Posts are ordered from most recent to least recent.
What to Know About the Exoplanet OGLE-2012-BLG-0838Lb
17 September 2020
Authors: R. Poleski, B. S. Gaudi, Xiaojia Xie, A. Udalski, J. C. Yee, J. Skowron, M. K. Szymański, I. Soszyński, P. Pietrukowicz, S. Kozlowski, L.Wyrzykowski, K.Ulaczyk, C. Han, Subo Dong, K. M. Morzinski, J. R. Males, L. M. Close, A. Gould, R. W. Pogge, J.-P. Beaulieu, and J.-B. Marquette
First Author’s Institution: Department of Astronomy, Ohio State University, 140 W. 18th Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA
Status: Published in the Astronomical Journal of the AAS
Astronomers have recently detected a new exoplanet nearly 13,100 light-years from Earth, but how did they find it and what makes it so special? In this article, we will discuss the techniques used to discover an exoplanet, named OGLE-2012-BLG-0838Lb and what difficulties astronomers faced.
Methods of Detecting Exoplanets:
Because exoplanets are extremely diverse in appearance, temperature, location, and orbital pattern, several different detection techniques can be used to identify them, yet each of them has their own abilities and limitations. The transit photometry method is the most commonly-used way to do this, but is most effective when looking for Kepler exoplanets, which have shorter orbital periods than both gas and ice giants in the Solar System. When looking for smaller planets with wider orbits, the radial-velocity, direct imaging, and microlensing techniques are used, since they are best at detecting these “hot Jupiters”— Jupiter-sized exoplanets with orbital periods less than 10 days. This is because the planets are further away and can be disentangled from the light of the parent star. Also, massive planets cause the parent star to ‘wobble’ more as the center of gravity of the two bodies moves away from the center of the star. Direct imaging is best for detecting planets that are self-luminous, but is not sensitive enough to recognize planets similar in mass to Neptune, approximately 17.15 M⊕.
The technique used to discover OGLE-2012-BLG-0838L is known as microlensing and is successful at uncovering planets kiloparsecs away from us and around low-mass stars. Microlensing is sensitive enough to detect exoplanets that are 1000 times less massive than their parent star and of masses similar to that of Neptune, unlike direct imaging and the previously mentioned techniques.
The Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment (OGLE) aided in the discovery and later observations of OGLE-2012-BLG-0838L. The 1.3-m telescope at Las Campanas Observatory detected a short-lasting anomaly before the main peak of the event, suggesting that its orbit is wide. The planetary nature of that anomaly was later suggested and so, planetary models were fitted. OGLE-2012-BLG-0838 was able to be observed by the EPOXI mission’s Deep Impact spacecraft. However, there were issues with the pictures, since many were out-of-focus, had overlapping figures if taken in the Galactic Bulge, and were donut-shaped, making them difficult to analyze. The Vista Variables in the Via Lactea (VVV Survey) was later used to observe the area around the Galactic Bulge, where the Deep Impact spacecraft could not take clear images, but the VVV survey was not completely successful either. It was able to detect OGLE-2012-BLG-0838, but did not record much useful data.
Shortly after this, the Microlensing Follow Up Network (μFUN) began observing the exoplanet using its ANDICAM dual-beam optical-IR camera at the Cerro Tololo InterAmerican Observatory. Because the observations were completed before the main peak of the anomaly, astronomers were able to see a range of magnifications and get a more accurate measurement for its source flux.
Figure 1. Light curve of OGLE-2012-BLG-0838 and the best-fitting model. The inset zooms-in on the anomaly. OGLE I band data are shown. (Source: Figure 1 from today’s paper)
Models for Microlensing:
By analyzing the light curve above, astronomers were able to see that the anomaly was short and high-amplitude, as evidenced by the height of the curve, but does not have a well determined shape. When an event looks this way, it is either produced by a binary source and a single lens or a single source and a binary lens, and this binary lens can either have a projected separation that is larger or smaller than one. In the case of OGLE-2012-BLG-083, its binary lens has a separation of more than 1, meaning that the graph above is a wide model.
The authors then applied a fitting to the observations allowing them to derive the brightness of the source. Because of deviations in the light curve, astronomers used the lens orbital motion, which determines whether the source motion is linear or not, were used to determine more about the event and its wide binary lens-model. From this, astronomers were able to fit the model.
In conclusion, the discovery and study of OGLE-2012-BLG-0838Lb is particularly fascinating because of the difficulties that astronomers faced. Although pictures of its anomaly were difficult to analyze and initially, not much useful data was recorded, astronomers were still able to learn a bit about the exoplanet.
~ USAAAO Publicity Team (Charly Castillo)
Our Sun: The Culprit of Widespread Power Outages
A Culmination of Research
4 September 2020
If you’ve been through a storm, you may have gotten your power knocked out at one point or another. However, how often have you seen total power failure for a major part of a continent? Maybe once in a lifetime, such as the 1989 Quebec power outage.
The culprit of many of these widespread electricity flaws is none other than the same thing that allows life to thrive on Earth — the sun.
The sun is capable of putting out huge ejections of plasma into space, and some of these streams incidentally are detected on Earth. These ejections are called Coronal Mass Ejections, (CMEs), and can have devastating effects on the planet if the conditions are just right.
This type of solar activity was first noticed in 1859 and labeled as a flare related to the geomagnetic disturbances on Earth (Carrington, 1859). The storm had overridden some of the lines in the U. S. telegraph network, and this was the most probable reason why it was noticed. The first clear detection of a CME itself was taken in December of 1971 by Richard Tousey.
In order to understand the mechanics of a CME, we must understand the events happening at the sun. When the magnetic fields on the sun are closed, segments of the outer corona are ejected out into interplanetary space. The closed magnetic fields help the ejections keep their shape and intensity by herding them into a powerful stream that escapes the sun, known as CMEs.
Like anything from the sun, a CME takes time to reach Earth due to the vast distance (93 million miles) between the Earth and the Sun. The amount of time varies with some CMEs taking weeks to reach Earth while others less than a day, according to the SOHO LASCO CME CATALOG (Yashiro et al 2004).
The Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) studies solar particles and detects a wide range of elements in a CME. Scientists use this device’s data to analyze CMEs and their structure in the data before they reach Earth. Using a particular data value from ACE, the Bz (from ACE Real-Time Solar Wind Data), astronomers have found a distinction to CMEs that are detected. In the beginning, before a CME hits, the data will show a “sheath region”, in which the Bz values will furiously toggle between negative and positive values. Then, when the actual CME hits, the Bz will stabilize in either a positive region or a negative value.
This distinction between the positive and negative values of the Bz is the most important to determining if a geomagnetic storm would’ve hit. If the Bz has a positive value, the CME will not do much. On the other hand, if the Bz has a negative value, then the CME will reconnect with the Earth’s magnetic field and have the potential to cause a geomagnetic storm (Gonzalez & Tsurutani, 1987). This is evidenced by the Bz’s close relation to the DST index (Burton et al 1975), with the DST measuring the disturbance of the magnetic field in the Earth’s atmosphere. Usually, as the Bz starts becoming more and more negative, the DST index will follow suit because of the disturbances in the atmosphere (Burton et al 1975).
In order to obtain more information about the CME, scientists study images (such as H-alpha) and simulations (such as those of JHelioviewer) of the sun to detect magnetic fields and solar filaments on its surface and how they may contribute to the negative-positive Bz orientation of the CME. Solar filaments can have chirality, or north-south orientations, distinguished by their placement in the magnetic fields on the surface of the sun (Martin, 1998). Many studies have indicated that the north-south orientation of a solar filament has a strong correlation with the negative-positive orientation of the Bz for a CME (Yurchyshyn 2001), (Palmerio et al 2018). More research is going on to further solidify this claim.
As such, it is very important to study solar weather not just to advance our scientific knowledge about stars and the sun, but also to detect harmful CMEs from the sun and to potentially avert disaster.
~ USAAAO Publicity Team (Kashvi Mundra)
Carrington, R.C., 1859. Description of a Singular Appearance seen in the Sun
on September 1, 1859. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Tousey, R., Brueckner, G. E., Koomen, M. J., & Michels, D. J. 1972, Naval Research
Reviews, 25, 8
Stenzel, R.L. & Gekelman, W. (1981). Magnetic field line
reconnection experiments. 1. Field topologies, J. Geophys.
Res. 86, 649-58.
ACE Mission. (1998). Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE). http://www.srl.caltech.edu/ACE/ace_mission.html
Burton, R. K., R. L. McPherron, and C. T. Russell.: 1975, J. Geophys. Res., 80, 4204.
Martin, S. F. (1998). Filament Chirality: A Link Between Fine-Scale and Global Patterns (Review). In D. F. Webb, B. Schmieder, & D. M. Rust (Eds.), Iau colloq. 167: New perspectives on solar prominences (Vols. ASP Conf. Ser., 150, p. 419).
Yurchyshyn, V. B., Wang, H., Goode, P. R., & Deng, Y.
2001, ApJ, 563, 381
Palmerio, E., Kilpua, E. K. J., Mostl, C., Bothmer, V., James, A. W., Green, L. M., . . .
Harrison, R. A. (2018). Coronal Magnetic Structure of Earthbound CMEs and In Situ
Comparison. Space Weather , 16 , 442-460. doi: 10.1002/2017SW001767
Gonzalez, W. D., & Tsurutani, B. T. 1987, Planetary and
Space Science, 35, 1101 ,
Yashiro, S., Gopalswamy, N., Michalek, G., St. Cyr, O.C., Plunkett, S.P., Rich, N.B., Howard, R.A., 2004. A catalog of white light coronal mass ejections observed by the SOHO spacecraft. J. of Geophys. Res. 109, A07105.