학술논문

Flares, Rotation, Activity Cycles and a Magnetic Star-Planet Interaction Hypothesis for the Far Ultraviolet Emission of GJ 436
Document Type
Working Paper
Source
Subject
Astrophysics - Solar and Stellar Astrophysics
Astrophysics - Earth and Planetary Astrophysics
Language
Abstract
Variability in the far ultraviolet (FUV) emission produced by stellar activity affects photochemistry and heating in orbiting planetary atmospheres. We present a comprehensive analysis of the FUV variability of GJ 436, a field-age, M2.5V star ($P_\mathrm{rot}\approx44$ d) orbited by a warm, Neptune-size planet ($M \approx 25\ M_\oplus$, $R \approx 4.1\ R_\oplus$, $P_\mathrm{orb}\approx2.6$ d). Observations at three epochs from 2012 to 2018 span nearly a full activity cycle, sample two rotations of the star and two orbital periods of the planet, and reveal a multitude of brief flares. Over 2012-2018, the star's $7.75\pm0.10$ yr activity cycle produced the largest observed variations, $38\pm3$% in the summed flux of major FUV emission lines. In 2018, variability due to rotation was $8\pm2$%. An additional $11\pm1$% scatter at 10 min cadence, treated as white noise in fits, likely has both instrumental and astrophysical origins. Flares increased time-averaged emission by 15% over the 0.88 d of cumulative exposure, peaking as high as 25$\times$ quiescence. We interpret these flare values as lower limits given that flares too weak or too infrequent to have been observed likely exist. GJ 436's flare frequency distribution (FFD) at FUV wavelengths is unusual compared to other field-age M dwarfs, exhibiting a statistically-significant dearth of high energy ($>4\times 10^{28}$ erg) events that we hypothesize to be the result of a magnetic star-planet interaction (SPI) triggering premature flares. If an SPI is present, GJ 436 b's magnetic field strength must be $\lesssim$100 G to explain the statistically insignificant increase in orbit-phased FUV emission. Erratum: Due to an arithmetic error, the published limit on the magnetic field strength is incorrect. The correct limit is $\lesssim$10 G.
Comment: 18 pages, 9 figures, published in the Astronomical Journal