
from events such as binary eclipses resulting in false positives (Australian Science
- web). App 1-Illus 2 is an example of transit LC variations. Although not illustrated,
there is also a smaller drop in flux when the planet disappears behind the star. This
happens because star light is reflected off the planet and its own thermal light
adds to the total radiation flux. Accordingly, when the planet becomes obscurred
by the star, the total flux a reduces. Perryman (2014) indicates that combined
transit and RV observations, allow for determination of :

Radius, period and eccentricity --- which provides insight into: tidal interactions,
the planets stellar luminosity impact, and mean density surface gravity. The
latter is important in determining physical characteristics determined by the
presence of an atmosphere.
The radius of the planet ---which is based upon the magnitude of the flux drop.
Transit latitude, orbit radius (assuming circular orbit -Keplers 3rd law) and
period (transit time intervals). Observations can also indicate the distance of
the planet from its host star and its orbital velocity and inclination. When used
with RV data, luminosity and spectral type can assist in a more accurate lower
mass limit determination.

Atmosphere properties---Light passing through an atmosphere, either reflected

or thermal, provides spectroscopic information on atmospheric elements, and
surface conditions, etc.
Spin axis- As a planet transits it initially blocks out more of the stars
rotational blueshift and then its redshift . This changes RV profiles which require
correction, but provides stellar spin axis orientation relative to the planets
orbit axis. This is called the Rossiter McLaughlan (RM) effect, see App 1-illus 4
& 5 (Gaudi & Winn, 2010). This effect has also been used to determine orbital
direction, such as retrograde motions of planets (Yaqoob 2011).

Observations
Perryman (2014) indicates that we do not necessarily know which stars are likely
to have exoplanets. Accordingly, searches have tended to concentrate on a wide
field of stars over extended periods. However, Brown (2003) indicates that this
approach results in stringent restrictions, not only in telescope time but in the
need for scopes with high photometric precision and sensitivities that are also
capable of handing a large number of false positives.
Ground Based Observations
One advantage of ground scopes is that they can be smaller and cover a wide
field. Some major surveys are:

HAT - Six automated northern hemisphere scopes operating from the Whipple
Observatory (Bokos et al. 2002). Number of confirmed discoveries = 50
(exoplanet.eu web).
OGLE - 1.3m scope at Las Campanas. Number of confirmed discoveries = 36
(exoplanet.eu web)
MACHO Project. Number of confirmed discoveries = 11 (exoplanet.eu web).
TrES - Transalantic survey using three small aperture scopes situated in Canary
Islands, Arizona and Mount Palomar California. Number of confirmed
discoveries = 5 (exoplanet.eu web).
WASP - Two wide field camera arrays in La Palma, Canary Islands and
Sutherland, South Africa. Number of confirmed discoveries = 100 (exoplanet.eu
web).

Other ground based telescopes have just recently been commissioned or are under
development, for example, Skymapper out of Siding Springs (Bayliss & Sackett
2007). Antarctic searches are also active.
Space based observations
Perryman (2014) indicates that ground based observations have photometric
accuracy limitations of about 0.01% due to atmospheric intervention. Accordingly,
observation above the atmosphere by dedicated scopes is advantageous.
Dedicated space scopes are also better equipped to discover planets with longer
periods. However, a prime limitation is their associated implementation costs.
Follow-up RV observations are also an integral component of transit observations.
Such follow-ups improve transit duration, planet size and orbital eccentricity
according to Perryman (2014). An overview of some of the major space based
scopes is as follows:

CoRoT - A European supported scope launched in 2006 to 900km with a polar

orbit that provides a view of the galactic centre and anti centre. This scope can

observe some 12,000 stars simultaneously (Auvergne et al. 2009). Number of

confirmed discoveries = 25 (exoplanet.eu web).
Kepler-Nasa satellite launched in early 2009. It covers a 115 square degree field
of view, covering wavelengths in the range 430-890 nm. Its target is 150,000
main sequence stars in the Cygnus region. This observation platform has been
highly successful with, according to Nasa-web, 989 confirmed planets, 4234
candidates and 2165 eclipsing binaries. Although it is now operationally
compromised, it still managed some further planet identification in 2014.
Hubble and Spritzer have provided valuable follow-up analysis of LC and
planetary spectra. HSTs SWEEPS camera concentrates on 180,000 stars in the
galactic centre (Perryman, 2014).
Successful earlier platforms included Hipparcos, MOST, EPOXI. Perryman (2014)
indicates developing platforms will either be devoted to increased efficiency,
whereas others will have exoplanet observations running alongside other
missions. Some will be devoted to follow-up observations.
Examples of developing platforms are:
o PLATO - A proposed ESA transit program is now not expected to be
operational before 2018.
o TESS - A NASA program for the survey of some 2 million stars. In part, its
mission is to be a rapid mission to provide intended targets for the James
Web scope (JWST) (Deming et al., 2009). JWST is a major NASA/ESA venture
expected to be launched in 2018. It has a 6m primary mirror and expected to
provide high signal to noise light curves for 1 Earth mass planets (Perryman,
2014).
o SPICA - A Japanese mission comprised of a 3.5m mirror with a launch date of
2007.

Results-Properties of Transiting Planets

Perryman (2014) indicates that the discoveries to date suggest most transiting
planets orbit Sun mass stars. A limiting observational factor which may skew these
findings is that stars earlier than F had broadened spectral lines and stellar noise
making RV follow-up inherently difficult , and stars later than K are too dim for
wide field surveys (Perryman 2014). Mass ranges of the planets are broad and
range from 4.8Me to 10 Mj; orbital periods are frequently below 10 days (Perryman
2014). Orbital inclinations do vary but Perryman (2014) indicates that a significant
proportion were close to 90 degrees of the line of sight.
Using Kepler data, Buchhave et al. (2012), indicate that planets with radii smaller
than Neptune were found around stars with metallicities in the range 0.6 < [m/H]
< +0.5. Whereas larger planets were found mostly around stars with metallicity at
solar metallicity and above. The Kepler data suggested that small planets
occurred about three times as frequently as large planets around stars of
metallicity greater than that of the Sun, but they occurred around six times as
frequently for stars of metallicity less than that of the Sun(Buchhave et al. 2012).
They further suggest that the lack of gas giants around low-metallicity stars
possibly relates to the level of proto-planetary disks metallicity at the time planets
were being formed.
1.5 -Timing Method
Perryman (2014) describes periodic timing variations relating to stars or other
planets orbiting them. These are detailed as follows:

Pulsar timing- This technique observes timing changes in the usually very stable
emissions of millisecond pulsars and is so sensitive that it is capable of detecting
planets far smaller than any other method. Timing variations are due to orbital
variations around the centre of mass in the presence of an accompanying planet
(Perryma 2014). The method detected the first two bona Fide exoplanets
involving PSR-1257+12 which were dubbed dead worlds as they were subjected
to the pulsars deadly radiation (Wolszczan & Kuchner 2010). Accordingly, main
sequence stars are now preferred observational candidates. Nevertheless, because
of this methods ability to detect very low mass companions, observation still
continues. The observed line of sight pulses are Doppler corrected for the Earths
spin. The analysed pulsar variations need to be distinguished from potential
variations caused by the gradual loss of rotational energy which may impact on
rotational stability, particularly for older pulsars (Wolszczan and Kuchner 2010).
There are two prime limitations of the pulsar-timing method: Pulsars are relatively
rare given the mass evolution requirements for their creation, and life as we know
it would be doubtful on planets orbiting pulsars due to the intense high-energy
radiation (Wolszczan & Kuchner 2010).
Variable star timing- Due to their regularity, photometric observation of the
stellar pulsations may determine RV s resulting from orbiting planets. This method
is not as accurate as pulsar timing however in 2007, V391 Pegasi b, was
discovered around a pulsating subdwarf star (Perryman 2014).
Transit Timing Variation (TTV) and Duration Timing Variation (TDV).
Perryman (2014) suggests this method analyses whether transits occur with strict
periodicity. It is often a useful technique when multiple transiting planets are
detected. This method can be useful when distances are beyond the scope of RV
methods. Variations in transit timing are extremely sensitive and can detect
additional non-transiting planets in a system. Perryman (2014) also indicates that
the Kepler satellite detected the transiting planet Kepler-19b and the presence of a
second planet, Kepler-19c using TTV. TTVs main limitation is that it does not
provide much planetary information.
Eclipsing Binary Minima Timing. In an eclipsing binary star system, the time of
light variation between primary and secondary eclipses can be recorded. Variations
in these eclipsing times may be as a result of the presence of an orbiting planet.
With this method, massive planets are more easily detectable or if they orbit
relatively closely around the system and the stars are less massive. In 2011,
Kepler-16b became the first planet detected via this method.

1.6-Gravitational Microlensing (GL) Method

Technique
Under general relativity, Einstein considered that the local curvature of spacetime
around astronomical masses could gravitationally lens (GL) photons at certain
angles (Ryden 2003). According to Gaudi (2010) where a star, close to our line of
sight, passes between that of a more distant source star, the foreground star
gravitationally lenses the light. This magnifies/brightens the source stars light with
the degree of magnification being based on the degree of angular separation
between the two stars, see App 1-Illus 3. The lensing applies to the full EMR
spectrum and is called micro-lensing.

Different circumstances dictate strong, weak or micro-lensing outcomes depending

on the positions of the source, lens and observer, and the mass and shape of the
lens. Gaudi (2010) suggests that if the lensing star hosts a planet orbiting near the
images, its orbit will perturb the LC by also acting as a lens but one that varies
with the orbit. The duration of the perturbations indicate mass ratio, period, and
orbital radii. The radius of an arclet in radians can be used to derive lensing mass
(Gaudi 2010).
Observation
Perryman (2014) indicates that a wide angle survey telescope looks for
microlensing events. Once identified, an array of narrow angle smaller scopes
concentrate on the identified event with high precision photometry and a much
denser time coverage. Early detection is the key given the potentially limited time
that the source and lensing masses may be aligned. For example, MOA
(Microlensing Observations in Astrophysics) is a 2m telescope on Mt John, (NZ)
which covers 20 square degrees a number of times per night (Perryman 2014). In
the event of an alert, follow-up scopes such as PLANET/RoboNet and others switch
into action.
With the advent of space based photometric and astrometric platforms previously
discussed, observation of events over larger areas and with improved accuracy
should result in enhance planetary detection. Two proposal searches such as ESAs
Euclid mission (Beaulieu et al. 2010), and WFIRST (Wide Field Infrared Survey
Telescope) will, if proceeded with, have some exoplanet focuses (Perryman 2014).
Ground based observation is also expected to be enhanced via interferometry and
improvements in adaptive optics (Perryman 2014).
Limitations and strengths
Advantages
The magnification of a light source may allow for stellar resolution that would
otherwise not be available. This allows for photometric and potentially astrometric
measurement. At the moment astrometric measurements are too small for ground
based observation, but the development of interferometry techniques, such as
VLTI-PRIMa (Launhardt et al. 2008) should enhance this possibility. GL also benefits
observations of low mass planets beyond the snow line and is good for observing
planets at large orbital radii, albeit detection to date has been limited (Gaudi
2010). A further advantage is the observed lensing of more distant systems.
Limitations
Under GL, the light emitter, lens mass and observer need to be closely aligned to
achieve accurate measurements. Planets found are usually at great distances and
the lensing events are usually short lived due to the relative proper motions of the
observer, source and lens. This often requires simultaneous monitoring of a
number of sources (Gaudi 2010). Because of its stellar density, the galactic bulge
is a prime target. However, Perryman (2014) suggests that given its high density,
separating the light source from the blended light from that direction increases
resolution difficulties (Perryman 2014). For example, the probability of detecting a
lensing event in the galactic bulge is in the order of 10 -8. This method therefore
requires a large number of stars to be observed simultaneously. Also, analysis is
required to account for false positives (Wolszczan & Kuchner, 2010).
Results and future results
The number of planets detected by this method is small. The OGLE and MOA
surveys record some 600-1000 galactic bulge microlensing events each year,
10

some of which represent very high magnification (Perryman 2014). Perryman

(2014) indicates that concentrating on these events is well suited for the detection
of multiple planets and that their high brightness allows for observation by smaller
scopes. The first microlensing planet was detected in 2003 (OGLE-2003-BLG235/MOA- 2003-BLG-53Lb) and was a 2.6Mj found in follow-up mode (Fischer et
al. 2013). Many of the planets discovered via this method have large mass ratios
(to Jovian planets) and are generally hosted by M dwarfs (the most common stars
in the Galaxy) (Fischer et al. 2013). Technological advances and increased scope
time allocations will see improved results from this method.

2.0 -Direct Imaging

Technique
If we were able to adequately take a picture of a distant star, its planets and disk,
rather than indirectly, then this would add considerably to our understanding of
such systems. According to Traub & Oppenheimer (2010) this observational
technique has only gained traction since 2008 given the difficulties associated with
planet-star light contrast, diffraction and scattering. Most imaged planets are still
very hot and therefore emit higher IR compared to the visible spectra. This allows
for better imaging but images will still be faint (Perryman 2014).
The prime objective under this method is to separate the image of a star from that
of its planet(s). A direct image of a planet will be sourced from the reflected visible
light from its host star, and/or from the infrared light directly emitted by the
planet. This means that a planets brightness needs to be compared to its star to
obtain comparative spectra signatures (Traub & Oppenheimer, 2010). Perryman
(2014) indicates that for reflected light the planets/stars reflection ratio is
expected to range from 10-5 in the infrared to 10-10 at visible wavelengths.
Observation Scopes
Current generation scopes (GPI, SPHERE and P1640) can only study the largest
planets around young stars. In this respect the extension of adaptive optics into
the infrared have been advantageous but come with their own engineering
challenges (Perryman 2014). Fischer et al. (2013) suggest that the use of
interferometry and coronagraphs have also aided in direct imaging outcomes.
Coronagraphs are designed to block out the direct light from a host star so as to
allow for nearby objects to be better resolved. With the expected introduction of
space based scopes using coronagraphs, significant progress will be seen in direct
imaging. Perryman (2014) indicates that in respect to interferometry techniques,
ground based systems such as VLT-I, Keck-I and LBT-are in development.
According to Perryman (2014), direct imaging of exo-Earths by scopes under
development will still remain beyond their capabilities. Accordingly, observational
concentrations will be on: younger stars at less than 100pc whose planets are
warmer, and stars with known planets. Fischer et al. (2013) indicate that imaging
of an Earth planet orbiting a solar-type star will require a dedicated space
telescope. This will need to incorporate advanced coronagraph and adaptive optic
capabilities. At this stage space based observation remains limited with HST and
Spritzer sharing observation over a range of missions. These scopes have limited
advanced direct imaging capabilities. The JWST is expected to improve on space
based direct imaging capabilities but this will also will be limited (Perryman 2014).
At this point, future development of dedicated space based systems appears
limited primarily due to budget constraints.
11

Traub & Oppenheimer (2010) indicate that a related development in imaging

relates to polarimetry. Light reflected off a planet tends to polarise wave
oscillations. The polarisation signal will vary with the planets orbit as the
scattering angle changes. Detection equipment is being developed along these
lines by Planetpol University of Hertfordshire Astrophysics Group (planetpol-web).
Advantages and limitations
According to Perryman (2014) this observational method is limited by the often
vast distances and the close separation of planets around their host stars.
Accordingly, observable planets are anticipated to be in the solar neighbourhood
and must be sufficiently bright. This method is used in conjunction with other
indirect methods so as to enhance spectroscopic outcomes (Perryman 2014). Traub
& Oppenheimer (2010) indicate that a series of timed images would allow for
orbits to be calculated. In addition, planetary and disk characteristics such as: size,
temperature, clouds, atmospheric gases, surface properties, rotation rate, etc, can
be measured. They further indicate that conditions conducive to the potential for
life may be mapped when planetary photometry, colours, and spectra are
observed. Therefore, the techniques advantages are significant.
However, at large distances planet/ host star separation can be typically within
0.1- 0.5 arcsec. This means for ground based observations, which are subject to
atmospheric turbulence; exoplanets are immersed within its host stars glare
(Perryman, 2014). The use of active and adaptive optics, and observation from
space, has improved equipment scattering and aberration interference.
Exoplanets low luminosity relative to their host star adds significantly to imaging
limitations. According to Traub & Oppenheimer (2010), in order for this
observational method to gain momentum, new methods of imaging exoplanets are
required to suppress the stars image and diffraction pattern.
Future Developments.
To date the number of directly imaged planets is limited, but growing. As indicated
above, improved imaging techniques will see successes grow. However, in the
interim, improvements will be driven by ground based scopes. The ability for
enhanced information via this method is offset by the considerable technical
challenges confronting planetary resolution at vast distances (Fischer et al., 2013).

1.8 -Properties of Exoplanets, Host Stars and Planetary

Formation
Exoplanet observations probe the diversity of planet formation and evolution,
including frequency, mass, sizes, orbital, atmospheric and host star properties.
Some of the findings are as follows:
Abundances-Small Close Planets
Early observations indicate that planets between the sizes of Earth and Neptune
outnumber Jupiter-sized planets in close orbits (Fischer et al. 2013). Howard (2013)
is of the view that exoplanet data supports the core accretion model with one or
more planets approximately one to three times Earths size orbiting within a
fraction of the Earth-Sun distance. However, it appears that many planetary
systems are dissimilar to our own revealing: small star-planet-separations, higher
planetary temperatures as a result of solar proximity, greater inclined orbits, and
planets orbiting binary systems, and sizes and masses somewhat different to our
own (Howard 2013). However, the emerging picture is beginning to put our solar
system into context. Nevertheless, as only a tiny fraction of potential systems
12

have been surveyed, this picture may change as surveys are expanded and
observational refinement is improved. A summary of the characteristics of smaller
planets being discovered is as follows:

Howard (2013) indicates that planets between Earth and Neptune size are
common, unlike our system. The planet size and mass distributions show
clearly that these small planets outnumber large ones, at least for close-in
orbits. This is detailed in App 1, illus 6 which reveals the distributions of planets
orbiting close to G and K-type stars. For example, planets sizes < 2.8 RE or <
30 ME are found within 0.25 AU of 30-50% of Sun-like stars (Howard 2013).
The HARPS (High Accuracy Radial velocity Planet Searcher) produced similar
rising planet mass function. In addition it revealed that low-mass planets have
small orbital eccentricities (Howard 2013). The Kepler mission has confirmed
and refined the size mass distribution revealing that Earth size planets
orbiting within 0.25 AU of their host stars are just as common as planets twice
that size (Howard 2013).

Gas Giants

App 1, illus 7 attempts to consider potential links between radii, mass,

atmosphere and planet occurrence at given sizes. However, Howard (2013)
suggests that the data does not clearly demonstrate such relationships and
indicates that there are inherent observational accuracy difficulties to be
considered. Accordingly, the data graphed was restricted to approx 200
observations for which confidence levels were more acceptable. Howard (2013)
is of the view that this data does hint at some relationship between mass/radii
as planets less massive than ~30 ME vary in size by a factor of 4-5 whereas
planets larger than ~100 ME (gas giants) vary in size by a factor of ~2.
Howard (2013) considers that the size dispersion at given masses may be
accounted for by: 1.) the gas giants having more massive cores which results in
greater surface gravity and hence compactness and 2.) for planets closer in
orbit to their star, the increased solar flux may result in inflated radii for a given
mass. For lower and intermediate mass planets, no clear trend is evident
(Howard 2013).

Orbital separation for giant planets indicate preferences for larger than ~1 AU

and to a lesser extent near 0.05 AU, where hot Jupiters orbit only a few
stellar radii from their host stars (Fischer et al. 2013). Howard (2013) indicates
that this suggests a transition region between two categories of planets with
different migration histories. That is, the excess of planets starting at ~1 AU
may coincide with the ice line outside of which the solid mass of condensed
water may speed the formation of planet cores or act as migration trap for
planets formed farther out (Howard 2013).

13

Data suggests that metal-rich stars are more likely to host giant planets within
5 AU. Studies indicate that the probability of a star hosting a giant planet is
proportional to the square of the number of iron atoms in the star relative to
the Sun and overall stellar mass (Fischer et al. 2013). The contemporary view
by some is that this is further evidence for the core accretion model. That is,
higher proto-planetary disk densities are required from which larger gravities
will lead to runaway gas accretion prior to disk dispersal (Fischer et al. 2013).
Therefore, giant planets should be more common around massive and metalrich stars. There appears to be some observational support for this according to

Howard (2013), but seemingly only for gas giants and Neptune sized planets. In
contrast, smaller planet distributions are found around stars with a large range
of metallicity. That is, only a fraction grow to a critical size in time to become
gas giants (Howard 2013). However, at this stage many aspects of the
observed planet population remain unanswered, particularly the existence of
low-mass planets inside of 1 AU.
The Habitable Zone- the Search for Earth Sized Terrestrial Planets
Howard (2013) indicates that the detection of Earth size/mass planets, especially
in a habitable zone, remains a prime goal. In this respect some success has been
achieved in that a 1.1ME planet has been detected orbiting Centauri B. However,
with a separation of only 0.04 it fails to meet the habitable zone criterion due to
the expected level of solar heating. The orbital habitable zone is of prime
importance in the search for life. Such a planet would need to have a temperature
environment which would potentially support the existence of liquid water, one of
the essential ingredients required to support life, at least as we know it. However,
Howard (2013) is of the view that any Doppler signal from an Earth-mass planet at
1 AU is problematic for current instrumentation capabilities. In this regard Kepler
has detected a number of near Earth-sized planets. However, these planets orbit
interior to their stars habitable zones (Howard 2013). Nevertheless, Kepler planets
slightly larger than Earth but within the habitable zone have been detected
providing some measure of hope for future searches.
Howard (2013) suggests that the targeting of low-mass stars may be a shortcut in
identifying extrasolar Earths. Such planets are more detectable by the Doppler and
transit methods. Howard (2013) is of the view that around low mass stars the
habitable zones are also closer due to the reduced star brightness. Also, Kepler
searches around low-mass M dwarfs stars reveal that small planets may be more
common. Some 15% of Earth sized planets have been identified around such stars
within habitable zones (Fischer et al. 2013). Future prospects for identifying Earth
sized planets are considered to be positive as observational resolution capabilities
increase particularly with the direct imaging and microlensing techniques
discussed herein.
Atmospheres
According to Madhusudhan et al. (2014) some fifty transiting and five directly
imaged exoplanet atmospheres have been observed resulting in detection of
specific chemical signatures. Other observations include temperature gradients
and atmospheric structures. Elements and compounds such as sodium, water,
carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and methane are some examples.
Orbital Evolution
An objective of exoplanet detection is an endeavour to better understand the
nature of planetary formation and what this can tell us about our own solar system
evolution. Perryman (2014) suggests that there are two leading theories covering
planet formation. Briefly, these are: 1.) the core accretion model in which planets
grow from an accretion process within the planetary disk. This better explains the
growth of terrestrial planets. 2.) The gravitational disk instability model which
suggests that planets grow from local disk gravitational collapses. This better
explains the existence of outer disk larger planets (Perryman 2014). Each model
has something to offer and has limitations, particularly when considering time
scales for planetary growth compared to the expected life times of planetary disks
(Perryman 2014). Armitage (2004) suggests that the core instability model is
14

consistent with the composition of Saturn, Uranus & Neptune; and with the
metallicity bias of extrasolar planet hosts. However, the existence of hot
Jupiters orbiting closely to their host stars appears to be somewhat at odds with
this model. Nevertheless, it may be explained by planetary migration through
planetary interactions and radial disk turbulence (Armitage 2004). There appears
to be a range of interpretations on planetary observations and how the data may
best be explained by the formation models summarised above. In this respect,
considerably more observation is required before firmer views can be formulated
on solar system evolution models. By way of example, Armitages (2004)
interpretation of observed data suggests that:

Extrasolar planet locations appear to support a major role for migration.

Paucity of high mass planets could be due to slower accretion across gaps as
mass increases.
Giant planets at large radii are expected to form around more massive stars.
Exoplanet mass / eccentricity observations suggest a non-trivial correlation.
Although at this early stage of exoplanet discovery, there is No evidence that
most extrasolar giant planets formed via different mechanisms than in our
Solar System.

1.9 SUMMARY
Not only have we seen an explosion in exoplanet discovery over recent times, but
technological advances have seen our understanding of the properties of these
planets, and the systems in which they are formed, grow significantly. The more
traditional RV and transit methods still dominate in terms of the number of
discoveries, but these have been supplemented where practicable by other
dynamic and photometric search techniques, such as direct imagining and
gravitational lensing. Where these techniques are able to work in concert,
valuable property characteristics, including those of multiple planetary systems,
have added significantly to our understanding of solar system evolution.
Importantly, each method identifies certain physical parameters for target
stars/planets some of which are peculiar to a given technique.
Success has not only come from the expansion in different methods of
observation, but by the advancement in technologies that add to resolution gains.
For example, improved slit and ccd accuracy, active optic and Interferometry
technologies, etc have improved dramatically. These advancements are expected
to continue. Significantly, considerable recent success in transit observation was
achieved by the Kepler space mission. Although it will have a wide range of
mission objectives, the recently launched Gaia mission is expected to add valuable
exoplanet data.
Our knowledge of exoplanet and solar system properties has been expanded, but
significant gaps in planet formation and their dynamics exist. Many observations
do not appear to be in accord with the planetary characteristics and structure of
our own solar system. Perryman (2014) indicates that there are significant
variations in observed orbital properties such as eccentricity and star separation
particularly some observed hot Jupiters orbiting very close to their host star. Other
15

properties such as planets at much greater separation (100 AU+ Perryman

(2014) and planets in retrograde motion, etc, point to possible planetary migration
activities that are considered to be an integral component of solar system
evolution. Also, the question of stellar metallicitys role in planetary formation
continues to provide insight Finally, our desire to locate Earth sized planets in
habitable zones in the presence of liquid water has not yet been fruitful, but
observations continue to get closer to this objective.

References

16

Armitage, P. 2004, in AAS conference, Formation and Migration of Extrasolar

Planets, (Denver, USA)
Australian science web: Home online page,www.australianscience.com.au/science2/discovery-of-exoplanets-tbc/ (accessed 7 Oct 2014)
Auvergne, M., Bodin, P., Boisnard, L., 2009 A&A, 506, 411
Bayliss, D.D. & Sackett, P.D. 2007, the Sky Mapper Transit Survey, Transiting
Extrasolar Planets Workshop, V 366 of ASP Conf Ser, 320
Beaulieu, J.P., et al. 2010, Proceedings of a workshop held 2009 in Barcelona, Spain.
Edited by Vincent Coud du Foresto, Dawn M. Gelino, and Ignasi Ribas. San
Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific, p.266
Bokos, G.A. 2002, PASP, 114, 974
Brown, T.M., 2003, APJ, 494, 85
Buchhave, L., Bakos, G., & Hartman, J., (2012), APJ, 720, 1118
Carroll, B., & Ostlie, D., 2007, An Introduction To Modern Astrophysics (2 nd), (San
Fransisco:Pearsons)
Deming, D., Seager, S., & Winn, J., 2009, PASP, 121, 95
ESA-web: home online page,
http://www.eso.org/sci/facilities/paranal/telescopes/vlti.html (accessed 10 Oct 2014)
Exoplanet.eu-Web: Exoplanet.eu home online page, http://exoplanet.eu/catalog/?f=
%22transit%22+IN+detection (accessed 20 Oct 2014)
Exoplanet.org-web : Online home page, http://exoplanets.org (accessed 10 Oct
2014)
Fischer, D., Howard, A., Laughlin, G., Macintosh B., Mahadevan, S., Sahlmann, J.,
Jennifer, C., & Yee, J., 2013, PPVI conference Germany, Exoplanet Detection
Techniques
Gaudi, B., 2010, Exoplanets - Arizona, University of Arizona Press , ed. S. Seager
Howard , A. W., 2013, Science, 340, 572
Launhadt, R., et al. 2008, IAU Symposium, 248, 417
Lovis, C., & Fischer, D., 2010, Exoplanets, Arizona, University of Arizona Press , ed.
S. Seager
Mayor, M., & Queloz, D. 1995, Nature, 378, 355
Murray, C. & Correia, A. 2010, Exoplanets, Arizona, University of Arizona Press , ed.
S. Seager
NASA-Web Online Home Page, http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/ (accessed 13 Oct 2014)
Madhusudhan, N., Knutson, H., & Fortney, J., Barman, T. 2014, astro-ph.EP
(submitted) (arXiv:1402.1169v1)
Pepe, F., & Lovis, C., 2008, Physica Scripta, 130
Perryman, M. 2014, The Exoplanet Handbook (UK, TJ International Ltd)
Planetpol-web, online home page,
http://www.ing.iac.es/PR/wht_info/whtplanetpol.htmlplanetpol-web (accessed 28
Nov 2014)

Ryden, B. (2003), Introduction to Cosmology, San Fransisco, Addison Wesley

Traub, W., & Oppenheimer, B.R., 2010, Exoplanets, Arizona, University of Arizona
Press , ed. S. Seager
Yaqoob, T., 2011, Exoplanets and Alien Solar Systems ( Baltimore, New Earth Labs)
Wolszczan, A., & Kuchner, M., 2010, Exoplanets, Arizona, University of Arizona
Press , ed. S. Seager
Winn, J., 2010, Exoplanets, Arizona, University of Arizona Press , ed. S. Seager
Quirrenbach, A., 2010, Exoplanets-Arizona, University of Arizona Press , ed. S.
Seager

Appendix -1
Illustration 1- Fischer et al. 2013.

51 Pegasi was the first exoplanet detected and confirmed. The points on the graph indicate actual measurements taken. The
sinusoid is the characteristic shape of the radial velocity graph of a star rocking to the tug of an orbiting planet

Illustration 2http://www.as.utexas.edu/astronomy/education/fall08/scalo/secure/309l_sep23_planets

17

Illustration 3 -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rossiter%E2%80%93McLaughlin_effect

Illustration 4- http://oklo.org/tag/rossiter-mclaughlin/

Illustration 5- http://www.jpl.nasa.gov

18

Illustration 6 , Howard , A. W., 2013, Science, 340, 572

19

Illustration 7- Howard , A. W., 2013, Science, 340, 572

20

21

22