4.6 Article

TESS Hunt for Young and Maturing Exoplanets (THYME). II. A 17 Myr Old Transiting Hot Jupiter in the Sco-Cen Association

期刊

ASTRONOMICAL JOURNAL
卷 160, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab94b7

关键词

-

资金

  1. Heising-Simons Foundation
  2. NASA through the Sagan Fellowship Program
  3. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program [DGE-1650116]
  4. TESS Guest Investigator program [80NSSC18K1586]
  5. NASA's Science Mission directorate
  6. NASA
  7. Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA [NAS5-26555]
  8. European Southern Observatory under ESO program [072.D-0021(B)]
  9. NASA High-End Computing (HEC) Program through the NASA Advanced Supercomputing (NAS) Division at Ames Research Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present the discovery of a transiting hot Jupiter orbiting HIP 67522 (T-eff similar to 5650 K; M-* similar to 1.2M(circle dot)) in the 10-20 Myr old Sco-Cen OB association. We identified the transits in the TESS data using our custom notch filter planet search pipeline and characterize the system with additional photometry from Spitzer; spectroscopy from SOAR/Goodman, SALT/HRS, LCOGT/NRES, and SMARTS/CHIRON; and speckle imaging from SOAR/HRCam. We model the photometry as a periodic Gaussian process with transits to account for stellar variability and find an orbital period of 6.9596(-0.000015)(+0.000016) days and radius of 10.02(-0.53)(+0.54) R-circle dot. We also identify a single transit of an additional candidate planet with radius 8.01(-0.71)(+0.75) R-circle plus that has an orbital period of greater than or similar to 23 days. The validated planet HIP 67522b is currently the youngest transiting hot Jupiter discovered and is an ideal candidate for transmission spectroscopy and radial velocity follow-up studies, while also demonstrating that some young giant planets either form in situ at small orbital radii or else migrate promptly from formation sites farther out in the disk.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据