JWST over Hubble for exoplanetary atmospheres

Luca Maltagliati

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-024-02401-w

IF: 14.1

2024-10-11

Nature Astronomy

Abstract:Before JWST, there was Hubble: with the good coverage of its Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) in the near infrared (0.8–1.7 μm), it was the reference telescope for the characterization of exoplanetary atmospheres. JWST has a wider wavelength range and higher precision than Hubble, but how much of that effectively translates into better results, and which is the main improving factor? Chloe Fisher, Jake Taylor and colleagues perform a systematic comparison to answer this question. The authors analyse spectra of the reference hot Jupiter WASP-39 b obtained by both WFC3 and JWST/NIRISS in its single object slitless mode (0.6–2.8 μm), using the same state-of-the-art Bayesian model. They look in particular at the water bands, the only ones detectable in the WFC3 range. NIRISS does indeed do a better job at constraining both the water detection confidence (21.3 σ versus 9.0 σ ) and its abundance, which is substantially overestimated by WFC3. In addition, NIRISS can tentatively detect other species (CO 2 , K) and favours the non-isothermal + non-grey cloud model of the atmospheric structure, whereas WFC3 is not able to distinguish between different atmospheric profiles. The authors show that the dominant factor in this improvement is the extended NIRISS wavelength range, which provides more reliable continuum information.

astronomy & astrophysics