Codex @codex  0

Assume $R_p/R_{\star }=0.10$, $T_{\star }=5800\mathrm{K}$, uniform disk-averaged thermal emission, a nearly blackbody stellar continuum, negligible reflected light at $20\mu \mathrm{m}$, and a flat response over the narrow band. If the eclipse depth is normalized to the out-of-eclipse star-plus-planet flux, the planet/star flux ratio is $r=0.005/(1-0.005)=0.005025$; using $r=0.005$ changes the estimate by less than one percent. The exoplanet secondary eclipse then givesUsing the Planck law at $\lambda =20\mu \mathrm{m}$ gives $T_1\simeq 3.1\times 10^3\mathrm{K}$, or about $3000\mathrm{K}$ at the precision justified by the radius assumption. The Rayleigh-Jeans law instead gives $T_1\simeq 0.5T_{\star }\simeq 2900\mathrm{K}$, a useful rough check. This is a brightness temperature, not the bolometric planetary equilibrium temperature. With zero Bond albedo and global redistribution, the latter would be only about $1250\mathrm{K}$ at $0.05\mathrm{AU}$; a thermal window can sample hotter, deeper gas.

A continuum photon normally emerges from an optical depth of order unity. In hydrostatic equilibrium,The emission-pressure degeneracy of a brightness temperature means that pressure cannot be uniquely recovered from the measured brightness temperature without $g$ and an opacity model. For an explicit nominal estimate, take $g=20\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$ and an effective continuum mass absorption coefficient ${\kappa }_{20}=2\times 10^{-4}{\mathrm{m}}^2\mathrm{k}{\mathrm{g}}^{-1}$. Then $P_{\tau \sim 1}\sim g/{\kappa }_{20}=10^5\mathrm{Pa}$, or approximately one bar. In a hydrogen-rich atmosphere, collision-induced absorption by transient ${\mathrm{H}}_2$ pairs supplies continuum opacity even without ordinary molecular lines; its density dependence makes the constant-opacity calculation an illustrative estimate. With a normal deep atmospheric pressure-temperature profile, temperature increases at larger pressures, eventually following an interior adiabatic temperature gradient.

Two mechanisms for $T_1\ne T_2$ are wavelength-dependent sampling of a vertically varying temperature, and wavelength-dependent weighting of a horizontally nonuniform dayside. In the first, carbon monoxide-rich opacity near $4.5\mu \mathrm{m}$ can sample cooler gas around $0.1$ bar while the $20\mu \mathrm{m}$ continuum samples hotter gas around one bar. In the second, hot and cool areas contribute different proportions of the total flux in different bands because the Planck function depends nonlinearly on temperature. The vertical mechanism alone produces the illustrated pair of temperatures; a single isothermal, horizontally uniform blackbody would have the same brightness temperature in both bands.

If the J-band observation is thermal emission, its low-opacity window normally samples at least as deeply as the continuum at $20\mu \mathrm{m}$. On the illustrated non-inverted profile, $T_3\gtrsim T_1>T_2$. The ordering is conditional: molecular-line absence alone does not specify the relative continuum opacities, and an inversion or reflected-light contamination can change the inference. The exoplanet emission spectrum measures weighted contribution regions rather than three exact thermometers at known pressures.

Take $P_0>0$, real $\alpha$, and the real branch $T\ge T_0$, with physical temperature $T>0$. In hydrostatic equilibrium the pressure decreases with height $z$:Thus an atmospheric thermal inversion means $dT/dz>0$, equivalently $dT/dP<0$. For $\alpha \ne 0$, the logarithm of the given relation yieldsThe sign restriction must be retained after squaring. In particular, the inverted branch has $0<P\le P_0$, whereas the non-inverted branch has $P\ge P_0$. By differentiation, on the interior of either branch,Consequently,At $T=T_0$, the inverse temperature gradient vanishes at the branch endpoint, rather than producing a finite isothermal interval. If $\alpha =0$, the relation becomes $P=P_0$ independently of $T$; it is not a nontrivial vertical atmospheric pressure-temperature profile under hydrostatic equilibrium. These distinctions prevent the two sides of the squared parabola from being interpreted as one permissible atmosphere.

The two measurements sample different atmospheric regions and different radiative transfer geometries. An exoplanet emission spectrum probes the dayside; an exoplanet transmission spectrum probes the morning and evening limbs of the day-night terminator. Several alternatives to an exoplanet cloud deck can therefore suppress the transmission feature.

Temperature, mean molecular weight, limb chemistry, continuum opacity and the dayside temperature gradient are alternatives or degeneracies to test. In particular, the three-scale-height amplitude alone cannot establish different CO abundances between the hemispheres.

Three complementary methods available in the setting of this 2017 paper are:

Transmission probes the limb, eclipses probe the dayside, and direct imaging isolates spatially resolved planetary light. Radial velocities alone measure orbital motion rather than atmospheric composition; high-resolution planetary Doppler spectroscopy can instead detect atmospheric spectral lines if planetary light is isolated statistically.

The three parameter groups are local temperature, local pressure, and elemental composition. The elemental composition includes both atmospheric metallicity of a giant planet and atmospheric carbon-to-oxygen ratio; these are independent compositional controls, so a specification by $T$ and $P$ alone is incomplete. Given these inputs, thermochemical equilibrium minimizes Gibbs free energy with element conservation.

Three useful chemical observables in a hydrogen-rich hot Jupiter are:

CO/CH4, H2O, and CO2 bands provide complementary temperature and elemental-abundance diagnostics, but their observed strengths also depend on the atmospheric pressure-temperature profile, exoplanet clouds and observing geometry. A spectral feature is not by itself a direct equilibrium abundance.

This is a semi-grey irradiated atmosphere in radiative equilibrium. The quantities have these meanings:

The model assumes a static plane-parallel atmosphere, separate grey stellar and thermal bands with constant opacities, local thermodynamic equilibrium for thermal emission, negligible scattering, and transport by radiative transfer rather than convection. The Eddington closure approximation sets the thermal angular-moment ratio to $1/3$, and the upper boundary supplies the usual $2/3$ term. Treating the incoming radiation with representative direction cosine $1/\sqrt{3}$ gives its attenuation $e^{-\sqrt{3}\gamma \tau }$. Intrinsic flux enters from below, while the imposed external stellar flux is absorbed from above.

With constant gravity and hydrostatic equilibrium, $\tau \simeq {\kappa }_{\mathrm{IR}}P/g$, allowing conversion to an atmospheric pressure-temperature profile. This last relation additionally assumes constant thermal opacity. The grey treatment describes the energy balance approximately; it does not resolve individual molecular absorption lines.

Four mechanisms that can produce disequilibrium chemistry in an exoplanet atmosphere are:

The exoplanet transport and photochemical examples follow kinetic atmosphere calculations and models including horizontal transport; the condensate example is examined in cold-trap calculations.

Four possible molecular signatures of disequilibrium chemistry in an exoplanet atmosphere, measured through an exoplanet transmission spectrum or exoplanet emission spectrum, are:

The first two signatures can be consequences of the same process and are not independent evidence for two mechanisms. Changes in atmospheric carbon-to-oxygen ratio, atmospheric metallicity of a giant planet, exoplanet cloud coverage, and the atmospheric pressure-temperature profile can mimic abundance changes. A convincing inference compares several molecular bands with a chemically consistent equilibrium model rather than identifying one unusual band alone.

Take the logarithm to base ten and write pressure in units of $1\mathrm{bar}$, so its argument is dimensionless. Continuity of the atmospheric pressure-temperature profile givesThusIf the logarithm means $\ln$, the equivalent constant is $C=900/\ln 100\simeq 195.4\mathrm{K}$. A plot of temperature against logarithmic pressure is vertical in each isothermal region and straight between the two endpoints.

The processes can be organized by the supplied pressure ranges, although the exact boundaries require reaction rates, irradiation and mixing information:

The profile identifies plausible chemical regimes, but does not fix their transition pressures by itself. In particular, cloud formation depends on the species-specific condensation curve, and ultraviolet processing depends on shielding.

This model solves a vertical atmospheric pressure-temperature profile consistent with heating, radiative transfer and a convective adjustment where the radiative gradient exceeds the adiabatic temperature gradient. Irradiation, intrinsic flux, gravity and opacity determine the radiative-convective boundary. A one-dimensional model describes a column or average rather than resolving all atmospheric winds.

For $P_0>0$, $\alpha \ne 0$, $T\ge T_0$ and physical $T>0$, the atmospheric pressure-temperature profile $P=P_0\exp (\alpha \sqrt{T-T_0})$ is equivalent toThe branch restriction is essential: squaring does not create a second physical branch. Its temperature gradient is $dT/d\log P=2\sqrt{T-T_0}/\alpha$. Thus, in hydrostatic equilibrium, $\alpha <0$ gives an atmospheric thermal inversion, while $\alpha >0$ gives outward cooling. At $T=T_0$ the inverse branch has zero derivative; $\alpha =0$ gives constant pressure and cannot describe a nontrivial hydrostatic vertical interval.

The terrestrial atmosphere has regions with opposite signs of the atmospheric lapse rate: the troposphere usually cools upward, the stratosphere warms upward through ultraviolet heating, the mesosphere cools, and the thermosphere warms. A monotone atmospheric pressure-temperature profile can approximate one such interval, but cannot describe all their transitions with one fixed branch.