Review Article

ASTROBIOLOGY
Volume 14, Number 9, 2014ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
DOI: 10.1089/ast.2014.1147

Formation, Habitability, and Detection of Extrasolar Moons
René Heller,1 Darren Williams,2 David Kipping,3 Mary Anne Limbach,4,5 Edwin Turner,4,6
Richard Greenberg,7 Takanori Sasaki,8 Émeline Bolmont,9,10 Olivier Grasset,11Karen Lewis,12 Rory Barnes,13,14 and Jorge I. Zuluaga15

Abstract

The diversity and quantity of moons in the Solar System suggest a manifold population of natural satellites exist
around extrasolar planets. Of peculiar interest from an astrobiological perspective, the number of sizable moonsin the stellar habitable zones may outnumber planets in these circumstellar regions. With technological andtheoretical methods now allowing for the detection of sub-Earth-sized extrasolar planets, the first detection of an
extrasolar moon appears feasible. In this review, we summarize formation channels of massive exomoons thatare potentially detectable with current or near-future instruments. We discuss the orbital effects that govern
exomoon evolution, we present a framework to characterize an exomoon’s stellar plus planetary illumination as
well as its tidal heating, and we address the techniques that have been proposed to search for exomoons. Most
notably, we show that natural satellites in the range of 0.1–0.5 Earth mass (i) are potentially habitable, (ii) canform within the circumplanetary debris and gas disk or via capture from a binary, and (iii) are detectable withcurrent technology. Key Words: Astrobiology—Extrasolar planets—Habitability—Planetary science—Tides.
Astrobiology 14, 798–835.

1. Introduction

Driven by the first detection of an extrasolar planet orbiting a Sun-like star almost 20 years ago (Mayor andQueloz, 1995), the search for these so-called exoplanets has
nowadays achieved the detection of over one thousand suchobjects and several thousand additional exoplanet candidates(Batalha et al., 2013). Beyond revolutionizing humankind’s
understanding of the formation and evolution of planetarysystems, these discoveries allowed scientists a first approach
toward detecting habitats outside the Solar System. Ever
smaller and lighter exoplanets were found around Sun-likestars, the record holder now smaller than Mercury (Barclay
et al., 2013). Furthermore, ever longer orbital periods can betraced, now encompassing Earth-sized planets in the stellar
habitable zones (HZs) (Quintana et al., 2014) and beyond.
While the realm of extrasolar planets is being exploredin ever more detail, a new class of objects may soon become accessible to observations: extrasolar moons. These
are the natural satellites of exoplanets, and based on our
knowledge from the Solar System planets, they may be evenmore abundant.
Moons are tracers of planet formation, and as such theirdiscovery around extrasolar planets would fundamentally
reshape our understanding of the formation of planetarysystems. As an example, the most massive planet in the
Solar System, Jupiter, has four massive moons—Io, Europa,
Ganymede, and Callisto—whereas the second-most massive

1

Origins Institute, Department of Physics and Astronomy, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
The Behrend College School of Science, Penn State Erie, Erie, Pennsylvania, USA.
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
4
Department of Astrophysical Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
5
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
6
The Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe, The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Japan.
7
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
8
Department of Astronomy, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
9
Université de Bordeaux, LAB, UMR 5804, Floirac, France.
10
CNRS, LAB, UMR 5804, Floirac, France.
11
Planetology and Geodynamics, University of Nantes, CNRS, Nantes, France.
12
Earth and Planetary Sciences, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan.
13
Astronomy Department, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
14
NASA Astrobiology Institute—Virtual Planetary Laboratory Lead Team, USA.
15
FACom—Instituto de Fı́sica—FCEN, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellı́n, Colombia.
2
3

798

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

planet around the Sun, Saturn, hosts only one major moon,
Titan. These different architectures were likely caused bydifferent termination timescales of gas infall onto the circumplanetary disks, and they show evidence that Jupiter was
massive enough to open up a gap in the circumsolar primordial gas and debris disk, while Saturn was not (Sasaki
et al., 2010).
Besides being clues to planet formation, exomoons excite
the imagination of scientists and the public related to their
possibility of being habitats for extrasolar life (Reynolds
et al., 1987; Williams et al., 1997; Heller and Barnes, 2013).
This idea has its roots in certain Solar System moons, which
may—at least temporarily and locally—provide environments benign for certain organisms found on Earth. Could
those niches on the icy moons in the Solar System be inhabited? And in particular, should not there be many more
moons outside the Solar System, some of which are not only
habitable beyond a frozen surface but have had globally
habitable surfaces for billions of years?
While science on extrasolar moons remains theoretical as
long as no such world has been found, predictions can bemade about their abundance, orbital evolution, habitability,
and ultimately their detectability. With the first detection ofa moon outside the Solar System on the horizon (Kipping
et al., 2012; Heller, 2014), this paper summarizes the stateof research on this fascinating, upcoming frontier of astronomy and its related fields.
To begin with, we dedicate Section 2 of this paper tothe potentially habitable icy moons in the Solar System.
This section shall provide the reader with a more haptic
understanding of the possibility of moons being habitats.
In Section 3, we tackle the formation of natural satellites,
thereby focusing on the origin of comparatively massive
moons roughly the size of Mars. These moons are suspected
to be a bridge between worlds that can be habitable in termsof atmospheric stability and magnetic activity on the one
hand and that can be detectable in the not-too-far future on
the other hand. Section 4 is devoted to the orbital evolutionof moons, with a focus on the basics of tidal and secular
evolution in one- or two-satellite systems. This will automatically lead us to tidal heating and its effects on exomoon
habitability, which we examine in Section 5, together withaspects of planetary evolution, irradiation effects on moons,and magnetic protection. In Section 6, we outline those techniques that are currently available to search for and characterize exomoons. Section 7 presents a summary and Section 8
an outlook.
2. Habitable Niches on Moons in the Solar System

Examination of life on Earth suggests that ecosystems
require liquid water, a stable source of energy, and a supplyof nutrients. Remarkably, no other planet in the Solar System beyond Earth presently shows niches that combine allthese basics. On Mars, permanent reservoirs of surface
water may have existed billions of years ago, but today they
are episodic and rare. Yet we know of at least three moons
that contain liquids, heat, and nutrients. These are the jovian
companion Europa and the saturnian satellites Enceladus
and Titan. Ganymede’s intrinsic and induced magnetic dipole fields are suggestive of an internal heat reservoir and aliquid water ocean and make this moon a fourth candidate

799

satellite to host a subsurface habitat. What is more, only fourworlds in the Solar System other than Earth are known toshow present tectonic or volcanic activity. These four objects are not planets but moons: Jupiter’s Io and Europa,
Saturn’s Enceladus, and Neptune’s Triton.
Naturally, when discussing the potential of yet-unknown
exomoons to host life, we shall begin with an inspection of
the Solar System moons and their prospects of being habitats. While the exomoon part of this review is dedicated tothe surface habitability of relatively large natural satellites,
the following Solar Systems moons are icy worlds that could
only be habitable below their frozen surfaces, where liquidwater may exist.
2.1. Europa

Europa is completely surrounded by a global ocean that
contains over twice the liquid water of Earth on a bodyabout the size of Earth’s Moon. Its alternative heat source tothe weak solar irradiation is tidal friction. Tidal heating
tends to turn itself off by circularizing orbits and synchronizing spins. However, Europa’s orbit is coupled to thesatellites Io and Ganymede through the Laplace resonance(Peale et al., 1979; Greenberg, 1982). The orbital periods
are locked in a ratio of 1:2:4, so their mutual interactions
maintain eccentricities. As a result, enough heat is generated
within Europa to maintain a liquid subsurface ocean about
10–100 km deep, which appears to be linked to the surface.
Its surface is marked by dark lines and splotches, and thelow rate of impact craters suggests that the surface is younger than 50 Myr (Zahnle et al., 2003). Tectonics produce
linear features (cracks, ridges, and bands), and thermal effects produce splotches (chaotic terrain) (Fig. 1). These
global-scale lineaments roughly correlate with the patternsof expected tidal stress on the ice shell (Helfenstein andParmentier, 1983; Greenberg et al., 1998) and may record
past deviations from uniform synchronous rotation. Double
ridges likely form on opposite sides of cracks due to theperiodic tidal working over each 80 h orbit, thereby squeezing up material from the cracks and out over the surface.
This process would be especially effective if the crack extended from the ocean (Greenberg et al., 1998). Althoughtidal tension is adequate to crack ice, at depth the overburden pressure counteracts this stress. Therefore, it is unlikelythat the ice is thicker than 10 km if ridges form in this way.
The most distinctive crack patterns associated with tidal
stress are the cycloids, chains of arcs, each about 100 km
long, connected at cusps and extending often over 1000 km
or more. Cycloids are ubiquitous on Europa, and they provided the first observational evidence for a liquid water
ocean because they fit the tidal stress model so well andbecause adequate tidal distortion of Europa would be impossible if all the water were frozen (Hoppa et al., 1999;
Groenleer and Kattenhorn, 2008). Given that Europa’s surface age is less than 1% of the age of the Solar System, andthat many cycloids are among the freshest features, it
seemed evident that the ocean must still exist today. Confirmation came with measurements of Jupiter’s magnetic
field near the satellite, which showed distortions consistent
with the effect of a near-surface electrical conducting salty
ocean (Kivelson et al., 2000). Active plumes observed at the
moon’s south pole deliver further evidence of a liquid water

800

HELLER ET AL.

FIG. 1. Europa, Enceladus, Ganymede, and Titan are regarded as potentially habitable moons. Global lineaments on
Europa’s surface and ridges on Enceladus indicate liquid water as close as a few kilometers below their frozen surfaces.
Ganymede’s surface is much older, with two predominant terrains: bright, grooved areas and older, heavily cratered, dark
regions. Titan has a dense nitrogen atmosphere and liquid methane/ethane seas on its surface. While the atmosphere is
intransparent to the human eye, the lower right image contains information taken in the infrared. Note the different scales!
Moon diameters are indicated below each satellite. (Image credits: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute/Ted Stryk) (Color
images available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)
reservoir, but it remains unclear whether these waters thatfeed these geysers are connected to the global subsurface
ocean or are local (Roth et al., 2014).
Large plates of Europa’s surface ice have moved relative
to one another. Along some cracks, often hundreds of kilometers long, rifts (called dilation bands) have opened up
and filled with new striated ice (Tufts et al., 2000). The
dilation can be demonstrated by reconstructing the surface,matching opposite sides, like pieces of a picture puzzle. The
apparent mobility of large plates of surface ice shows thatthe cracks must penetrate to a fluid or low-viscosity layer,
again indicating that the ice is less than 10 km thick.
Chaotic terrain covers nearly half Europa’s surface (Riley
et al., 2000) and appears to have been thermally disrupted,
leaving a lumpy matrix between displaced rafts, on whose
surfaces fragments of the previous surface are clearly visi-

ble. The crust appears to have melted, allowing blocks ofsurface ice to float, move, and tilt before refreezing backinto place (Carr et al., 1998). Only modest, temporary, local
or regional concentrations of tidal heat are required for
substantial melt-through. If 1% of the total internal heat flux
were concentrated over an area about 100 km across, thecenter of such a region would melt through in only a few
thousand years and cause broad exposure over tens of kilometers wide in 104 yr (O’Brien et al., 2000).
If the ice were thick, the best prospects for life would benear the ocean floor, where volcanic vents similar to thoseon the Earth’s ocean floor could support life by the endogenic substances and tidal heat. Without oxygen, organisms
would require alternative metabolisms whose abundance
would be limited (Gaidos et al., 1999). For a human exploration mission, europan life would only be accessible

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

after landing on the surface, penetrating about 10 km of
viscous ice, and diving 100 km or more to the ocean floor,
where the search would begin for a hypothetical volcanic
vent. If the ice is thin enough to be permeable, the odds
that life is present and detectable increase. At the surface,oxidants—especially oxygen and hydrogen peroxide—are
produced by impacts of energetic charged particles trappedin the jovian magnetic field (Hand et al., 2007). Although
this radiation must also sterilize the upper 10 cm of ice,organisms might be safe below that level. Photosynthesis
would be possible down to a depth of a few meters, and theoxidants, along with organic compounds from cometarydebris, are mixed to that depth by micrometeoroid impacts.
Any active crack, periodically opening and closing withthe tide, might allow the vertical flow of liquid water fromthe ocean and back down. Organisms living in the ice or
the crack might take advantage of the access to near-surface
oxidants and organics as well as oceanic substances and theflow of warm (0C) water (Greenberg et al., 2002). Based on
the size of the double ridges, cracks probably remain active
for tens of thousands of years, so organisms would havetime to thrive. But once a crack freezes, they would need tohibernate in the ice or migrate into the ocean or to anotheractive site. Exposure of water at the surface would allow
some oxygen to enter the ocean directly. The gradualbuildup of frozen ocean water over the surface exposes fresh
ice to the production of oxidants and also buries ever deeper
the previously oxygenated ice. Based on resurfacing rates ofthe various geological processes, oxygen may enter theocean at a rate of about 3 · 1011 mol/yr (Greenberg, 2010),
equivalent to the respiration requirements of 3 million tonsof terrestrial fish. Hence, this delivery rate could allow a
concentration of oxygen adequate to support complex life,
which is intrinsically less efficient than microorganisms dueto their extra operational overhead. Moreover, with thisoxygen source, an ecosystem could be independent of photosynthesis. In the ocean, interaction of the oxygen with therocky or clay seafloor could be significant and eventually
result in a drastic decrease in the pH of the water (Pasek andGreenberg, 2012). How much this process could affect life
depends on the efficiency of the contact between the waterand the rock. Moreover, if organisms consume the oxygen
fast enough, they could ameliorate the acidification.
2.2. Ganymede

With its 2634 km radius, the most massive moon in the
Solar System, Ganymede, features old, densely cratered
terrain and widespread regions that may have been subject
to tectonic resurfacing. The great variety in geological andgeomorphic units has been dated over a range of several
billion years and shows evidence of past internal heat release. Besides Mercury and Earth, Ganymede is one of only
three solid bodies in the Solar System that generate amagnetic dipole field. It also possesses a small moment ofinertia factor of 0.3115 (Schubert et al., 2004)1, which isindicative of a highly differentiated body. This moon is
1This dimensionless measure of the moment of inertia equals ICal/(MCalRCal2), where ICal is Callisto’s moment of inertia, MCal its
mass, and RCal its radius. This factor is 0.4 for a homogeneous
spherical body but less if density increases with depth.

801

thought to have (i) an iron-rich core, in which a liquid part
must be present to generate the magnetic field, (ii) a silicate
shell, (iii) a hydrosphere at least 500 km thick, and (iv) a
tenuous atmosphere (Anderson et al., 1996; Kivelson et al.,
2002; Sohl et al., 2002; Spohn and Schubert, 2003).
There is no evidence of any present geological activity on
Ganymede. Locally restricted depressions, called ‘‘paterae,’’may have formed through cryovolcanic processes, and at
least one of them is interpreted as an icy flow that produced
smooth bright lanes within the grooved terrain (Giese et al.,
1998; Schenk et al., 2004). This suggests that cryovolcanism
and tectonic processes played a role in the formation ofbright terrain. There is no geological evidence on Ganymedethat supports the existence of shallow liquid reservoirs. And
analyses of magnetic field measurements collected by the
Galileo space probe are still inconclusive regarding an interpretation of a global subsurface ocean (Kivelson et al.,1996). The challenge is in the complex interaction amongfour field components, namely, a possibly induced field, themoon’s intrinsic field, Jupiter’s magnetosphere, and theplasma environment. But still, the presence of an ocean is inagreement with geophysical models, which predict that tidal
dissipation and radiogenic energy keep the water liquid(Spohn and Schubert, 2003; Hussmann et al., 2006; Schubert
et al., 2010).
While Europa with its relatively thin upper ice crust and a
global ocean, which is likely in contact with the rocky ocean
floor, has been referred to as a class III habitat (Lammer
et al., 2009)2, Ganymede may be a class IV habitat. In otherwords, its hydrosphere is split into (i) a high-pressure ice
layer at the bottom that consists of various water-rich ices
denser than liquid water, (ii) a subsurface water ocean that is
likely not in direct contact with the underlying silicate floor,and (iii) an ice-I layer forming the outer crust of the satellite.
In this model, Ganymede serves as an archetype for the
recently suggested class of water-world extrasolar planets(Kuchner, 2003; Léger et al., 2004; Kaltenegger et al., 2013;
Levi et al., 2013). Ganymede’s liquid layer could be up to
100 km thick (Sohl et al., 2010), and it is not clear whether
these deep liquid oceans can be habitable. Chemical andenergy exchanges between the rocky layer and the ocean,which are crucial for habitability, cannot be ruled out, butthey require efficient transport processes through the thickhigh-pressure icy layer. Such processes are indeed possible(Sohl et al., 2010) but not as clear-cut as the exchanges
envisaged for Europa, where they probably prevailed until
recent times.
2.3. Enceladus

Another potential moon habitat is Enceladus. With anaverage radius of merely 250 km, Saturn’s sixth-largest
moon should be a cooled, dead body, if it were not subject
to intense endogenic heating due to tidal friction. Contrary
to the case of Europa, Enceladus’ orbital eccentricity ofroughly 0.0047 cannot be fully explained by gravitational
interactions with its companion moons. While perturbations
from Dione may play a role, they cannot explain the current
thermal flux observed on Enceladus (Meyer and Wisdom,2

See cases 3 and 4 in their Fig. 11.

8022007). The current heat flux may actually be a remainderfrom enhanced heating in the past, and it has been shownthat variations in the strength of this heat source likely leadto episodic melting and resurfacing events (Běhounková
et al., 2012).
Given the low surface temperatures on Enceladus of roughly
70 K, accompanied by its low surface gravity of 0.114 m/s,
viscous relaxation of its craters is strongly inhibited. The
existence of a large number of shallow craters, however,suggests that subsurface temperatures are around 120 K or
higher and that there should have been short periods ofintense heating with rates up to 0.15 W/m2 (Bland et al.,2012). These conditions agree well with those derived fromstudies of its tectonically active regions, which yield temporary heating of 0.11–0.27 W/m2 (Bland et al., 2007; Gieseet al., 2008).
Enceladus’ internal heat source results in active cryovolcanic geysers on the moon’s southern hemisphere (Hansen
et al., 2006; Porco et al., 2006). The precise location coincides with a region warm enough to make Enceladus thethird body, after Earth and Io, whose geological energy flowis accessible by remote sensing. Observations of the Cassini
space probe during close flybys of Enceladus revealed
temperatures in excess of 180 K along geological formations
that have now become famous as ‘‘tiger stripes’’ (Porco
et al, 2006; Spencer et al., 2008) (Fig. 1). Its geological heatsource is likely strong enough to sustain a permanent subsurface ocean of liquid saltwater (Postberg et al., 2011). In
addition to water (H2O), traces of carbon dioxide (CO2),methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), salt (NaCl), and 40Ar havebeen detected in material ejected from Enceladus (Waite
et al., 2006, 2009; Hansen et al., 2011). The solid ejecta,
about 90% of which fall back onto the moon (Hedman et al.,2009; Postberg et al., 2011), cover its surface with a highlyreflective blanket of micrometer-sized water ice grains.
With a reflectivity of about 0.9, this gives Enceladus thehighest Bond albedo of any body in the Solar System(Howett et al., 2010).
While Europa’s subsurface ocean is likely global and may
well be in contact with the moon’s silicate floor, Enceladus’
liquid water reservoir is likely restricted to the thermally
active south polar region. It is not clear if these waters are incontact with the rocky core (Zolotov, 2007; Tobie et al.,2008) or if they only form pockets in the satellite’s icy shell(Lammer et al., 2009).
All these geological activities, and in particular their interference with liquid water, naturally open up the questionof whether Enceladus may be habitable. Any ecosystembelow the moon’s frozen ice shield would have to be independent from photosynthesis. It could also not be basedon the oxygen (O2) or the organic compounds produced bysurface photosynthesis (McKay et al., 2008). On Earth, indeed, such subsurface ecosystems exist. Two of them rely
on methane-producing microorganisms (methanogens), whichthemselves feed on molecular hydrogen (H2) released bychemical reactions between water and olivine rock (Stevens
and McKinley, 1995; Chapelle et al., 2002). A third suchanaerobic ecosystem is based on sulfur-reducing bacteria(Lin et al., 2006). The H2 required by these communities isultimately produced by the radioactive decay of long-lived
uranium (U), thorium (Th), and potassium (K). It is uncertain whether such ecosystems could thrive on Enceladus, in

HELLER ET AL.

particular due to the possible lack of redox pairs under asealed ocean (Gaidos et al., 1999). For further discussion of
possible habitats on Enceladus, see the work of McKay et al.
(2008).
What makes Enceladus a particularly interesting object
for the in situ search for life is the possibility of a sample
return mission that would not have to land on the moon’s
surface (Razzaghi et al., 2007; Reh et al., 2007; Tsou et al.,2012). Instead, a spacecraft could repeatedly dive throughthe enceladian plumes and collect material that has beenejected from the subsurface liquid water reservoir. This icy
moon may thus offer a much more convenient and cheaper
option than Mars from which to obtain biorelevant, extraterrestrial material. What is more, once arrived in the saturnian satellite system, a spacecraft could even take samplesof the upper atmosphere of Titan (Tsou et al., 2012).
2.4. Titan

With its nitrogen-dominated atmosphere and surfacepressures of roughly 1.5 bar, Titan is the only world in the
Solar System to maintain a gaseous envelope at least
roughly similar to that of Earth in terms of composition andpressure. It is also the only moon beyond Earth’s moon andthe only object farther away from the Sun than Mars, fromwhich a spacecraft has returned in situ surface images.
Footage sent back from the surface by the Huygens lander inJanuary 2005 show pebble-sized, rock-like objects some
10 cm across (mostly made of water and hydrocarbon ices)on a frozen ground with compression properties similar to
wet clay or dry sand (Zarnecki et al., 2005). Surface temperatures around 94 K imply that water is frozen and cannot
possibly play a key role in the weather cycle as it does on
Earth. Titan’s major atmospheric constituents are molecular
nitrogen (N2, 98.4%), CH4 (1.4%), molecular hydrogen(0.1%), and smaller traces of acetylene (C2H2) as well as
ethane (C2H6) (Coustenis et al., 2007). The surface is hidden
to the human eye under an optically thick photochemicalhaze (Fig. 1), which is composed of various hydrocarbons.
While the surface illumination is extremely low, atmospheric C2H2 could act as a mediator and transport the energy of solar ultraviolet radiation and high-energy particles
to the surface, where it could undergo exothermic reactions(Lunine, 2010). Intriguingly, methane should be irreversibly
destroyed by photochemical processes on a timescale of 10–
100 Myr (Yung et al., 1984; Atreya et al., 2006). Hence, its
abundance suggests that it is continuously resupplied. Although possibilities of methanogenic life on Titan have been
hypothesized (McKay and Smith, 2005; Schulze-Makuch
and Grinspoon, 2005), a biological origin of methane seems
unlikely because its 12C/13C ratio is not enhanced with respect to the Pee Dee Belemnite inorganic standard value(Niemann et al., 2005). Instead, episodic cryovolcanic
activity could release substantial amounts of methane from
Titan’s crust (Le Corre et al., 2008), possibly driven byoutgassing from internal reservoirs of clathrate hydrates(Tobie et al., 2006).
In addition to its thick atmosphere, Titan’s substantial
reservoirs of liquids on its surface make it attractive froman astrobiological perspective (Stofan et al., 2007; Hayes
et al., 2011). These ponds are mostly made of liquid ethane(Brown et al., 2008), and they feed a weather cycle with

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

evaporation of surface liquids, condensation into clouds, andprecipitation (Griffith et al., 2000). Ultimately, the moon’s
nonsynchronous rotation period with respect to Saturn aswell as its substantial orbital eccentricity of 0.0288 (Sohl
et al., 1995; Tobie et al., 2005) point toward the presence ofan internal ocean, the composition and depth of which is
unknown (Lorenz et al., 2008; Norman, 2011). If surface
life on Titan were to use non-aqueous solvents, where
chemical reactions typically occur with much higher rates
than in solid or gas phases, it would have to rely mostly on
ethane. However, laboratory tests revealed a low solubilityof organic material in ethane and other nonpolar solvents(McKay, 1996), suggesting also a low solubility in liquidmethane. While others have argued that life in the extremely
cold hydrocarbon seas on Titan might still be possible(Benner et al., 2004), the characterization of such ecosystems on extrasolar moons will not be possible for the foreseeable future. In what follows, we thus exclusively refer tohabitats based on liquid water.
3. Formation of Moons

Ganymede, the most massive moon in the Solar System,
has a mass roughly 1/40 that of Earth or 1/4 that of Mars.
Supposing Jupiter and its satellite system would orbit the
Sun at a distance of 1 AU, Ganymede’s ices would melt, but
it would not be habitable, since its gravity is too small tosustain a substantial atmosphere. Earth-sized objects mustbe larger than 1–2 Mars masses, or 0.1–0.2 Earth masses(M4), to have a long-lived atmosphere and moist surface
conditions in the stellar HZs (Williams et al., 1997). Hence,
to assess the potential of extrasolar moons to have habitablesurfaces, we shall consult satellite formation theories andtest their predictions for the formation of Mars- to Earthsized moons.
Ganymede as well as Titan presumably formed in accretion disks surrounding a young Jupiter and Saturn (Canupand Ward, 2002), and apparently there was not enoughmaterial or accretion efficiency in the disks to form anythinglarger. Disks around similar giant planets can form muchheavier moons if the disk has a lower gas-to-solid ratio or ahigh viscosity parameter a (Canup and Ward, 2006). Assuming disks similar to those that existed around Jupiter andSaturn, giant exoplanets with masses 5–10 times that of
Jupiter might accrete moons as heavy as Mars.
The orbit of Triton, the principal moon of Neptune, isstrongly suggestive of a formation via capture rather than
agglomeration of solids and ices in the early circumplanetary debris disk. The satellite’s orbital motion is tilted byabout 156 against the equator of its host planet, and its
almost perfectly circular orbit is embraced by various
smaller moons, some of which orbit Neptune in a prograde
sense (that is, in the same direction as the planet rotates) andothers which have retrograde orbits. With Triton being theseventh-largest moon in the Solar System and with Earth- to
Neptune-sized planets making up for the bulk part of extrasolar planet discoveries (Batalha et al., 2013; Rowe et al.,2014), the capture of substantial objects into stable satellites
provides another reasonable formation channel for habitable
exomoons.
Moving out from the Solar System toward moons orbiting
extrasolar planets, and eventually those orbiting planets in803

the stellar HZs, we ask ourselves: ‘‘How common are massive exomoon systems around extrasolar planets?’’ Ultimately, we want to know the frequency of massive moons
the size of Mars or even Earth around those planets. In thefollowing, we discuss recent progress toward addressingthese questions from the formation theory point of view.
3.1. In situ formation
3.1.1. Planetary disk models. Various models for satellite formation in circumplanetary protosatellite disks havebeen proposed recently. One is called the solids enhanced
minimum mass model ( Mosqueira and Estrada, 2003a,
2003b; Estrada et al., 2009), another one is an actively
supplied gaseous accretion disk model (Canup and Ward,
2002, 2006, 2009), and a third one relies on the viscous
spreading of a massive disk inside the planet’s Roche limit(Crida and Charnoz, 2012). All these models have been
applied to study the formation of the jovian and saturnian
satellite systems. In the Mosqueira and Estrada model, satellite formation occurs once sufficient gas has been removed
from an initially massive subnebula and turbulence in thecircumplanetary disk subsides. Satellites form from solidmaterials supplied by ablation and capture of planetesimal
fragments passing through the massive disk. By contrast, in
the Canup and Ward picture, satellites form in the accretion
disk at the very end of the host planet’s own accretion,
which should reflect the final stages of growth of the hostplanets. Finally, the Crida and Charnoz theory assumes thatsatellites originate at the planet’s Roche radius and thenmove outward due to gravitational torques experienced
within the tidal disk. While the latter model may explainsome aspects of satellite formation around a wide range ofcentral bodies, that is, from bodies as light as Pluto to giant
planets as heavy as Saturn, it has problems reproducing thejovian moon system.
The actively supplied gaseous accretion disk model postulates a low-mass, viscously evolving protosatellite disk
with a peak surface density near 100 g/cm2 that is continuously supplied by mass infall from the circumstellar protoplanetary disk. The temperature profile of the circumplanetary
disk is dominated by viscous heating in the disk, while theluminosity of the giant planet plays a minor role. ‘‘Satellitesimals,’’ that is, protomoons, are assumed to form immediately from dust grains that are supplied by gas infall.
Once a satellite embryo has grown massive enough, it may
be pushed into the planet through type I migration driven bysatellite-disk interaction (Tanaka et al., 2002). The average
total mass of all satellites resulting from a balance between
disposal by type I migration and repeated satellitesimalaccretion is universally of the order of 10 - 4 Mp, where Mp isthe host planet mass (Canup and Ward, 2006). Beyond apure mass scaling, Sasaki et al. (2010) were able to explain
the different architectures of the jovian and the saturnian
satellite systems by including an inner cavity in the circumjovian disk, while Saturn’s disk was assumed to open no
cavity, and by considering Jupiter’s gap opening within thesolar disk. Ogihara and Ida (2012) improved this model by
tracing the orbital evolution of moonlets embedded in thecircumplanetary disk with an N-body method, thereby
gaining deeper insights into the compositional evolution ofmoons.

804
3.1.2. Differences in the jovian and saturnian satellite
systems. As a gas giant grows, its gravitational perturba-

tions oppose viscous diffusion and pressure gradients in thegas disk and thereby open up a gap in the circumstellar
protoplanetary disk (Lin and Papaloizou, 1985). Since thecritical planetary mass for the gap opening at 5–10 AU is
comparable to Jupiter’s mass, it is proposed that Jupiter’s
final mass is actually determined by the gap opening (Idaand Lin, 2004). While the theoretically predicted criticalmass for gap opening generally increases with orbital radius,
Saturn has a mass less than one-third of Jupiter’s mass inspite of its larger orbital radius. It is conventionally thoughtthat Saturn did not open up a clear gap and the infall rate ofmass onto Saturn and its protosatellite disk decayed according to the global depletion of the protoplanetary disk.3
Since core accretion is generally slower at larger orbital
radii in the protoplanetary disk (Lin and Papaloizou, 1985),
it is reasonable to assume that gas accretion onto Saturnproceeded in the dissipating protoplanetary disk, while Jupiter’s growth was truncated by the formation of a clear gap
before the disk lost most of its gas.
Although gap opening may have failed to truncate theincident gas completely, it would certainly reduce the infall
rate by orders of magnitude (D’Angelo et al., 2003). After
this truncation, the protosatellite disk would be quickly
depleted on its own viscous diffusion timescale of about(10 - 3/a)103 yr, where a represents the strength of turbulence (Shakura and Sunyaev, 1973) and has typical values of
10 - 3 to 10 - 2 for turbulence induced by magneto-rotational
instability (Sano et al., 2004). On the other hand, if Saturn
did not open up a gap, the saturnian protosatellite disk was
gradually depleted on the much longer viscous diffusion
timescales of the protoplanetary disk, which are observationally inferred to be 106 to 107 yr (Meyer et al., 2007).
The different timescales come from the fact that the protosatellite disk is many orders of magnitude smaller than the
protoplanetary disk. The difference would significantly affect the final configuration of satellite systems, because typeI migration timescales of protosatellites (approximately 105yr) are in between the two viscous diffusion timescales(Tanaka et al., 2002). Jovian satellites may retain their orbital configuration frozen in a phase of the protosatellite disk
with relatively high mass at the time of abrupt disk depletion, while saturnian satellites must be survivors against
type I migration in the final less massive disk.
The different disk masses reflected by the two satellite
systems indicate that their disks also had different inneredges. By analogy with the observationally inferred evolution of the inner edges of disks around young stars (Herbst
and Mundt, 2005), Sasaki et al. (2010) assumed (i) a truncated boundary with inner cavity for the jovian system and(ii) a nontruncated boundary without cavity for the saturniansystem. Condition (i) may be appropriate in early stages of
disk evolution with high disk mass and accretion rate andstrong magnetic field, while in late stages with a reduced
disk mass, condition (ii) may be more adequate. The jovian
satellite system may have been frozen in a phase with3
The recently proposed Grand Tack model (Walsh et al., 2011),
however, suggests that Jupiter and Saturn actually opened up acommon gap (Pierens and Raymond, 2011).

HELLER ET AL.

condition (i), since the depletion timescale of its protosatellite disk is much shorter than typical type I migration
timescales of protosatellites. In this system, type I migrationof satellites is terminated by a local pressure maximum near
the disk edge. On the other hand, the saturnian system thatformed in a gradually dissipating protosatellite disk may
reflect a later evolution phase with condition (ii).
Sasaki et al. (2010) explained how these different final
formation phases between Jupiter and Saturn produce thesignificantly different architectures of their satellite systems,
based on the actively supplied gaseous accretion protosatellite disk model (Canup and Ward, 2002). They applied
the population synthesis planet formation model (Ida andLin, 2004, 2008) to simulate growth of protosatellites
through accretion of satellitesimals and their inward orbital
migration caused by tidal interactions with the gas disk. The
evolution of the gas surface density of the protosatellite
disk is analytically given by a balance between the infall andthe disk accretion. The surface density of satellitesimals is
consistently calculated with accretion by protosatellites andsupply from solid components in the incident gas. They assumed that the solid component was distributed over many
very small dust grains so that the solids can be delivered tothe protosatellite disk according to the gas accretion to thecentral planet. The model includes type I migration andregeneration of protosatellites in the regions out of which
preceding runaway bodies have migrated, leaving manysatellitesimals. Resonant trapping of migrating protosatellites is also taken into account. If the inner disk edge is set,the migration is halted there, and the migrated protosatellites
are lined up in resonances from the inner edge to the outerregions. When the total mass of the trapped satellites exceeds the disk mass, the halting mechanism is not effective,
such that they release the innermost satellite into the planet.
Sasaki et al. (2010) showed that in the case of the jovian
system, a few satellites of similar masses were likely toremain in mean motion resonances. These configurations
form by type I migration, temporal stopping of the migrationnear the disk’s inner edge, and quick truncation of gas infall
by gap opening in the solar nebula. On the other hand, thesaturnian system tended to end up with one dominant bodyin its outer regions caused by the slower decay of gas infall
associated with global depletion of the solar nebula. Beyond
that, the compositional variations among the satellites wereconsistent with observations with more rocky moons close
to the planet and more water-rich moons in wider orbits.
3.1.3. Formation of massive exomoons in planetarydisks. Ultimately, we want to know whether much more

massive satellites, the size of Mars, for example, can formaround extrasolar giant planets. If the Canup and Ward
(2006) mass scaling law is universal, these massive satellites
could exist around super-jovian gas giants. To test this hypothesis, we applied the population synthesis satellite formation model of Sasaki et al. (2010) to a range of hypothetical‘‘super-Jupiters’’ with tenfold the mass of Jupiter. The results from 100 runs are depicted in Fig. 2, showing that inabout 80% of all cases, four to six large bodies are formed.
In the right panel, we show the averaged semimajor axes
(abscissa) and masses (ordinate), along with the 1r standard
deviations, of those 36 systems that contain four large satellites. In these four-satellite systems, the objects reachFORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

805

FIG. 2. Results after 100 simulations of moon formation around a 10 MJup planet. Left panel: Multiplicity distribution of
the produced satellite systems for satellite masses Ms > 10 - 2 M4. Right panel: Averaged Ms and semimajor axis (a) are
shown as filled circles; their standard deviations are indicated by error bars for the 36 four-satellite systems.
roughly the mass of Mars, and they are composed of rocky
materials as they form in massive protosatellite disks withhigh viscous heating. We conclude that massive satellites
around extrasolar gas giants can form in the circumplanetary
disk and that they can be habitable if they orbit a giant
planet in the stellar HZ.

treated with a Kozai Cycle and Tidal Friction model, andthey assumed their satellites start the planetary entourage inhighly elliptical orbits with eccentricities eps > 0.85 andapoapses beyond 0.8 times the planetary Hill radius
RHill,p ¼

3.2. Formation by capture

Other ways of forming giant moons include collision andcapture, both of which require strong dynamical mixing of
giant planets and terrestrial objects in a protoplanetary disk.
A gas giant planet can migrate both inward and outward
through a protoplanetary disk once it grows large enough toclear a gap in the disk. The migrating gas giant is then able
to sweep through terrestrial material, as is thought to haveoccurred in the Solar System (Gomes et al., 2005), possibly
enabling close encounters that might result in the capture ofan oversized moon. In all capture scenarios, the approaching
mass must be decelerated below the planet’s escape velocity
and inserted into a bound, highly elliptical orbit that canlater be circularized by tides (Porter and Grundy, 2011). The
deceleration may result from the impactor striking the planet, a circumplanetary disk (McKinnon and Leith, 1995), ora fully formed satellite, but in each of these cases, the intercepting mass—gas or solid—must be comparable to themass of the impactor to make a significant change in its
encounter trajectory. For an impact with the planet to work,
the impactor must tunnel deep enough through a planet’souter atmosphere to release enough energy but still shallow
enough to avoid disintegration. An impact with a massive
satellite already in orbit around the planet might work if thecollision is head-on and the impactor-to-satellite mass ratio
is smaller than a few, which makes this formation scenario
unlikely.
Irrespective of the actual physical reason or history ofa possible capture, Porter and Grundy (2011) followed theorbital evolution of captured Earth-mass moons around arange of giant planets orbiting in the HZ of M, G, and F
stars. Stellar perturbations on the planet-satellite orbit were

Mp
3M+

1=3
a+p

ð1Þ

where M+ is the stellar mass, and a+p is the orbital semimajor axis of the star-planet system. Initial orbital inclinations and moon spin states were randomized, which allowed
investigations of a potential preference for prograde or retrograde orbital stability. Most importantly, their results
showed that captured exomoons in stellar HZs tend to be
more stable the higher the stellar mass. While about 23% of
their captured satellites around Neptune- and Jupiter-sizedplanets in the HZs of an M0 star remained stable, roughly
45% of such planet-moon binaries in the HZ of a Sun-likestar survived, and about 65% of similar scenarios in the HZof an F0 star stabilized over 1 Gyr. This effect is related tothe extent of the planet’s Hill sphere, which scales inversely
proportional to stellar distance while stellar illumination
goes with one over distance squared. No preference for either pro- or retrograde orbits was found. Typical orbital
periods of the surviving moons were 0.9, 2.1, and 3.6 days
for planet-moon binaries in the HZs of M, G, and F stars,
respectively.
A plausible scenario for the origin of these captures wasrecently discussed by Williams (2013, W13 hereafter), whoshowed that a massive moon could be captured if it originally belonged to a binary-terrestrial object (BTO) that was
tidally disrupted from a close encounter with a gas-giant
planet. During the binary-exchange interaction, one of the
BTO members is ejected while the other is captured as amoon. In fact, it is this mechanism that gives the most
reasonable formation scenario for Neptune’s odd principal
moon Triton (Agnor and Hamilton, 2006). The first requirement for a successful capture is for the BTO to actuallyform in the first place. The second requirement is to pass

806

HELLER ET AL.

near enough to the planet (inside 5–10 planetary radii) to betidally disrupted. This critical distance is where the planet’s
gravity exceeds the self-gravity of the binary, and it is expressed in W13 as   1=3
3qp
b
aB
&
R1
q1
Rp

ð2Þ

where the subscript ‘‘1’’ refers to the more massive component of the binary, ‘‘p’’ refers to the planet, and aB is thebinary separation. Setting aB/R1 = 10, and using densities qp
and q1 appropriate for gaseous and solid planets, respectively, yields b & 9.3 Rp, which shows that the encountermust occur deeper than the orbits of many of the major
satellites in the Solar System.
A second requirement for a successful binary exchange
is for the BTO to rotate approximately in the encounter
plane as it passes the planet. The binary spin thereby
opposes the encounter velocity of the retrograde-moving
binary mass so that its final velocity may drop below theescape velocity from the planet if the encounter velocityof the BTO at infinity is small, say (5 km/s. Finally, thedistance and mass of the host star are important because they determine how large of a satellite orbit is stable given the incessant stellar pull. Implementing these
physical and dynamical requirements yields an analytic
upper limit on the captured mass m1 as a function of
the escaping mass m2, in addition to other parameterssuch as planetary mass Mp, impact parameter b, encounter
velocity venc, and the periapsis velocity vperi of the newly
captured mass (W13). Expressed in compact form, thisrelation is
m1 < 3Mp

Gm2 p2benc ðenc  peri Þ

3=2
 m2

ð3Þ

with G as Newton’s gravitational constant and secondary
expressions for venc and vperi given in Eqs. 4 and 5 of W13.

It is apparent from this expression that the heaviest moons(large m1) will form from the closest encounters (small b)occurring at low velocity (small venc). The dependence onplanetary mass is not as straightforward. It appears from Eq. 3
that larger planets should capture heavier masses, but theencounter velocity and periapsis velocity in the denominatorboth increase with Mp, making the dependence on planetary
mass inverted. This is borne out in Fig. 7 of W13, whichshows the size of the captured mass to decrease as planetary
mass increases with the impact parameter b held constant.
Therefore, in general, it is easier to capture a moon around a
Saturn- or Neptune-class planet than around a Jupiter or asuper-Jupiter because the encounter speeds tend to be smaller.
As detailed in W13 (see his Figs. 3–7), moons the size ofMars or even Earth are possibly formed if the ratio of
captured mass to escaping mass is not too large. The limiting ratio depends on encounter details such as the size andproximity of both the planet and the star, as well as theencounter velocity. Yet, a ratio > 10:1 could yield a moon as
big as Earth around a Jupiter at 2 AU from the Sun (W13,right side of Fig. 5 therein). Mars-sized moons can possibly form by ejecting a companion the size of Mercury or
smaller.
Expanding the cases considered in W13, we assume
here a Saturn-mass planet in the HZ (0.8 AU) around a Kstar and vary the encounter distance b as well as the encounter velocity to examine whether velocities as large as
5 km/s make a binary-exchange capture impossible. According to the left panel of Fig. 3, losing an object the sizeof Mercury (&0.05 M4) in a 0.5 km/s encounter would
result in the capture of a Mars-sized moon, with tidal
disruption occurring as far as 15 Rp from the planet. The
right panel of Fig. 3 shows that such an exchange is also
possible at 10 times this encounter velocity, provided theapproach distance is reduced by a factor of 3. This is apromising result given the broad range of encounter speeds
and approach distances expected between dynamicallyinteracting planets in developing planetary systems. To
sum up, close encounters of BTOs can reasonably provide

FIG. 3. Maximum captured mass (ordinate) as a function of escaping mass (abscissa) and encounter distance b = 5 Rp, 10
Rp, and 15 Rp (contours). The curves are calculated from Eq. 3 with the planetary mass set to 0.3 MJup and the distancefrom the K star a+ = 0.8 AU in both panels. The encounter speed at infinity is vN = 0.5 km/s in the left panel and vN = 5 km/s
in the right panel.

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

807

FIG. 4. Tidal evolution of an Earth-sized moon orbiting a Jupiter-sized planet. Left panels: Semimajor axis (top) andobliquity (bottom) evolution for different initial semimajor axes, while all other initial parameters are equal. The black
dashed-dotted line in the top panel represents the planetary radius; four overlapping dashed lines indicate the corotation
radii. A red dashed line represents the Roche limit. Right panels: Semimajor axis (top) and eccentricity (bottom) evolution
for the same system but for different initial eccentricities. (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)a second formation channel for moons roughly the massof Mars.
4. Orbital Dynamics

Once the supply of the circumplanetary disk with incident gas and dust has ceased several million years after theformation of the planetary system or once a satellite has
been captured by a giant planet, orbital evolution will be
determined by the tidal interaction between the planet andthe moons, gravitational perturbations among multiple satellites, the gravitational pull from the star, and perturbations from other planets. These effects give rise to a rangeof phenomena, such as spin-orbit resonances, mean motion
resonances among multiple satellites, chaos, ejections, andplanet-satellite mergers.
As an example, a giant planet orbiting its host star closer
than about 0.5 AU will have its rotation frequency Up braked
and ultimately synchronized with its orbital motion n+p
around the star. This rotational evolution, Up = Up(t) (t beingtime), implies an outward migration of the planet’s corotation radius, at which Up = nps, with nps as the orbital mean
motion of a satellite around the planet. Due to the exchangeof orbital and rotational momentum via the planet’s tidal
bulge raised by a moon, satellites inside the corotation radius will spiral toward the planet and perhaps end in acollision (see Phobos’ fall to Mars; Efroimsky and Lainey,2007), while satellites beyond the corotation radius willrecede from their planets and eventually be ejected (Sasaki
et al., 2012). Hence, the evolution of a planet’s corotation
radius due to stellar-induced tidal friction in the planet affects the stability of moon systems. Barnes and O’Brien(2002) considered Earth-mass moons subject to an incoming stellar irradiation similar to the solar flux received
by Earth and found that these satellites can follow stableorbits around Jupiter-like planets if the host star’s mass isgreater than 0.15 M1, with M1 as one solar mass. From
another perspective, satellite systems around giant planetsthat orbit their stars beyond 0.6 AU should still be intact
after 5 Gyr. Cassidy et al. (2009), however, claimed thatan Earth-sized moon could even follow a stable orbit
around a hot Jupiter if the planet is rotationally synchronized to its orbit around the star. Then the tidal forcing
frequencies raised by the moon on the planet would be ina weakly dissipative regime, allowing for a slow orbital
evolution of the moon. Combining the results of Barnes
and O’Brien (2002) with those of Domingos et al. (2006),
Weidner and Horne (2010) concluded that 92% of thetransiting exoplanets known at that time (almost all ofwhich have masses between that of Saturn and a few times
that of Jupiter) could not have prograde satellites akin to
Earth’s moon. Further limitations on the orbital stability of
exomoons are imposed by the migration-ejection instability, causing giant planets in roughly 1-day orbits to lose
their moons during migration within the circumstellar disk
(Namouni, 2010).
Investigations on the dynamical stability of exomoon
systems have recently been extended to the effects of planetplanet scattering. Gong et al. (2013) found that planetarysystems whose architectures are the result of planet-planet
scattering and mergers should have lost their initial satellite systems. Destruction of moon systems would be particularly effective for scattered hot Jupiters and giant planetson eccentric orbits. Most intriguingly, in their simulations,

808

HELLER ET AL.

FIG. 5. Evolution of the semimajor axes (aps) and eccentricities (eps) of the two satellites orbiting a Jupiter-mass planet.
Red lines correspond to the inner Mars-mass satellite, blue lines to the outer Earth-mass satellite, and black lines represent
the corotation distance. Each panel depicts a different initial distance for the outer satellite, increasing from panels 1 to 9.
(Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)

the most massive giant planets were not hosts of satellite
systems, if these planets were the product of former planetplanet mergers. In a complimentary study, Payne et al.
(2013) explored moons in tightly packed giant planet systems, albeit during less destructive planet-planet encounters.
For initially stable planet configurations, that is, planet architectures that avoid planet-planet mergers or ejections,they found that giant exoplanets in closely packed systems
can very well harbor exomoon systems.

Orbital effects constrain the habitability of moons. Heller(2012) concluded that stellar perturbations would force
exomoons into elliptical orbits, thereby generating substantial amounts of tidal heat in the moons. Giant planets in
the HZs around low-mass stars have small Hill radii, so theirmoons would necessarily have small semimajor axes. As aconsequence of both the requirement for a close orbit andthe stellar-induced orbital eccentricities, Mars- to Earthsized exomoons in the HZs of stars with masses below

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

809

FIG. 6. Evolution of the obliquity (top left), inclination (center left), rotation period (bottom left), and internal heat flux
(right) of a Mars-like (red lines) and an Earth-like (blue lines) satellite orbiting a Jupiter-mass planet (configuration of panel
2 in Fig. 5). In the bottom left panel, the black line represents the rotation period of the planet, and the dashed lines
correspond to the pseudo-synchronization period of the satellites. In the right panel, the dotted black horizontal line
corresponds to the internal heat flux of Earth (0.08 W/m2); the dashed black lines correspond to tidal surface heating on Io(2.4–4.8 W/m2). (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)

0.2–0.5 M1 would inevitably be in a runaway greenhousestate due to their intense tidal heating.
To illustrate the evolution in satellite systems in the following, we simulate the orbital evolution of hypotheticalexomoon systems and discuss secular and tidal processes inmore detail. Stellar perturbations are neglected. At first, weconsider single-satellite systems and then address multiplesatellite systems.
4.1. Orbital evolution in single-satellite systems

Imagine a hypothetical Earth-mass satellite orbiting a
Jupiter-mass planet. Both the tides raised on the planet by
the satellite (the planetary tide) and the tides raised on thesatellite by the planet (the satellite tide) can dissipate energy
from this two-body system. For our computations, we use
the constant-time-lag model, which is a standard equilibrium tidal model (Hut, 1981). As in the work of Bolmont
et al. (2011, 2012), we solve the secular equations for thissystem assuming tidal dissipation in the moon to be similar
to that on Earth, where Ds4 = 638 s is the time lag between
Earth’s tidal bulge and the line connecting the two centersof mass (Neron de Surgy and Laskar, 1997), and k2,4 ·Ds4 = 213 s, with k2,4 as Earth’s second-degree tidal Love
number. For Jupiter, we use the value given by Leconte
et al. (2010) (k2,Jup · DsJup = 2.5 · 10 - 2 s) and include theevolution of the planetary radius RJup, of k2,Jup, and of

the radius of gyration squared (rg,Jup)2 = IJup/(MJupRJup2), where
IJup is Jupiter’s moment of inertia, following the evolutionary model of Leconte and Chabrier (2012, 2013). Thismodel was scaled so that the radius of Jupiter at the age
4.5 Gyr is equal to its present value.
The left panel of Fig. 4 shows the evolution of thesemimajor axes (top panel) and spin-orbit misalignments, or‘‘obliquities’’ (bottom panel), of various hypothetical Earthmass satellites around a Jupiter-mass planet for different
initial semimajor axes. The orbital eccentricity eps is zero,and the moon is in synchronous rotation, so once the obliquity is zero only the planetary tide influences the evolutionof the system. Not shown in these diagrams is the rotation of
the Jupiter, which spins up due to contraction and which ismodified by the angular momentum transfer from the satellite’s orbit (Bolmont et al., 2011). Figure 4 shows that the
corotation radius (ensemble of dashed bluish lines)—definedas the distance at which the satellite’s orbital frequency
equals the planetary rotation frequency—shrinks due tothe spin-up of the planet. A satellite initially interior to the
corotation radius migrates inward, because the bulge of theJupiter is lagging behind the position of the satellite, andeventually falls onto the planet. A satellite initially exterior
to the corotation radius migrates outward. Most notably, an
Earth-mass satellite can undergo substantial tidal evolution
even over timescales that span the age of present Jupiter.
The bottom left panel of Fig. 4 shows the evolution of the810

HELLER ET AL.
4.2. Orbital evolution in multiple-satellite systems

FIG. 7. Circumplanetary HEs for a Mars-mass (orange
lines) and an Earth-mass (blue lines) exomoon orbiting a
range of host planets (masses indicated along the ordinate).
All systems are assumed to be at 1 AU from a Sun-like star.
HEs are indicated for four different orbital eccentricities:
eps 2 f0:0001, 0:001, 0:01, 0:1g. The larger the eps, the farther away the moons need to be around a given planet to
avoid transition into a runaway greenhouse due to extensive tidal heating. Examples for the orbital distances foundin the jovian and saturnian satellite systems are indicatedwith labeled dots. (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)

obliquities of the satellites, whose initial value is set to 11.5
for all tracks. In all cases, the obliquities rapidly eroded tozero, in less than a year for a very close-in satellite and in a
few 104 yr for a satellite as far as 7 · 10 - 3 AU. Thus, in
single-satellite systems, satellite obliquities are likely to
be zero. The timescale of evolution of the satellite’s rotation period is similar to the obliquity evolution timescale, so
a satellite gets synchronized very quickly (for eps & 0) or
pseudo-synchronized (if eps is substantially nonzero).
The right panel of Fig. 4 shows the evolution of semimajor axes (top panel) and eccentricities (bottom panel) of
the same Earth-Jupiter binaries as in the left panel, but now
for different initial eccentricities. In the beginning of theevolution, the eccentricity is damped by both the planetary
and the satellite tides in all simulations. What is more, allsolid tracks start beyond their respective dashed corotation
radius, so the satellites should move outward. However, thesatellite corresponding to the light blue curve undergoes
slight inward migration during the first 105 yr, which is dueto the satellite tide that causes eccentricity damping. Thereis a competition between both the planetary and the satellite tides, and when the eccentricity is > 0.08, then the satellite tide determines the evolution, causing inward migration.
But if eps < 0.08, then the planetary tide dominates and drives
outward migration (Bolmont et al., 2011). The planet withinitial eps = 0.5 undergoes rapid inward migration such that it
is interior to the corotation radius when its eccentricity approaches zero. Hence, it then transfers orbital angular momentum to the planet until it merges with its host.

We consider now a system of two satellites orbiting thesame planet. One moon is a Mars-mass satellite in a close-inorbit at 5 RJup; the other one is an Earth-mass satellite orbiting farther out, between 10 and 50 RJup. All simulations
include the structural evolution of the Jupiter-mass planet as
in the previous subsection. We use a newly developed code,
based on the Mercury code (Chambers, 1999), which takes
into account tidal forces between both satellites and theplanet as well as secular interaction. We also consider tides
raised by each of the satellites on the planet, assuming theseplanetary bulges are independent, and the tide raised by theplanet in each of the two satellites. The code consistently
computes the orbital evolution as well as the evolution of
the rotation period of the three bodies and their obliquities(Bolmont et al., unpublished data). The inner satellite is
assumed to have an initial eccentricity of 0.05, an orbital
inclination of 2 with respect to the planet’s equatorial
plane, and an obliquity of 11.5. The outer satellite has an
initial eccentricity of 0.1, an inclination of 5 to the planet’s
equator, and an obliquity of 7. Tidal dissipation parameters
for the satellite and the planet are assumed as above.
Figure 5 shows the results of these simulations, where
each panel depicts a different initial semimajor axis of theouter moon. In all runs, the outer massive satellite excites
the eccentricity of the inner moon. Excitations result inhigher eccentricities if the outer satellite is closer in. Botheccentricities decrease at a similar pace, which is dictated by
the distance of the outer and more massive satellite; thefarther away the outer satellite, the slower the circularization. At the same time, the inner smaller satellite undergoes
inward migration due to the satellite tide. When its eccentricity reaches values below a few 10 - 3, the planetary tidecauses outward migration because the moon is beyond the
corotation radius (panels 1–3). In panels 4–9, eps of the outermoon decreases on timescales > 10 Myr, so the system does
not reach a state in which the planetary tide determines theevolution to push the inner satellite outward.
Panel 1 of Fig. 5 shows an instability between 104 and5
10 yr. The inner satellite eccentricity is excited to values
close to the outer satellite eccentricity. At a few 104 yr, epsof the inner satellite is excited to even higher values, but thesatellite tide quickly damps it. This rapid circularization isaccompanied by a substantial decrease of the inner moon’s
semimajor axis. Once the eccentricity reaches values of 10 - 2,
evolution becomes smoother. Both eccentricities then decrease and dance around a kind of ‘‘equilibrium’’ at eps &10 - 3. On even longer timescales, both eccentricities are expected to decrease further toward zero (Mardling, 2007).
Figure 6 shows the evolution of the obliquities, inclinations, rotation periods, and tidal surface heat flux for bothsatellites in the scenario of panel 2 of Fig. 5. The innersatellite reaches pseudo-synchronization in < 100 yr; duringthat time its obliquity decreases from initially 11.5 to about
2. The outer satellite reaches pseudo-synchronization in a
few 1000 yr, while its obliquity decreases to a few 10 - 1
degrees within some 104 yr. Once pseudo-synchronizationis reached on both satellites, their obliquities slowly decrease to very low values between 104 and 107 yr in Fig. 6.
The inclination of the small inner satellite oscillates aroundthe value of the more massive outer one, whose inclination

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

does not vary significantly during the first 107 yr because theplanetary tides are not efficient enough to adjust the orbital
planes to the planet’s equatorial plane.
Moving on to the tidal heat flux in the right panel ofFig. 6, note that the internal heat flux through Earth’s surface is around 0.08 W/m2 (Pollack et al., 1993), and Io’svalue is between 2.4 and 4.8 W/m2 (Spencer et al., 2000).
Initially, the tidal heat flux is extremely large in both satellites. While being pseudo-synchronized during the first&104 yr, the tidal heat flux of the outer satellite decreases
from some 102 to about 10 W/m2. After 104 yr, the decay oftidal heating in both satellites is due to the circularizationand tilt erosion (Heller et al., 2011b) on a 10 Myr timescale.
The tidal surface heat flux of the outer satellite is about anorder of magnitude lower than Earth’s internal heat flux
through its surface, but the tidal heat going through a surface
unit on the inner moon is several times the tidal surface heat
flux on Io, probably causing our Mars-mass test moon toshow strong tectonic activity for as long as its first 100 Myr
after formation.
The long-term evolution of this system might lead tointeresting configurations. For example, the outward migration of the inner satellite decreases the distance between
the two satellites, eventually resulting in an orbital resonance (Bolmont et al., unpublished data). In such a resonance, the eccentricities of both satellites would be excitedand thereby reignite substantial tidal heating. Not only
would such a resurgence affect the satellites’ potentials tobe, remain, or become habitable, but their thermal emission
could even prevail against the host planet’s thermal emission and make the moon system detectable by near-futuretechnology (Section 6.4).
5. Effects of Orbital and Planetary Evolution
on Exomoon Habitability

Predictions of exomoons the size of Mars orbiting giant
planets (Section 3) and the possible detection of exomoons
roughly that size with the Kepler space telescope or nearfuture devices (Section 6) naturally make us wonder about
the habitability of these worlds. Tachinami et al. (2011)
argued that a terrestrial world needs a mass T0.1 M4 tosustain a magnetic shield on a billion-year timescale, which
is necessary to protect life on the surface from high-energy
stellar and interstellar radiation. Further constraints comefrom the necessity to hold a substantial, long-lived atmosphere, which requires satellite masses MsT0.12 M4(Williams et al., 1997; Kaltenegger, 2000). Tectonic activity
over billions of years, which is mandatory to entertain plate
tectonics and to promote the carbon-silicate cycle, requires
MsT0.23 M4 (Williams et al., 1997). Hence, formation theory, current technology, and constraints from terrestrial world
habitability point toward a preferred mass regime for habitable moons that can be detected with current or near-futuretechnology, which is between 0.1 and 0.5 M4.
5.1. The global energy flux on moons

While these mass limits for a habitable world were allderived from assuming a cooling, terrestrial body such as
Mars, exomoons have an alternative internal heat source thatcan retard their cooling and thus maintain the aforementioned processes over longer epochs than in planets. This

811

energy source is tidal heating, and its effects on the habitability of exomoons have been addressed several times in
the literature (Reynolds et al., 1987; Scharf, 2006; Henning
et al., 2009; Heller, 2012; Heller and Barnes, 2013, 2014;
Heller and Zuluaga, 2013; Heller and Armstrong, 2014). In
their pioneering study, Reynolds et al. (1987) point out theremarkable possibility that water-rich extrasolar moons beyond the stellar HZ could be maintained habitable mainly
due to tidal heating rather than stellar illumination. Theirclaim was supported by findings of plankton in Antarctic
lakes, which require an amount of solar illumination that
corresponds to the flux received at the orbit of Neptune.
Heller and Armstrong (2014) advocated the idea that different
tidal heating rates allow exomoons to be habitable in different
circumplanetary orbits, depending on the actual distance ofthe planet-moon system from their common host star.
Assuming an exomoon were discovered around a giant
planet in the stellar HZ, then a first step toward assessing its
glob
habitability would be to estimate its global energy flux F S .
Were the moon to orbit its planet too closely, then it might
be undergoing a moist or runaway greenhouse effect(Kasting, 1988; Kasting et al., 1993) and be temporarily
uninhabitable or even desiccated and uninhabitable forever(Heller and Barnes, 2013, 2014). In addition to the orbitaveraged flux absorbed from the star ( f+ ), the moon absorbs
the star’s reflected light from the planet ( fr ), the planet’s
thermal energy flux ( ft ), and it can undergo substantial tidal
heating (hs, the amount of tidal heating going through a unit
area on the satellite surface). The total global average flux atthe top of a moon’s surface is then given by sglob ¼ f+ þ fr þ ft þ hs þ Ws
F
L+ ð1  as,opt Þ
xs pR2p ap
qﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ¼
þ
fs 2a2ps
4pa2+, p 1  e2+, p 4
þ¼

Lp ð1  as, IR Þ
qﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ þ hs þ Ws
4pa2ps fs 1  e2ps4
R+ r2SB Teff,+ ð1  as,opt Þa2+, pþ!

qﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ
1  e2+, p

xs pR2p ap
þ4
fs 2 a2ps

!

ð4Þ

4
R2p rSB Tp,effð1  as, IR Þ
qﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ
þ hs þ W s
a2ps fs 1  e2ps

where L+ and Lp are the stellar and planetary luminosities,
respectively; as,opt and as,IR the satellite’s optical and infrared albedo, respectively (Heller and Barnes, 2014); ap isthe planetary Bond albedo; a+,p and aps are the star-planet4
and planet-satellite semimajor axes, respectively; e+,p andeps the star-planet and planet-satellite orbital eccentricities,
respectively; Rp is the planetary radius; xs the fraction of thesatellite orbit that is not spent in the planetary shadow(Heller, 2012); rSB the Stefan-Boltzmann constant; Tp,eff theplanet’s effective temperature; hs is the tidal surface heating

4
It is assumed that the planet is much more massive than its
moons and that the barycenter of the planet and its satellite system
is close to the planetary center.

812

of the satellite; and Ws denotes contributions from otherglobal heat sources such as primordial thermal energy (or‘‘sensible heat’’), radioactive decay, and latent heat fromsolidification. The planet’s effective temperature Tp,eff is afunction of long timescales as young, hot giant planets coolover millions of years; and it depends on the planetary
surface temperature Tp,eq, triggered by thermal equilibrium
between absorbed and reemitted stellar light, as well as on
the internal heating contributing a surface component Tp,int.
Hence, Tp,eff = ([Tp,eq]4 + [Tp,int]4)¼ (Heller and Zuluaga, 2013).
The factor fs in the denominator of the terms describing thereflected and thermal irradiation from the planet accounts
for the efficiency of the flux distribution over the satellite
surface. If the satellite rotates freely with respect to theplanet, then f = 4; if the satellite is tidally locked with one
hemisphere pointing at the planet permanently, then f = 2(Selsis et al., 2007). Another factor of 2 in the denominatorof the term related to the stellar light reflected from theplanet onto the satellite accounts for the fact that only half
the planet is actually starlit. The split-up of absorbed stellar
and planetary illumination in Eq. 4, moderated by the different optical and infrared albedos, has been suggested byHeller and Barnes (2014) and is owed to the different
spectral regimes, in which the energy is emitted from thesources and absorbed by the moon.
A progenitor version of this model has been applied to
examine the maximum variations in illumination that moons
in wide circumplanetary orbits can undergo, indicating thatthese fluctuations can be up to several tens of watts per square
meter (Hinkel and Kane, 2013). Taking into account stellar
illumination and tidal heating, Forgan and Kipping (2013)
applied a one-dimensional atmosphere model to assess theredistribution of heat in the Earth-like atmospheres of Earthlike exomoons. In accordance with the results of Hinkel andKane, they found that global mean temperatures would varyby a few kelvin at most during a circumplanetary orbit. While
global flux or temperature variations might be small on
moons with substantial atmospheres, the local distribution ofstellar and planetary light on a moon can vary dramatically
due to eclipses and the moon’s tidal locking (Heller, 2012;
Heller and Barnes, 2013; Forgan and Yotov, 2014).
Equation 4 can be used to assess an exomoon’s potential toglob
maintain liquid reservoirs of water, if F S is compared to thecritical flux FRG for a water-rich world with an Earth-likeatmosphere to enter a runaway greenhouse state. We use Eq.
8 of Fortney et al. (2007b) and an Earth-like rock-to-mass
fraction of 68% to calculate the two satellites’ radii, Rs = 0.5
R4 and 1 R4, respectively, where R4 symbolizes the radiusof Earth. Then, using the semianalytic atmosphere model of
Pierrehumbert (2010, see also Eq. 1 in Heller and Barnes,2013), we compute FRG = 269 W/m2 and 295 W/m2 for aMars-mass and Earth-mass exomoon, respectively. The closer
an exomoon is to its host planet, the stronger tidal heating andthe stronger illumination from the planet. Ultimately, there
exists a minimum circumplanetary orbit at which the moontransitions into a runaway greenhouse state, thereby becoming
uninhabitable. This critical orbit has been termed the circumplanetary ‘‘habitable edge,’’ or HE for short (Heller andBarnes, 2013). Giant planets in the stellar HZ will not have anouter HE for their moons, because moons in wide orbits will
essentially behave like free, terrestrial planets. Beyond about
15 RJup, tidal heating will be weak or negligible, illumination

HELLER ET AL.

from the planet will be very low, eclipses will be infrequentand short compared to the moon’s circumplanetary orbital
period, and magnetic effects from the planet will be weak.
Thus, by definition of the stellar HZ, exomoons could be
habitable even at the planetary Hill radius.
As an application of Eq. 4, we assume a planet-moon
binary at 1 AU from a Sun-like star. Following Heller andBarnes (2014), we assume that the exomoon’s albedo tostarlight is as,opt = 0.3, while that due to the planet’s thermal
emission is as,IR = 0.05. This difference is due to the expectation that the planet will emit primarily in the infrared,
where both Rayleigh scattering is less effective and molecular absorption bands are more prominent, decreasing thealbedo (Kopparapu et al., 2013). Figure 7 shows the HEs for
the Mars- and Earth-like satellites described above (orange
and blue lines, respectively), assuming four different orbital
eccentricities, eps 2 f0:0001, 0:001, 0:01, 0:1g from left toright. Along the abscissa, semimajor axis aps is given inunits of planetary radii Rp, which depends on planetary mass
Mp, which is depicted along the ordinate. To intertwine
abscissa and ordinate with one another, we fit a polynomial
to values predicted for giant planets with a core mass of
10 M4 at 1 AU from a Sun-like star (Table 4 in Fortney
et al., 2007a). Examples for Solar System moons in thismass-distance diagram are indicated with black dots.
For eps T0.01, we find the HEs of the Mars-like satellite
are up to a few planetary radii closer to the planet than theHEs for the Earth-like moon. This is due to the strong dependence of tidal heating on the satellite radius, hs 1 R3s .
Thus, although the Earth-like moon is more resistant against
a runaway greenhouse state than the Mars-like satellite, inthe sense that 295 W/m2 > 269 W/m2, it is more susceptible
to enhanced tidal heating in a given orbit. We also see atrend of both suites of HEs moving outward from the planetas Mp increases. This is because, firstly, hs 1 Mp3 forMp [Ms and, secondly, we measure the abscissa in units ofplanetary radii, and radii of super-jovian planets remain
approximately constant around RJup. For eps (0.01, we findthat the relative positions of the HEs corresponding to theMars- and Earth-like satellite strongly depend on Mp. Again,
this is owed to the strong dependence of hs on Mp andexplains why the more resistive Earth-like moon, in terms ofa transition to a runaway greenhouse state, can be closer toless massive host planets than the Mars-like moon; in loweccentricity orbits around low-mass planets, tidal heating is
negligible, and the HEs depend mostly on additional illumination from the planet.
Orbital eccentricities of exomoons will typically besmall due to tidal circularization of their orbits (Porter andGrundy, 2011; Heller and Barnes, 2013). And given that thehighest eccentricity among the most massive satellites in the
Solar System is 0.0288 for Titan, Fig. 7 suggests that exomoons the mass of Mars or Earth orbiting a giant planet at
about 1 AU around a Sun-like star can be habitable if theirorbital semimajor axis around the planet-moon barycenter
T10 Rp, with closer orbits still being habitable for lower
eccentricities and lower-mass host planets.
5.2. Runaway greenhouse due to inplanation

In this section, we examine the evolution of incident
planetary radiation (‘‘inplanation’’) on the habitability ofFORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

813

FIG. 8. Circumplanetary exomoon menageries for Mars-sized satellites around a 10 MJup host planet at ages of 100 Myr(left panel) and 1 Gyr (right panel). The planet is assumed to orbit in the middle of the HZ of a 0.7 M1 star, and the moon
orbits the planet with an eccentricity of 10 - 3. In each panel, the planet’s position is at (0, 0), and distances are shown on
logarithmic scales. Note that exomoons in a Tidal Venus or a Tidal-Illumination Venus state are in a runaway greenhousestate and thereby uninhabitable. (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)

exomoons, encapsulated in Lp in Eq. 4. Following the prescriptions of Heller and Barnes (2014), we approximate Eq.
4 by considering stellar light, the evolution of inplanation
due to the radial shrinking of young gaseous giant planets(Baraffe et al., 2003; Leconte and Chabrier, 2013), and assuming constant tidal heating. While Heller and Barnes(2014) considered several configurations of star-planetmoon systems, we limit our example to that of a Mars-sized
moon (see Section 5.1) around a 10 MJup planet that orbits a
K dwarf in the middle of the HZ. Further, we arbitrarily
consider a moon with eps = 10 - 3, a small value that is similar to those of the Galilean satellites. Heller and Barnes(2014) found that Earth-sized moons orbiting planets lessmassive than 5 MJup are safe from desiccation by inplanation, so our example exomoon may be at risk of losing its
water from inplanation.
As in the previous subsection, our test exomoon may beconsidered habitable if the total flux is < 269 W/m2. What ismore, the duration of the runaway greenhouse is important.
Barnes et al. (2013) argued that & 100 Myr are sufficient toremove the surface water of a terrestrial body, based on thepioneering work of Watson et al. (1981). While it is possible
to recover habitability after a runaway greenhouse, we areaware of no research that has examined how a planet
evolves as energy sources drop below the limit. However,
we conjecture that the flux must drop well below the runaway greenhouse limit to sufficiently weaken a CO2 greenhouse to permit stable surface water.
In Fig. 8, we classify exomoons with different surface
fluxes as a function of semimajor axis of the planet-moon
orbit. We assume satellites of Earth-like properties in terms ofoverall tidal response and that 90% of the energy is dissipatedin a putative ocean, with the remainder in the solid interior.
For this example, we use the ‘‘constant-phase-lag’’ tidal
model, as described by Heller et al. (2011a), and assume atidal quality factor Qs of 10, along with k2,s = 0.3. We
classify planets according to the scheme presented byBarnes and Heller (2013) and Heller and Barnes (2014),
which the authors refer to as the ‘‘exomoon menagerie.’’ Iftidal heating alone is strong enough to reach the runaway
greenhouse limit, the moon is a ‘‘Tidal Venus’’ (Barnes
et al., 2013), and the orbit is colored red. If the tidal heating
flux is less, but the total flux is still sufficient to trigger
the runaway greenhouse, the moon is a ‘‘Tidal-Illumination
Venus,’’ and the orbit is orange. These two types of moons
are uninhabitable. If the surface flux from the rocky interior
is between the runaway limit and that observed on Io(&2 W/m2; Veeder et al., 1994; Spencer et al., 2000), thenwe label the moon a ‘‘Super-Io’’ (see Jackson et al., 2008;
Barnes et al., 2009a, 2009b), and the orbit is yellow. If thetidal heating of the interior is less than Io’s but larger than atheoretical limit for tectonic activity on Mars (0.04 W/m2;
Williams et al., 1997), then we label the moon a ‘‘Tidal
Earth,’’ and the orbit is blue. For lower tidal heat fluxes, themoon is considered Earth-like, and the orbit is green. The
outer rim of this sphere containing Earth-like moons is determined by stability criteria found by Domingos et al.
(2006). Satellites orbiting their planet in the same direction
as the planet orbits the star, that is, in a prograde sense, arebound to the planet as far as about 0.49 RHill,p. Moons orbiting their planet in the opposite direction, in a retrograde
sense, can follow stable orbits out to 0.93 RHill,p, dependingon eccentricities.
The left panel of Fig. 8 shows these classes for a 100 Myr
old planet, the right after 1 Gyr. As expected, all boundaries
are the same except for the Tidal-Illumination Venus limit,
which has moved considerably inward (note the logarithmic
scale!). This shrinkage is due to the decrease in inplanation,
as all other heat sources are constant5. In this case, moons at

5
Without external perturbations, tidal heating should also dissipate as the eccentricity is damped, but here we do not consider
orbital evolution.

814

HELLER ET AL.

distances (10 RJup are in a runaway greenhouse for at least
100 Myr, assuming they formed contemporaneously withthe planet, and thus are perilously close to permanent desiccation. Larger values of planet-moon eccentricity, moon
mass, and/or moon radius increase the threat of sterilization.
Thus, should our prototype moon be discovered with aps(10 RJup, then it may be uninhabitable due to an initialepoch of high inplanation.
5.3. Magnetic environments of exomoons

Beyond irradiation and tidal heating, the magnetic environments of moons determine their surface conditions. It is
now widely recognized that magnetic fields play a role in the
habitability of exoplanetary environments (Lammer et al.,2010). Strong intrinsic magnetic fields can serve as an effective shield against harmful effects of cosmic rays andstellar high-energy particles (Grießmeier et al., 2005). Most
importantly, an intrinsic magnetic shield can help protect theatmosphere of a terrestrial planet or moon against nonthermal
atmospheric mass loss, which can obliterate or desiccate aplanetary atmosphere; see Venus and Mars (Zuluaga et al.,2013). To evaluate an exomoon’s habitability, assessing its
magnetic and plasmatic environments is thus crucial (Heller
and Zuluaga, 2013).
To determine the interaction of a moon with the magnetic
and plasmatic environment of its host planet, we need toestimate the size and shape of the planetary magnetosphere.
Magnetospheres are cavities within the stellar wind, createdby the intrinsic magnetic field of the planet (Fig. 9). The
scale of a magnetosphere is given by the distance between
the planetary center and the planetary magnetopause. Thisso-called ‘‘standoff radius’’ RS has been measured for giant
planets in the Solar System (see Table 1). For extrasolar
planets, however, RS can only be estimated from theoreticaland semi-empirical models, which predict that RS scaleswith the dynamic pressure of the stellar wind Pswfnswvsw2,
with nsw as the particle density and vsw as the particle velocity, and with the planetary dipole moment M as
 1=amag
RS / M1=3 · Psw

ð5ÞHere, amag depends on the magnetospheric compressibility,that is, the contribution to internal stress provided by magnetospheric plasma. Values for amag range from 6 in the caseof relatively empty magnetospheres such as that of Earth,
Uranus, and Neptune (Heller and Zuluaga, 2013; Zuluaga
et al., 2013) to 4 if important magnetospheric plasma
sources are present, as is the case for Jupiter and Saturn(Huddleston et al., 1998; Arridge et al., 2006). Predictionsof RS for the Solar System giant planets are listed in Table 1,
together with their actually observed dipole moments andpresent values of the solar wind properties.
As a giant planet ages, its internal heat source recedes;
thus the planet’s internal dynamo as well as its magnetic
field weaken6. Yet the stellar wind also weakens as thestellar activity decreases. The combination of both effects
6
The evolution of the magnetic field strength could be much more
complex if the interplay between the available energy for the dynamo and the Coriolis forces are taken into account (Zuluaga andCuartas, 2012).

FIG. 9. Schematic representation of a planetary magnetosphere. Its roughly spherical dayside region has a standoff
radius RS to the planetary center. Between the bow shockand the magnetopause lies the magnetosheath, a region ofshocked stellar-wind plasma and piled-up interplanetary
magnetic fields. Inside the magnetosphere, plasma is dragged by the corotating magnetic field, thereby creating aparticle stream called the ‘‘corotating magnetoplasma.’’Moons at orbital distances < RS (completely shielded, CS)
can be subject to this magnetospheric wind and, hence,experience similar effects as unshielded (US) moons exposed to stellar wind. Partially shielded (PS) moons thatspend most of their orbital path inside the magnetosphere
will experience both effects of interplanetary magnetic fields
and stellar wind periodically. (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)

induces a net expansion of the magnetosphere over billionsof years. Figure 10 shows the evolution of RS for a Jupiteranalogue in the center of the Sun’s HZ, following methods
presented by Heller and Zuluaga (2013): Mp = MJup, theplanetary core mass Mcore = 10 M4, and the planet’s rotation
Prot = 10 h. Magnetospheres of HZ giant planets could bevery compressed during the first billion years, thereby
leaving their moons unshielded. As an example, compare
the blue spiral in Fig. 10, which denotes RS, with the orbitsof the Galilean moons. While an Io-analog satellite would
be coated by the planetary magnetic field as early as
500 Myr after formation, a moon in a Europa-wide orbit
would be protected after about 2 Gyr, and a satellite in a
Ganymede-wide orbit would only be shielded after 3.5 Gyr.
This evolutionary effect of an exomoon’s magnetic environment can thus impose considerable constraints on its
habitability. Heller and Zuluaga (2013), while focusing on
moons around giant planets in the HZ of K stars, concluded
that exomoons beyond 20 planetary radii from their host will
hardly ever be shielded by their planets’ magnetospheres.
Moons in orbits between 5 and 20 Rp could be shielded after
several hundred million years or some billion years, andthey could also be habitable from an illumination and tidal
point of view. Moons closer to their planets than 5 Rp could
be shielded during the most hazardous phase of the stellar
wind, that is, during the first &100 Myr, but they would
likely not be habitable in the first place, due to enormous

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

815

Table 1. Measured Magnetic Properties of Giant Planets in the Solar System
Shieldingth
RS (Rp)th, HZRS(Rp)

PlanetM(M )Robs
S (Rp ) (Rp)

Jupiter

1800

45–80

38–48

22–24

Saturn

580

17–30

17–23

8.5–9.0

Uranus

50

18

23–33

8.9–9.3

Neptune

24

23–26

21–32

7.2–7.6

Moons

aps (Rp)

ActualHZ

IoEuropaGanymede
Callisto
Enceladus
Titan
Titania
Oberon
Triton

5.9
9.4
15.0
26.3
4.0
20.3
17
22.8
14

CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
PS
CS
PS
CS

CS
CS
CS
PS
CS
US
US
US
US

M: Magnetic dipole moment (Bagenal, 1992; Guillot, 2005). Robs
S : observed range of magnetospheric standoff radii (Huddleston et al., 1998;
Arridge et al., 2006). Note that standoff distances vary with solar activity. Rth
S : range of predicted average standoff distances. Predicted standoff
HZ: extrapolation of Rth
distances depend on magnetospheric compressibility (see text). Rth,S assuming that the planet would be located at 1 AU
Sfrom the Sun. Semimajor axes aps of selected major moons are shown for comparison. The final two columns depict the shielding status (seeFig. 9) of the moons for their actual position in the Solar System and assuming a distance of 1 AU from the Sun.

tidal heating and strong planetary illumination (Heller andBarnes, 2014).
5.3.1. Unshielded exomoons. The fraction of a moon’s
orbit spent inside the planet’s magnetospheric cavity defines
three different shielding conditions: (i) unshielded (US), (ii)partially shielded (PS), and (iii) completely shielded (CS)FIG. 10. Evolution of the standoff radius RS (thick blueline) around a Jupiter-like planet in the center of the stellar
HZ of a Sun-like star. For comparison, the orbits of theGalilean moons are shown (see legend). Angles with respect
to the vertical line encode time in billions of years. Timestarts at the ‘‘12:00’’ position in 100 Myr and advances insteps of 0.3 Gyr up to the present age of the Solar System.
Thin gray circles denote distances in intervals of 5 planetary
radii. The filled circle in the center denotes the planetaryradius. (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)(Fig. 9). Depending on its membership in any of these threeclasses, different phenomena will affect an exomoon, someof which will be conducive to habitability and others ofwhich will threaten life.
Assuming that the dayside magnetosphere is approximately spherical and that the magnetotail is cylindrical, a moon
orbiting its host planet at a distance of about 2 RS will spend
more than 50% of its orbit outside the planetary magnetosphere. To develop habitable surface conditions, such apartially shielded exomoon would need to have an intrinsic
magnetic field similar in strength to that required by a terrestrial planet at the same stellar distance (Vidotto et al.,2013; Zuluaga et al., 2013). For moons in the HZ of Sunlike stars, intrinsic magnetic dipole moments larger thanabout that of Earth would allow for habitable surface conditions. Moons near the HZs around less massive stars,
however, which show enhanced magnetic activity, need
intrinsic dipole moments that are several times larger toprevent an initial satellite atmosphere from being exposed tothe strong stellar wind (Vidotto et al., 2013). As formation
models predict that moons can hardly be as massive as Earth(see Section 3), the maximum magnetic field attainable by ahypothetical exomoon may be insufficient to prevent atmospheric erosion (Williams et al., 1997). Perhaps moons
with alternative internal heat sources could drive a longlived, sufficiently strong internal dynamo.
Ganymede may serve as an example to illustrate this peril.
It is the only moon in the Solar System with a strong intrinsic
magnetic field (Ness et al., 1979). With a dipole moment
about 2 · 10 - 3 times that of Earth, a Ganymede-like, unshielded moon (see ‘‘US’’ zone in Fig. 9) orbiting a giant
planet in the HZ of a Sun-like star would only have a standoff
radius of about 1.5 Ganymede radii at an age of 1 Gyr. This
would expose a potentially thin and extended atmosphere ofsuch a moon to the high-energy particles from the stellar
wind, eventually stripping off the whole atmosphere.
5.3.2. Partially shielded exomoons. Inside the planetary
magnetosphere, the main threat to a partially shielded exomoon is that of the so-called corotating magnetoplasma(Neubauer et al., 1984). Magnetospheric plasma, which isdragged by the planetary magnetic field to obtain the same816

rotational angular velocity as the planet, will produce a‘‘magnetospheric wind.’’ Around gas giants akin to those in
the Solar System, the circumplanetary angular velocity of
the corotating plasma is typically much higher than the
Keplerian velocity of the moons. Hence, the magnetosphericwind will hit exomoon atmospheres and may erode them inorbits as wide as a significant fraction of the standoff distance. This effect could be as intense as effects of the directstellar wind. For instance, it has been estimated that Titan,
which is partially shielded by Saturn’s magnetosphere,
could have lost 10% of its present atmospheric content justbecause of charged particles from the planet’s corotatingplasma (Lammer and Bauer, 1993).
Toward the inner edge of the HZ around low-mass stars,
the stellar wind flux is extremely strong. What is more, theplanetary magnetosphere will be small, thereby increasing
the density of the magnetospheric wind. Other sources ofplasma such as stellar wind particles, planetary ionospheregasses, and ions stripped off from other moons could also begreatly enhanced.
5.3.3. Completely shielded exomoons. Moons that arecompletely shielded by the planetary magnetic shield are neither exposed to stellar wind nor to significant amounts of cosmic high-energy particles. What is more, being well inside themagnetosphere, the corotating plasma will flow at velocities
comparable to the orbital velocity of the moon. Hence, nostrong interactions with the satellite atmosphere are expected.
On the downside, planetary magnetic fields can trap stellar energetic particles as well as cosmic rays with extremely
high energies. Around Saturn and Jupiter, electrons, protons, and heavy ions with energies up to hundreds of gigaelectronvolts populate the inner planetary magnetosphereswithin about 10 planetary radii, thereby creating what is
known as radiation belts. Around Jupiter, as an example, theflux of multi-megaelectronvolt electrons and protons at a
distance of about 15 RJup from the planet is between 106 and108 cm - 2 s - 1 (Divine and Garrett, 1983), that is, four to six
orders of magnitude larger than that of solar high-energy
particles received by Earth. Exposed to these levels of
ionizing radiation, moon surfaces could absorb about 1–
10 J kg - 1 min - 1 (National Research Council, 20007), which
is many orders of magnitude above the maximum tolerable
radiation levels for most microorganisms found on Earth(Baumstark-Khan and Facius, 2002).
Magnetic field intensities inside compressed magnetospheres will be larger for a given dipole moment of a Solar
System giant planet. Moreover, stellar high-energy particle
fluxes, feeding radiation belts, will be also larger. As a result, the flux of high-energy particles accelerated inside themagnetosphere of giant planets in the HZ could be strongly
enhanced with respect to the already deadly levels expected
on Jupiter’s moon Europa.
6. Detection Methods for Extrasolar Moons

Within the arena of transiting planets, there are two basic
effects that may betray the presence of an exomoon: (i)dynamical effects, which reveal the mass ratio between the7

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=NI000231

HELLER ET AL.

satellite and the planet (Ms/Mp), and (ii) eclipse effects,
which reveal the radius ratio between the satellite and thestar (Rs/R+). Detecting both effects allows for a measurement of the bulk density and thus allows one to distinguishbetween, say, icy moons versus rocky moons.
Beyond the possibility to detect extrasolar satellites whenusing the stellar transits of a planet-moon system, several
other methods have been proposed over the past decade.
Cabrera and Schneider (2007) suggested that an exomoon
might induce a wobble of a directly imaged planet’s photocenter and that planet-moon eclipses might be detectablefor directly imaged planets (see also Sato and Asada, 2010;
Pál, 2012). Excess emission of transiting giant exoplanets inthe spectrum between 1 and 4 lm (Williams and Knacke,2004) or enhanced infrared of terrestrial planets (Moskovitz
et al., 2009; Robinson, 2011) might also indicate the presence of a satellite. Further approaches consider the RossiterMcLaughlin effect (Simon et al., 2010; Zhuang et al., 2012),
pulsar timing variations (Lewis et al., 2008), microlensing(Han and Han, 2002), modulations of a giant planet’s radio
emission (Noyola et al., 2014), and the generation of plasma
tori around giant planets caused by the tidal activity of amoon (Ben-Jaffel and Ballester, 2014). In particular, theupcoming launch of the James Webb Space Telescope( JWST) inspired Peters and Turner (2013) to propose thepossibility of detecting an exomoon’s thermal emission. In
the following, we discuss the dynamical effects that may
reveal an exomoon as well as the prospects of direct photometric transit observations and constraints imposed bywhite and red noise. Possibilities of detecting extremely
tidally heated exomoons (THEMs) via their thermal emission will also be illustrated.
6.1. Dynamical effects on transiting exoplanets

The first technique ever proposed to detect an exomoon
comes from Sartoretti and Schneider (1999), which falls into
the dynamical category and is now often referred to astransit timing variations, or simply TTV, although it was notreferred to as this in the original paper. For a single-moon
system, the host planet and the companion orbit a common
barycenter, which itself orbits the host star on a Keplerian
orbit. It therefore follows that the planet does not orbit thestar on a Keplerian orbit and will sometimes transit slightly
earlier or later depending upon the phase of the moon. These
deviations scale proportional to PP · (Ms/Mp) · (as/ap) and
can range from a few seconds to up to a few hours for terrestrial moons. The original model of Sartoretti and Schneider(1999) deals with circular, coplanar moons, but extensions
to non-coplanar and eccentric satellites have been proposedsince (Kipping, 2009a, 2011a). Three difficulties with employing TTV in isolation are that, firstly, other effects can be
responsible (notably perturbing planets); secondly, the TTV
waveform is guaranteed to be below the Nyquist frequency
and thus undersampled, making a unique determination of
Ms untenable; and, thirdly, moons in close orbits blur theirplanet’s TTV signature as the planet receives a substantial
tangential acceleration during each transit (Kipping, 2011a).
Transit timing variation can be thought of as being conceptually analogous to the astrometric method of finding
planets, since it concerns changes in a primary’s position due
to the gravitational interaction of a secondary. Astrometry,FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

however, is not the only dynamical method of detecting
planets. Notably, Doppler spectroscopy of the host star tomeasure radial velocities has emerged as one of the workhorses of exoplanet detection in the past two decades. Just as
with astrometry, an exomoon analogy can be devised bymeasuring changes in a planet’s transit duration, as a proxyfor its velocity (Kipping, 2009a). Technically though, one isobserving tangential velocity variations rather than those in
the radial direction. Transit duration variations due to velocity variations, dubbed TDV-V, scale as (PP/Ps) · (Ms/Mp) ·(as/ap) and vary from seconds to tens of minutes in amplitude
for terrestrial satellites.
Just as radial velocity is complementary to astrometry,
TDV-V and TTV are complementary, since TTV are moresensitive to wide-orbit moons (sensitivity scales asfas) andTDV are more sensitive to close-orbit moons (sensitivity
scales as f as- 1/2). Furthermore, should one detect bothsignals, the ratio of their root-mean-square amplitudes (thatis, their statistical scatter) yields a direct measurement of Ps,
which can be seen via inspection of the aforementioned
scalings. This provides a powerful way of measuring Ps
despite the fact that the signals are undersampled. Finally,
TDV-V lead TTV by a p/2 phase shift in amplitude (Kipping, 2009a), providing a unique exomoon signature, whicheven for undersampled data can be detected with crosscorrelation techniques (Awiphan and Kerins, 2013). Just as
with TTV though, a TDV-V signal in isolation suffers fromboth model and parameter degeneracies.
An additional source of transit duration variations (TDV)
comes from non-coplanar satellite systems, where the planet’s reflex motion causes position changes not only parallelto the transit chord (giving TTV) but also perpendicular
to it. These variations cause the apparent impact parameterof the transit to vary, leading to transit impact parameter–induced transit duration variations, known as TDV-TIP(Kipping, 2009b). This is generally a small effect of order of
seconds but can become much larger for grazing or neargrazing geometries. Should the effect be detected, it can beshown to induce a symmetry breaking that reveals whether amoon is prograde or retrograde in its orbit, thereby providing insights into the history and formation of the satellite.

FIG. 11. Period-ratio versus mass-ratio
scatter plot of the Solar System moons.
Transit timing and duration variations (TTVand TDV) exhibit complementary sensitivities with the period-ratio. Using the Kepler
timing measurements from Ford et al.
(2012), one can see that the tip of the observed distribution is detectable. The above
assumes a planetary period of 100 days
and a baseline of 4.35 yr of Kepler data.
(Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)

817

For all the aforementioned techniques, multiple moons
act to cancel out the overall timing deviations, except forresonant cases. In any case, the limited number of observables (two or three) makes the detection of multiple moons
untenable with timing data alone. Despite this, there arereasons to be optimistic for the detection of a large quasibinary-type exomoon. Kipping et al. (2009) and Awiphan
and Kerins (2013) estimated that the Kepler space telescopeis sensitive to telluric moons. Recent statistics on the timing
sensitivity of Kepler by Ford et al. (2012) reveal that the tipof the known population of moons in our own solar system
would be detectable with Kepler too, as shown in Fig. 11.
In terms of detectable habitable exomoons, Kipping et al.
(2009) took into account orbital stability criteria from Barnes
and O’Brien (2002) and found that moons more massive
than about 0.2 M4 and orbiting a Saturn-mass planet in thecenter of the stellar HZ can be detectable with Kepler-classphotometry if the star is more massive than about 0.3 M1
and has a Kepler magnitude (12 (Fig. 6 of Kipping et al.,2009). More massive stars would need to be brighter because the planetary transit and its TTV and TDV signals
become relatively dimmer. Simulations by Awiphan and
Kerins (2013) suggest that moons in the HZ of a 12.5 Kepler
magnitude M dwarf with 0.5 times the mass of the Sun
would need to be as massive as 10 M4 and to orbit a planet
less massive than about one-quarter the mass of Saturn to be
detectable via their planet’s TTV and TDV. Such a system
would commonly be referred to as a planetary binary systemrather than a planet-moon binary because the common
center of gravity would be outside the primary’s radius.
From this result and similar results (Lewis, 2011b), thedetection of a HZ moon in the &1400 d of Kepler data ishighly challenging.
6.2. Direct eclipse effects

While dynamical effects of the planet can yield the system’s orbital configuration, a transit of the moon itself
not only provides a measurement of its radius but also has
the potential to distort the transit profile shape, leading to
the erroneous derivation of TTV and TDV. Modeling the818

moon’s own transit signal is therefore both a critical andinextricable component of hunting for exomoons.
Exomoons imprint their signal on the stellar light curve
via two possible effects. The first is that the moon, with awide sky-projected separation from the planet, transits thestar and causes a familiar transit shape. These ‘‘auxiliarytransits’’ can occur anywhere from approximately 93% of
the Hill radius away from the planet (Domingos et al., 2006)
to being ostensibly on top of the planet’s own transit (seeFig. 12 for examples). Since the phase of the moon will be
unique for each transit epoch, the position and duration ofthese auxiliary transits will vary, which can be thought of as
TTV and TDV of the moon itself, magnified by a factor of
Mp/Ms. The position and duration variations of the moon
will also be in perfect antiphase with the TTV and TDV of
the planet, providing a powerful confirmation tool.
The second eclipse effect caused by exomoons are socalled ‘‘mutual events.’’ This is where the moon and planet
appear separated at the start of a transit, but then the moon
eclipses (either in front or behind) the planet at some point
during the full transit duration. This triple-overlap meansthat the amount of light being blocked from the star actually
decreases during the mutual event, leading to what appears
to be an inverted-transit signal (Fig. 12). Mutual events canoccur between two planets, too (Ragozzine and Holman,2010), but the probability is considerably higher for a moon.
The probability of a mutual event scales as f Rp/as and thus
is highest for close-in moons. One major source of false
positives here are starspots crossings (Rabus et al., 2009),
which appear almost identical but of course do not follow
Keplerian motion.
Accounting for all these eclipse effects plus all the timing
effects is arguably required to mount a cogent and expansive
search for exomoons. Self-consistent modeling of these

HELLER ET AL.

phenomena may be achieved with full ‘‘photodynamic’’modeling, where disc-integrated fluxes are computed at eachtime stamp for positions computed from a three-body (ormore) dynamical model. Varying approaches to moon-centric
photodynamical modeling exist in the literature, including
a redefined TTV for which the photocenter (Simon et al.,2007), circular/coplanar photodynamical modeling (Satoand Asada, 2009; Tusnski and Valio, 2011), and full threedimensional photodynamic modeling (Kipping, 2011b) havebeen used.
Another way of detecting an exomoon’s direct transit
signature is by folding all available transits of a given system with the circumstellar orbital period into a single,
phase-folded light curve. If more than a few dozen transits
are available, then the satellites will show their individualtransit imprints (Heller, 2014). Each moon causes an additional transit dip before and after the planetary transit andthereby allows measurements of its radius and planetary
distance. This so-called orbital sampling effect loses the
temporal information content exploited in rigorous photodynamical modeling, meaning that the satellite’s period
cannot be determined directly. And without the satellite
period, one cannot compute the planetary density via thetrick described by Kipping (2010). Despite this, the computational efficiency of the orbital sampling effect method
makes it attractive as a quick method for identifying exomoon candidate systems, perhaps in the readily available
Kepler data or the upcoming Plato space mission. But forsuch a detection, dozens of transits in front of a photometrically quiet M or K dwarf are required (Heller, 2014). Whatis more, to ultimately confirm the presence of an exomoon,
additional evidence would be required to exclude photometric variations due to other phenomena, both astrophysical (e.g., stellar activity, rings) and instrumental (e.g., red

FIG. 12. (Left) Six simulated transits using LUNA (Kipping, 2011b) of a HZ Neptune around an M2 star with an Earthlike moon on a wide orbit (90% of the Hill radius). The moon can be seen to exhibit ‘‘auxiliary transits’’ and induce TTV.
(Right) Same as left, except the moon is now on a close-in orbit (5% of the Hill radius), causing ‘‘mutual events.’’ Bothplots show typical Kepler noise properties for a 12th-magnitude star observed in short cadence.

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

819

FIG. 13. Transit of the almost Jupiter-sized planet candidate KOI189.01 around a star of about 0.7 solar radii. Gray dots
indicate the original phase-folded Kepler light curve, the black dashed line indicates a model for the transit assuming aplanet only, and the red line assumes an Earth-sized moon in an orbit that is 15 planetary radii wide. Black dots in the rightpanel indicate data that is binned to 60 min. The photometric orbital sampling effect appears in the right panel as a deviation
between the red solid and the black dashed line about 6.5 h before the planetary midtransit. (Color graphics available onlineat www.liebertonline.com/ast)noise). A confirmation could be achieved with photodynamical modeling as applied by the Hunt for Exomoons
with Kepler (HEK) team. As an example for the photometricorbital sampling effect, Fig. 13 presents the phase-folded
Kepler light curve (gray dots) of the almost Jupiter-sizedplanet candidate KOI189.01, transiting a &0.7 R1 K star.
Note how the ‘‘no moon’’ model (black dashed line) and themodel for an Earth-sized moon (red solid line) diverge in theright panel! The latter is based on an improved model ofHeller (2014), now including stellar limb darkening, among
others, and is supposed to serve as a qualitative illustration
but not as a statistical fit to the Kepler data for the purposeof this paper.
6.3. Photometric noise

One major factor constraining the detection of moons oftransiting planets is the type of photometric noise contaminating the light curve.8 A first detailed analysis of noise
effects on the detection of exomoons with Kepler was performed by Kipping et al. (2009), showing that photon noise
and instrument noise strongly increase for stellar apparent
magnitudes T13. Combing shot noise, Kepler’s instrumental noise, and stellar variability with arguments fromorbital stability, they obtained a lower limit of about 0.2 M4
for the detection of moons orbiting Saturn-like planets in the

8

In the case of moon detection through perturbation of the
Rossiter-McLaughlin effect (Simon et al., 2010; Zhuang et al.,2012), one needs to consider types of noise that contaminate radial
velocity measurements.

stellar HZ of bright M stars (with Kepler magnitudes <11)by using TTV and TDV. This mass detection limit increases
for Neptune- and Jupiter-like planets because of theseplanets’ higher densities (see Fig. 3 in Kipping et al., 2009).
What is more, absolute mass detection limits are hard togeneralize because the TTV-TDV combined method constrains the planet-to-satellite mass ratio Ms/Mp. In theirtargeted search for exomoons, Kipping et al. (2013a)
achieved accuracies as good as Ms/Mp & 4%.
Lewis (2011a) investigated the effects of filtering on
Sun-like stellar noise for a variant of TTV, photometrictransit timing, and found that realistic photometric noise
suppresses the detection of moons on wide circumplanetary orbits. In another work, Lewis (2013) confirmed thatthese noise sources also hamper the detection of moons
around planets that follow distant circumstellar orbits. As aresult, exomoons hidden in the noise of the Kepler data
will need to have radii T0.75 R4 to be detectable by direct
eclipse effects. This value is comparable to the results ofSimon et al. (2012), who found that moons of close-inplanets, that is, with circumstellar orbital periods (10 days,
could be detected by using their scatter peak method on
Kepler short cadence data if the moons have radii T0.7 R4.
Uncorrelated noise that follows a Gaussian probability
distributionðx  lÞ2
1
f ðxÞ ¼ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ e 2r2
r 2p

ð6Þ

where r is the standard deviation, x is the perturbation to thelight curve due to noise, and l is the mean of the noise

820(usually zero), is called ‘‘white noise,’’ and it makes moon
detection relatively straightforward. At a given time, f(t) is
assumed to be uncorrelated with the past. As a result, white
noise contains equal power at all spectral frequencies. Whitenoise or noise that is nearly white is produced by many
instrumental or physical effects, such as shot noise.
Processes in stars, in Earth’s atmosphere, and in telescopes
can lead to long-term correlated trends in photometry thatshow an overabundance of long-wavelength components. In
astrophysics, these effects are collectively referred to as red
noise (Carter and Winn, 2009). Stars pulsate, convect, show
spots, and rotate, each of which leaves a distinctive red noise
signature on the light curve (Aigrain et al., 2004). Solar oscillations have a typical amplitude of a few parts per million
and period on the order of 5 min, while for other stars the
specific details depend on the stellar size and structure(Christensen-Dalsgaard, 2004). In Sun-like stars, stellar convection leads to granulation, which produces red noise withcharacteristic timescales between minutes and hours. Finally,starspots can cause red noise in transit light curves, firstthrough spot-crossing events and second through spot evolution or rotational modulation. If a planet passes in front of astarspot group during transit, a temporary short-term increasein brightness results. This effect was predicted (Silva, 2003)
and has finally been observed in many transiting systems(Pont et al., 2007; Kundurthy et al., 2011; Sanchis-Ojeda andWinn, 2011). Evolution and rotational modulation of starspots can cause long-term photometric variation over tens ofdays. This variation has been observed and modeled for arange of stars including CoRoT-2a (Lanza et al., 2009a) and
CoRoT-4a (Lanza et al., 2009b).
Ground-based observations can be substantially contaminated with red noise induced by Earth’s atmosphere (Pontet al., 2006), for example, by the steadily changing value ofthe air mass over the course of a night. The operation of thetelescope, as well as the telescope’s surroundings, can also
introduce red noise, as has been noted by the ground-based
WASP (Street et al., 2004) and HATNet surveys (Bakos
et al., 2002, 2009). For the space-based Kepler and CoRoT
missions, a number of different processes can lead to trends
and jumps in the data, including effects from spacecraft
motion, motion of the image on the CCD, and cosmic rays
(Auvergne et al., 2009; Christiansen et al., 20139). When aspacecraft rotates to reposition solar panels or to downlink
data, or when it passes into Earth’s shadow10, the varying
solar irradiation on various parts of the spacecraft’s surface
can cause transient photometric perturbations. In addition,
the target’s image can move on the CCD, and finally,
damage due to cosmic rays can lead to degradation of the
CCDs. Cosmic rays can be isolated, as well as certain specific events such as the passage of the South Atlantic Anomaly
in the case of CoRoT or the three large coronal mass ejectionsin Kepler’s quarter 12. While processing pipelines work to
reduce effects from cosmic rays (Fanelli et al., 201111), they
are never completely removed in all cases.
9

http://archive.stsci.edu/kepler/manuals/Data_Characteristics.pdf
Kepler orbits the Sun in an Earth-trailing orbit, where it avoids
transits in the shadow of Earth. At an altitude of 827 km, CoRoT is
in a polar orbit around Earth and occasionally passes Earth’s shadow.
11
http://archive.stsci.edu/kepler/manuals/KSCI-19081-001_Data_
Processing_Handbook.pdf
10

HELLER ET AL.
6.3.1. Effects of red noise on searches for exomoons.

While uncertainties in the transit mid-time and transit duration are dominated by errors in the ingress and egress partsof the light curve, relatively short lengths of time, red noise
acts over longer periods. Hence, these techniques should bequite robust to red noise. However, transit mid-time (filled
circles in Fig. 14) and duration (open circles) errors (Mazeh
et al., 2013) of Kepler Objects of Interest are up to manyfactors above the values predicted by assuming white noise
only. While inclination, stellar luminosity, stellar radius, andplanetary radius can explain some of this discrepancy, someof it is undoubtedly due to red noise.
Carter and Winn (2009) investigated the effect of red
noise on both mid-time and duration errors with a power
spectrum following a power law, showing that parameters
can be effectively recovered through use of a wavelet
transform. Alternatively, Kipping et al. (2009) and later
Awiphan and Kerins (2013) modeled red noise as white
noise plus a set of longer-period sinusoids. While Kipping
et al. (2009) ended up neglecting the difference between
white and red noise, their simulations show that the distribution of transit mid-times became slightly non-Gaussian; inparticular, the tails of the distribution became fatter (Fig. 2of Kipping et al., 2009). Awiphan and Kerins (2013) confirmed this effect and concluded that this variety of red noise
decreases moon detectability. Other recent studies suggestthat the presence of starspots, especially near the stellar
limb, can alter transit durations and timings (Silva-Válio,
2010; Barros et al., 2013), reducing sensitivity for spottedstars. Mazeh et al. (2013) confirmed this trend in transit
timing errors for numerous Kepler Objects of Interest. In
particular, they found that TTV correlate with stellar rotation in active stars, indicating again that noise components
due to starspots could alter timing results.
In addition to the standard transit timing technique,photometric transit timing has been proposed (Szabó et al.,2006), a technique that measures timing perturbations withrespect to the average transit time weighted by the dip depth.
Using solar photometric noise from the Solar and Heliosphere Observatory as a proxy, Lewis (2013) found thatrealistic red stellar photometric noise dramatically degradedmoon detectability for this technique (see crosses in Fig.
14), compared to white noise for the case where the transit
duration was longer than 3 h. What is more, this degradation
was not completely reversed by filtering, independent of thefiltering method. This result is unfortunate, as the photometric transit timing statistic is proportional to the moon’s
radius squared (Simon et al., 2007) as opposed to the
moon’s mass (Sartoretti and Schneider, 1999), but unsurprising, as photometric transit timing uses data from bothwithin and outside the planetary transit, compared to transit
timing variation, which only uses shorter sections of data.
While Tusnski and Valio (2011) assumed white photometric noise, other projects have started to consider the effectof red noise in their analyses. The Hunt for Exomoons with
Kepler (HEK) (Kipping et al., 2012) addresses the effect of
red noise in a number of ways. First, they reject candidates
with high levels of correlated noise (Kipping et al., 2013a).
Second, a high-pass cosine filter is used to remove long-term
trends from the data. The possibility of modeling the effectsof starspots has also been suggested (Kipping, 2012). To help
distinguish between starspot crossings and mutual events,

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

821

FIG. 14. Calculated timing errors of the transit mid-time (filled circles) and duration (open circles) for Kepler planetcandidates around stars with magnitudes < 13.5 (Mazeh et al., 2013). Planetary radii are estimated by assuming an Earthlike composition (left panel) or a mostly gaseous composition (right panel). Point size is proportional to the stellar radius,
with color indicating if the radius is smaller than 0.7 solar radii (R1) (red), between 0.7 and 1.3 R1 (gold), or larger than
1.3 R1 (green). Predictions of the errors in transit mid-time (solid line) and duration (dotted line) following Carter et al.
(2008) assume a central transit and white noise for the case of a 1 or 10 R4 radius planet orbiting a 0.7 R1 (red), R1 (gold),or 1.3 R1 (green) star. Photometric transit timing errors, dominated by white noise (dashed line) and realistic solar-type
noise (crosses) assume a 12th-magnitude G dwarf and relative photometric precision of 2 · 10 - 5 in a 6.5 h exposure (Lewis,2013). (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)
rules have been proposed; for example, it is required that amutual event have a flat top (Kipping et al., 2012). Also, toallow for secure detection, it is required that a given moon be
detected by several detection methods. In an attempt toquantify the true error on detected moon properties, fakemoon transits were injected into real data for the case of
Kepler-22b (Kipping et al., 2013b), indicating that an Earthlike moon, if present, would have been detected.
6.4. Direct imaging of extrasolar moons
6.4.1. Principles of direct imaging. Direct imaging of
exoplanets, especially those in the stellar HZ, is extremely
difficult because of the very small star-planet angular separation and the high-contrast ratio between the star and planet.
In fact, all exoplanets that have been directly imaged are well
separated from their host star and are young systems that are
still hot from formation, rather than being heated by stellar
irradiation, with effective temperatures around 1000 K. Examples of directly imaged exoplanets include the HR8799
planets, b Pic b, LkCa15b, j And b, and GJ 504b (Lagrange
et al., 2008; Marois et al., 2008; Kraus and Ireland, 2011;
Carson et al., 2013; Kuzuhara et al., 2013). Intuitively, one
would expect exomoons to be even more difficult to be imaged directly. For exomoons similar to those found in the
Solar System, this is likely the case. However, satellites thatare heated by sources other than stellar irradiation, such as
tidal heating, can behave completely differently.
There has been considerable discussion in the literature of
the existence of THEMs that are extrasolar analogues toSolar System objects such as Io, Europa, and Enceladus (Pealeet al., 1979; Yoder and Peale, 1981; Ross and Schubert, 1987,
1989; Nimmo et al., 2007; Heller and Armstrong, 2014).
Yet the possibility of imaging the thermal emission fromunresolved THEMs was proposed only recently by Peters
and Turner (2013)12. From an observational point of view,
direct imaging of exomoons has several advantages overexoplanet direct imaging. THEMs may remain hot and luminous for timescales of order of the stellar main sequence
lifetime and thus could be visible around both young and oldstars. Additionally, THEMs can be quite hot even if theyreceive negligible stellar irradiation; therefore they may beluminous even at large separations from the system primary.
This will reduce or even eliminate the inner-working angle
requirement associated with exoplanet high-contrast imaging. Furthermore, tidal heating depends so strongly on orbital and physical parameters of the THEM that plausible
systems with properties not very different from those occurring in the Solar System will result in terrestrial planet–
sized objects with effective temperatures up to 1000 K oreven higher in extreme but physically permissible cases. The
total luminosity of a THEM due to tidal heating is given by12
For exoplanets, direct imaging refers to the imaging of a planetthat is spatially resolved from its host star. In the model proposed byPeters and Turner (2013), the tidally heated moon is not spatiallyresolved from its host planet, but it rather adds to the thermal flux
detected at the circumstellar orbital position of the planet. Despite
this unresolved imaging, we here refer to this exomoon detection
method as direct imaging.

822

HELLER ET AL.

6272p7 G5Ltid ¼
9747

1=2

9=2

R7s qs
ls Qs

!

e2ps

!

b15=2
ps

ð7Þ

where ls is the moon’s elastic rigidity, Qs is the moon’s tidal
dissipation function (or quality factor), eps is the eccentricityof the planet-satellite orbit, bps is the satellite’s orbital
semimajor axis in units of Roche radii, qs is the satellite
density, and Rs is the satellite radius (Scharf, 2006; Peters
and Turner, 2013). Equation 7 is based on the tidal heating
equations originally derived by Reynolds et al. (1987) and
Segatz et al. (1988) and assumes zero obliquity. The terms
that depend on the exomoon’s physical properties and thosethat describe its orbit are grouped separately. Although bps
is grouped with the orbital terms, in addition to its linear
dependence on the moon’s semimajor axis aps, it also scales=with the planetary mass and the satellite density as (Mp/qs)
for a fixed aps.
Following Peters and Turner (2013), the scaling relation
for Eq. 7 relative to the luminosity of Earth (L4 = 1.75 ·1024 ergs/s) is
1

"

!#
9
dynes
qs 2 36 1011 cm2
Ls  L

Qs
q
ls
"
#
 e 2 b 152
ps
ps·
0:0028
8
Rs
R

3

7 

ð8Þ

Note that Eq. 8 adopts Qs = 36, ls = 1011 dynes/cm2 as for Io(Peale et al., 1979; Segatz et al., 1988), and Earth’s radiusand density as reference values. The reference values of bps
and eps were then chosen to give L4. If we assume that
THEMs are blackbodies, we can use the exomoon’s luminosity to approximate its effective temperature. The blackbody assumption is a reasonable approximation, but ingeneral we would expect THEMs to emit excess light at
bluer wavelengths due to hotspots on the surface. Additionally, exomoons with atmospheres are likely to haveabsorption lines in their spectrum. Assuming a blackbody,
we can define a satellite’s effective temperature (Ts) fromthe luminosity via the Stefan-Boltzmann law as a scaling
relation relative to a 279 K exomoon, this temperature corresponding to the equilibrium temperature of Earth:2!1 3
54  98
11 dynes 4
10
R
q
36
s
s
cm2
5

Ts  279 K4
Qs
R
q
ls
"
#
 e 12 b 158
ps
ps·
0:00288ð9Þ(Peters and Turner, 2013). As an example, Eq. 9 yields &60 K for Io, corresponding to the effective temperature of Io
if it were not irradiated by the Sun. Note that Eq. 9 adopts
the same reference values as Eq. 8 and that it assumes only
tidal heating with no additional energy sources, such as
stellar irradiation or interior radiogenic heat.
An exomoon’s brightness is expected to be variable formultiple reasons, including eclipses of the exomoon behind
its host planet (Heller, 2012), phase curve variations due totemperature variation across an object’s surface (Heller andBarnes, 2013), and volcanism.
6.4.2. Direct imaging with future facilities. If THEMs
exist and are common, are they detectable with current andfuture instrumentation? As shown by Peters and Turner(2013), Spitzer’s IRAC could detect an exomoon the size ofEarth with a surface temperature of 850 K and at a distanceof 5 pc from Earth. Future instruments, such as JWST’s
Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI), have even more potential
for direct imaging of exomoons. Figure 15 shows minimum
temperatures and radii of exomoons detectable with MIRI at
the 5r confidence level in 10,000 s for a star 3 pc from theSun (Glasse et al., 2010). Note that some exomoons shown
here have temperatures and radii similar to Earth’s! Thus, itis plausible that some of these hypothetical exomoons are
not only directly visible with JWST but could potentially behabitable, in the sense of having surface temperatures thatwould allow liquid water to be present.
A 300 K, an Earth-radius THEM is only 3 · 105 fainter at awavelength of k & 14 lm than a Sun-like star, but at the sametime it can be at a large distance from its host star. For
example, at 30 AU projected separation, it would be 15† fromthe star at a distance of 2 pc. At k & 14 lm, k/D = 0.44† for a
D = 6.5 m telescope, which means this moon would be at
30 · k/D. This far away from the star, the airy rings are about
3 · 105 times fainter than the core of the star and about thesame intensity as the 300 K, Earth-radius moon, indicatingthat the detection should be possible. This example is not at
the limit of JWST’s sensitivity and inner working angle. The
most challenging THEM detection JWST will be capable ofmaking is a 300 K THEM as far as 4 pc from the Sun. If there
is such an Earth-sized 300 K moon orbiting aCen, MIRI will
be able to detect it in eight of its nine spectral bands with
better than 15r signal-to-noise in a 104 s integration. Thus,
directly imaging a 300 K, Earth-radius moon that is tidally
heated is potentially much easier than resolving an Earth-like
exoplanet orbiting in the HZ of its primary!
We can ask the question of what orbital parameters would
give rise to the temperatures of moons shown in Fig. 15. The
minimum detectable temperatures by MIRI for four different-radii satellites (Rs = 0.1 R4, 0.25 R4, 0.5 R4, and R4)
at 3 pc were calculated to be Ts = 542, 355, 282, and 229 K,
respectively (see Fig. 15). We can use Eq. 9 to calculate theexpected orbital parameters bps and eps for these four objects. Figure 16 shows bps and eps corresponding to thesefour cases, indicating that a roughly Earth-sized exomoon(black line) at a distance of 10 Roche radii with an eccentricity similar to that of Titan (eps = 0.0288) and an effective
temperature equal to the reader’s room temperature could be
detectable with JWST.
6.5. Results of exomoon searches to dateCompared to their planetary cousins, relatively few searches for exomoons have been conducted to date. The great
enabler in this field has been the Kepler mission, offeringcontinuous, precise photometric data of the same targets foryears. The downside of Kepler data is that the field is deep
(and thus faint) and dominated by Sun-like stars, whereas
K and M dwarfs provide a significant boost to sensitivity
thanks to their smaller sizes.

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

823

FIG. 15. 5r detection limits of JWST’s MIRI for THEMs with radii along the abscissa and effective temperatures along
the ordinate (following Turner and Peters, 2013). Ten thousand seconds of integration are assumed for a star 3 pc from theSun. MIRI’s nine imaging bands are indicated with different line colors, their names encoding the wavelength in units of
microns times 100. Dashed vertical black lines denote the radii of Io, Earth, and Jupiter, which is roughly equal to that of atypical brown dwarf. (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)

FIG. 16. Minimum detectable eccentricity (abscissa) andsemimajor axis in units of Roche radii (bps, ordinate) for
THEMs between 0.1 and 1 R4 in size (Turner and Peters,2013). The assumed bodily characteristics are describedaround Eqs. 5–6. The orange dot indicates Io’s eccentricity
and bps, but note that its size is 0.066 R4. Satellites below
their respective curve will be detectable by MIRI as far as
3 pc from Earth, provided they are sufficiently separated
from their star. (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)

Within the current literature, one can find claims thatvarious observations are consistent with an exomoon without specifically claiming an unambiguous exomoon detection. For example, Szabó et al. (2013) suggested that manyof Kepler’s hot Jupiters show high TTV that could be due toexomoons or equally other planets in the system. Others
used observations of transiting exoplanets to perform serendipitous searches for exomoons, such as Brown et al.
(2001) around HD 209458b, Charbonneau et al. (2006)
around HD 149026b, Maciejewski et al. (2010) around
WASP-3b, and Montalto et al. (2012) around WASP-3b,
none of which revealed evidence for an extrasolar satellite.
At the time of writing, the only known systematic survey
is HEK (Kipping et al., 2012). Using photodynamic modeling, the HEK team has surveyed 17 Kepler planet candidates for evidence of an extrasolar moon so far. Due to thelarge number of free parameters, the very complex andmultimodal parameter space, the demands of full photodynamic modeling, and the need for careful Bayesian model
selection, the computational requirements reported by the
HEK project have been staggering compared to a typicalplanet-only analysis. For example, Kepler-22b required
50 yr of modern CPU time (Kipping et al., 2013b).
So far, the HEK team reports no compelling evidence foran exomoon, but they have derived strong constraints of Ms/
Mp < 4% for five cases (Nesvorný et al., 2012; Kipping
et al., 2013a), translating into satellite masses as small as
0.07 M4 (Fig. 17), and Ms < 0.5 M4 for the additional caseof the HZ planet Kepler-22b (Kipping et al., 2013b). In thelatter example, an absolute mass constraint is possible
thanks to the availability of radial velocities. In their latest
release, Kipping et al. (2014) added another eight null

824

HELLER ET AL.

FIG. 17. Moon-to-planet mass ratio constraints derived so far by the HEK project (Nesvorný et al., 2012; Kipping et al.,2013a). Kepler-22b has also been studied and yields Ms < 0.5 M4 but is not shown here, as the paper is still under review at
the time of writing. (Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/ast)

detections of moons around planets transiting M dwarfs,
with sensitivities to satellites as tiny as 0.36 M4 in the caseof KOI3284.01. Despite the recent malfunction with the
Kepler spacecraft, there is a vast volume of unanalyzed
planet candidates for moon hunting and still relatively few
conducted so far. In the next 1–2 yr, then, we should see
about 100 systems analyzed, which will provide a statistically meaningful constraint on the occurrence rate of large
moons, g .
7. Summary and Conclusions

This review highlights a remarkable new frontier of human exploration of space: the detection and characterizationof moons orbiting extrasolar planets. Starting from the potentially habitable icy satellites of the Solar System (Section2), we show that the formation of very massive satellites
the mass of Mars is possible by in situ formation in thecircumplanetary disk and how a capture during binary exchange can result in a massive moon, too (Section 3). After
discussing the complex orbital evolution of single- and multiplemoon systems, which are governed by secular perturbations
and tidal evolution (Section 4), we explore illumination, tidal
heating, and magnetic effects on the potential of extrasolar
moons to host liquid surface water (Section 5). Finally, we
explain the currently available techniques for searching for
exomoons and summarize a recently initiated survey for exomoons in the data of the Kepler space telescope (Section 6).
From a formation point of view, habitable exomoons
can exist. Mars-sized exomoons can form by either in situ
formation in the circumplanetary disks of super-jovian
planets (Section 3.1) or by gravitational capture from aformer planet-moon or planet-planet binary (Section 3.2).
This mass of about 0.1 M4 is required to let any terrestrial

world be habitable by atmospheric and geological considerations (Section 5). Stellar perturbations on these moons’orbits, their tidal orbital evolution, tidal heating in the
moons, and satellite-satellite interactions prevent moons in
the HZs of low-mass stars from being habitable (Section 4).
Moreover, while more massive giant planets should tend to
produce more massive moons, strong inplanation fromyoung, hot planets onto their moons can initiate a runaway
greenhouse effect on the moons and make them at least
temporarily uninhabitable (Section 5.2). With this effectbecoming increasingly severe for the most massive giant
planets, we identify here the formation and habitability ofmoons as competing processes. Although growing moons
can accumulate more mass from the disks around more
massive giant planets, the danger of a planet-induced runaway greenhouse effect on the moons increases, too. Finally,
the host planet’s intrinsic magnetic field and the stellar windaffect the moon’s habitability by regulating the flux of highenergy particles (Section 5.3.2).
Exomoons in the Kepler data may be detectable if they belong to a class of natural satellites that does not exist in the Solar
System. While the most massive known moon, Ganymede, hasa mass roughly 1/40 M4, exomoons would need to have about
10 times this mass to be traceable via their planet’s TTV andTDV (Section 6.1). Another detection channel would bethrough a moon’s direct photometric transit, which could bemeasurable in the Kepler data for moons as small as Mars oreven Ganymede (Sections 6.2 and 6.3).
Combining the key predictions from formation, detection,and habitability sections, we find a favorable mass regime
for the first extrasolar moons to be detected. Notably, there
is a mass overlap of the most massive satellites that (i) can
possibly form in protosatellite disks around super-jovian
planets, (ii) can be detected with current and near-future

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

technology, and (iii) can be habitable in terms of atmospheric stability. This regime is roughly between 1 and 5
times the mass of Mars or 0.1–0.5 M4. Heavier moons
would have better odds of being habitable (Heller andArmstrong, 2014), and they would be easier to detect,though it is uncertain whether they exist.
Although the observational challenges of exomoon
detection and characterization are huge, our gain in understanding planet formation and evolution would be enormous. The moons of Earth, Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune
have proven to be fundamentally important tracers of theformation of the Solar System—most notably of the formation of Earth and life—so the characterization of exomoon systems engenders the power of probing the origin ofindividual extrasolar planets (Withers and Barnes, 2010).
Just as the different architectures of the jovian and saturnian
satellite systems are records of Jupiter’s gap opening in theearly gas disk around the Sun, of an inner cavity in Jupiter’s
very own circumplanetary disk, and of the evolution of the
H2O snow line in the disks, the architectures of exomoon
systems could trace their planets’ histories, too. We conclude that any near-future detection of an exomoon, be it in
the Kepler data or by observations with similar accuracy,
could fundamentally challenge formation and evolution
theories of planets and satellites.
Another avail of exomoon detections could lie in a drastic
increase of potentially habitable worlds. With most known
planets in the stellar HZ being gas giants between the sizesof Neptune and Jupiter rather than terrestrial planets, themoons of giant planets could actually be the most numerous
population of habitable worlds.
8. Outlook

On the theoretical front, improvements of our understanding of planet and satellite formation might help to focus
exomoon searches on the most promising host planets. The
formation and movement of water ice lines in the disks aroundyoung giant planets, as an example, has a major effect on the
total mass of solids available for moon formation. Preliminary
studies show that super-jovian planets might host water-rich
giant moons the size of Mars or even larger (Heller and Pudritz, unpublished data), in agreement with the scaling relation suggested by Canup and Ward (2006). Hence, even futurenull detections of moons around the biggest planets could help
assess the conditions in circumplanetary disks. As an example, the absence of giant moons could indicate hotter planetaryenvironments, in which the formation of ices is prevented,
than are currently assumed. Earth-mass moons, however, arevery hard to form with any of the viable formation theories;
consequently the suggested low abundance or absence (Kipping et al., 2014) of such moons may not help constrainmodels immediately. However, in the most favorable conditions, where a somewhat super-jovian-mass planet with anentourage of an oversized Galilean-style moon system transits
a photometrically quiet M or K dwarf star, a handful of detections might be feasible with the available Kepler data
(Kipping et al., 2012; Heller, 2014) and therefore might
confirm the propriety of moon formation theories for extrasolar planets.
Another largely unexplored aspect of habitable moon
formation concerns the capture and orbital stability of moons

825

during planet migration. A few dozen giant planets near, orin, their host stars’ HZ have been detected by radial velocity
techniques (see Fig. 1 in Heller and Barnes, 2014), most ofwhich cannot possibly have formed at their current orbital
locations, as giant planets’ cores are assumed to form beyond the circumstellar snow lines (Pollack et al., 1996;
Ward, 1997). This prompts the compelling question of whether migrating giant planets, which end up in their host star’s
HZ, can capture terrestrial planets into stable satellite orbits
during migration. A range of studies have addressed the postcapture evolution or stability of moons (Barnes and O’Brien,
2002; Domingos et al., 2006; Donnison, 2010; Porter andGrundy, 2011; Sasaki et al., 2012; Williams, 2013) and theloss of moons during planet migration toward the hot Jupiterregime (Namouni, 2010). But dynamical simulations of thecapture scenarios around migrating giant planets near the
HZ are still required in order to guide searches for habitable exomoons.
NASA’s all-sky survey with the Transiting Exoplanet
Survey Satellite (TESS), to be launched in 2017, will use thetransit method to search for planets orbiting bright stars withorbital periods (72 days (Deming et al., 2009). As stellar
perturbations play a key role in the orbital stability of moons
orbiting giant planets (see Section 4), TESS will hardly findsuch systems. The proposed ESA space mission PLAnetary
Transits and Oscillations of stars (PLATO 2.0) (Rauer et al.,2013), with launch envisioned for 2022–2024, however, hasbeen shown capable of finding exomoons as small as 0.5
R4, that is, the size of Mars (Simon et al., 2012; Heller,2014). Since the target stars will be mostly K and M dwarfs
in the solar neighborhood, precise radius and mass constraints on potentially discovered exomoons will be possible(Kipping, 2010). What is more, PLATO’s long pointings of
2–3 yr would allow for exomoon detections in the HZs of K
and M dwarfs.
Future exomoon surveys may benefit by expanding theirfield of view while keeping a continuous staring mode andusing the redder part of the spectrum to look at K and M
dwarfs. Targeting these low-mass stars increases the relative
dip in the light curves due to an exomoon as well as thetransit frequency, and it decreases the minimum transit duration of a planet capable of hosting long-lived stablemoons. Searches for exomoons around specific transiting
planets will need to target relatively inactive stars or stars
with noise spectra that are amenable to filtering (Carter andWinn, 2009) in order to reduce the effect of starspot modulation and errors due to spot-crossing events. While recently developed procedures of white and red noise filteringin stellar light curves represent major steps toward securemoon detections, they do not directly address additional
timing noise due to spots on the stellar limb (Silva-Válio,
2010; Barros et al., 2013) and the empirical correlation
between the timing error and the slope of the out-of-transit
light curve (Mazeh et al., 2013). Further progress, either
through the modeling-based approach used by the HEK
project, the filtering approach suggested by Carter and Winn
(2009), or the observational approach used by Mazeh et al.
(2013), is required to securely detect and constrain moonsof Kepler planets. Finally, telescopes capable of multicolor measurements will help discriminate between starspot
occupations on the one hand and planet/moon transits on theother hand.

826

HELLER ET AL.

The James Webb Space Telescope will be sensitive to ahypothetical family of THEMs at distances as far as 4 pc
from the Sun and as a cool as 300 K. These moons would
need to be roughly Earth-sized and, together with the hostplanets, separated from their host star by at least 0.5†. Future
surveys that aim to detect smaller and colder THEMs would
need to operate in the mid-infrared to far infrared with submicrojansky sensitivity. Although THEMs need not be close
to their host star to be detectable, instruments able to probesmaller inner working angles are likely to detect more THEMs
simply because there will presumably be more planets closer
into the star that can host THEMs. A preliminary imaging
search for THEMs around the nearest stars with the use ofarchival Spitzer IRAC data has recently been completed andwill deliver the first constraints on the occurrence of THEMs(Limbach and Turner, unpublished data).
Once an exomoon has been detected around a giant planetin the stellar HZ, scientists will try to discern whether it isactually inhabited. Kaltenegger (2010) showed that JWST
would be able to spectroscopically characterize the atmospheres of transiting exomoons in nearby M dwarf systems,
provided their circumplanetary orbits are wide enough toallow for separate transits. In her simulations, the spectroscopic signatures of the biologically relevant molecules
H2O, CO2, and O3 could be observable for HZ exomoons
transiting M5 to M9 stars as far as 10 pc from the Sun.
Although stellar perturbations on those moon’s orbits could
force the latter to be eccentric and thereby generate substantial tidal heating (Heller, 2012), the threat of a runaway
greenhouse effect would be weak for moons in wide orbits
because tidal heating scales inversely to a high power inplanet-moon distance.
Exomoon science will benefit from results of the Jupiter
Icy Moons Explorer ( JUICE) (The JUICE Science Study
Team, 201113; Grasset et al., 2013), the first space mission
designated to explore the emergence of habitable worlds
around giant planets. Scheduled to launch in 2022 and toarrive at Jupiter in 2030, JUICE will constrain tidal processes and gravitational interaction in the Galilean systemand thereby help calibrate secular-tidal models for theorbital evolution of moons around extrasolar planets. As
an example, the tidal response of Ganymede’s icy shell
will be measured by laser altimetry and radio science experiments. The amplitudes of periodic surface deformations are suspected to be about 7–8 m in case of a shallow
subsurface ocean, but only some 10 cm if the ocean isdeeper than roughly 100 km or not present at all. With
Ganymede being one of the three solid bodies in the Solar
System—besides Mercury and Earth—that currently generates a magnetic dipole field (Kivelson et al., 2002),
JUICE could constrain models for the generation of intrinsic magnetic fields on extrasolar moons, which could
be crucial for their habitability (Baumstark-Khan and Facius, 2002; Heller and Zuluaga, 2013). Measuring thebodily and structural properties of the Galilean moons, themission will also constrain formation models for moonsystems in general.
In view of the unanticipated discoveries of planets aroundpulsars (Wolszczan and Frail, 1992), Jupiter-mass planets in
13

Yellow Book available at http://sci.esa.int/juice

orbits extremely close to their stars (Mayor and Queloz,1995), planets orbiting binary stars (Doyle et al., 2011), andsmall-scale planetary systems that resemble the satellite
system of Jupiter (Muirhead et al., 2012), the discovery of
the first exomoon beckons and promises yet another revolution in our understanding of the universe.
Acknowledgments

The helpful comments of two referees are very muchappreciated. We thank Alexis Carlotti, Jill Knapp, Matt
Mountain, George Rieke, Dave Spiegel, and Scott Tremaine
for useful conversations and Ted Stryk for granting permission to use a reprocessed image of Europa. René Heller
is supported by the Origins Institute at McMaster University
and by the Canadian Astrobiology Training Program, aCollaborative Research and Training Experience Program
funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering ResearchCouncil of Canada (NSERC). Darren Williams is a memberof the Center for Exoplanets and Habitable Worlds, which is
supported by the Pennsylvania State University, the Eberly
College of Science, and the Pennsylvania Space Grant
Consortium. Takanori Sasaki was supported by a grant for
the Global COE Program, ‘‘From the Earth to ‘Earths,’’’
MEXT, Japan, and Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B),
JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 24740120. Rory Barnes
acknowledges support from NSF grant AST-1108882 andthe NASA Astrobiology Institute’s Virtual Planetary Laboratory lead team under cooperative agreement no.
NNH05ZDA001C. Jorge I. Zuluaga is supported by CODI/
UdeA. This research has been supported in part by World
Premier International Research Center Initiative, MEXT,
Japan. This work has made use of NASA’s Astrophysics
Data System Bibliographic Services.
Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.
Abbreviations

BTO, binary-terrestrial object.
HE, habitable edge.
HEK, Hunt for Exomoons with Kepler.
HZ, habitable zone.
JUICE, Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer.
JWST, James Webb Space Telescope.
MIRI, Mid-Infrared Instrument.
PLATO, PLAnetary Transits and Oscillations of stars.
TDV, transit duration variations.
TDV-V, transit duration variations due to velocity variations.
TESS, Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite.
THEMs, tidally heated exomoons.
TTV, transit timing variations.
W13, Williams (2013).
References

Agnor, C.B. and Hamilton, D. P. (2006) Neptune’s capture ofits moon Triton in a binary-planet gravitational encounter.
Nature 441:192–194.
Aigrain, S., Favata, F., and Gilmore, G. (2004) Characterisingstellar micro-variability for planetary transit searches. AstronAstrophys 414:1139–1152.

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

Anderson, J.D., Lau, E.L., Sjogren, W.L., Schubert, G., andMoore, W.B. (1996) Gravitational constraints on the internal
structure of Ganymede. Nature 384:541–543.
Arridge, C.S., Achilleos, N., Dougherty, M.K., Khurana, K.K.,
and Russell, C.T. (2006) Modeling the size and shape ofSaturn’s magnetopause with variable dynamic pressure. J
Geophys Res: Space Physics 111, doi:10.1029/2005JA011574.
Atreya, S.K., Adams, E.Y., and Niemann, H.B. (2006) Titan’s
methane cycle. Planet Space Sci 54:1177–1187.
Auvergne, M., Bodin, P., Boisnard, L., Buey, J.-T., Chaintreuil,S., Epstein, G., Jouret, M., Lam-Trong, T., Levacher, P.,
Magnan, A., Perez, R., Plasson, P., Plesseria, J., Peter, G.,
Steller, M., Tiphène, D., Baglin, A., Agogué, P., Appourchaux, T., Barbet, D., Beaufort, T., Bellenger, R., Berlin, R.,
Bernardi, P., Blouin, D., Boumier, P., Bonneau, F., Briet, R.,
Butler, B., Cautain, R., Chiavassa, F., Costes, V., Cuvilho, J.,
Cunha-Parro, V., de Oliveira Fialho, F., Decaudin, M., Defise, J.-M., Djalal, S., Docclo, A., Drummond, R., Dupuis, O.,
Exil, G., Fauré, C., Gaboriaud, A., Gamet, P., Gavalda, P.,
Grolleau, E., Gueguen, L., Guivarc’h, V., Guterman, P.,
Hasiba, J., Huntzinger, G., Hustaix, H., Imbert, C., Jeanville,G., Johlander, B., Jorda, L., Journoud, P., Karioty, F., Kerjean, L., Lafond, L., Lapeyrere, V., Landiech, P., Larqué, T.,
Laudet, P., Le Merrer, J., Leporati, L., Leruyet, B., Levieuge,
B., Llebaria, A., Martin, L., Mazy, E., Mesnager, J.-M., Michel, J.-P., Moalic, J.-P., Monjoin, W., Naudet, D., Neukirchner, S., Nguyen-Kim, K., Ollivier, M., Orcesi, J.-L.,
Ottacher, H., Oulali, A., Parisot, J., Perruchot, S., Piacentino,A., Pinheiro da Silva, L., Platzer, J., Pontet, B., Pradines, A.,
Quentin, C., Rohbeck, U., Rolland, G., Rollenhagen, F.,
Romagnan, R., Russ, N., Samadi, R., Schmidt, R., Schwartz,
N., Sebbag, I., Smit, H., Sunter, W., Tello, M., Toulouse, P.,
Ulmer, B., Vandermarcq, O., Vergnault, E., Wallner, R.,
Waultier, G., and Zanatta, P. (2009) The CoRoT satellite inflight: description and performance. Astron Astrophys 506:
411–424.
Awiphan, S. and Kerins, E. (2013) The detectability of habitable exomoons with Kepler. Mon Not R Astron Soc 432:
2549–2561.
Bagenal, F. (1992) Giant planet magnetospheres. Annu Rev
Earth Planet Sci 20:289–329.
Bakos, G.Á., Lázár, J., Papp, I., Sári, P., and Green, E.M.
(2002) System description and first light curves of the Hungarian Automated Telescope, an autonomous observatory forvariability search. Publ Astron Soc Pac 114:974–987.
Bakos, G., Afonso, C., Henning, T., Jordán, A., Holman, M.,
Noyes, R.W., Sackett, P.D., Sasselov, D., Kovács, G.,
Csubry, Z., and Pál, A. (2009) HAT-South: a global networkof Southern Hemisphere automated telescopes to detect
transiting exoplanets. Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union 253:354–357.
Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Barman, T.S., Allard, F., and Hauschildt,
P.H. (2003) Evolutionary models for cool brown dwarfs andextrasolar giant planets. The case of HD 209458. Astron Astrophys 402:701–712.
Barclay, T., Rowe, J.F., Lissauer, J.J., Huber, D., Fressin, F.,
Howell, S.B., Bryson, S.T., Chaplin, W.J., Désert, J.M., Lopez,
E.D., Marcy, G.W., Mullally, F., Ragozzine, D., Torres, G.,
Adams, E.R., Agol, E., Barrado, D., Basu, S., Bedding, T.R.,
Buchhave, L.A., Charbonneau, D., Christiansen, J.L., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., Ciardi, D., Cochran, W.D., Dupree,
A.K., Elsworth, Y., Everett, M., Fischer, D.A., Ford, E.B.,
Fortney, J.J., Geary, J.C., Haas, M.R., Handberg, R., Hekker,
S., Henze, C.E., Horch, E., Howard, A.W., Hunter, R.C.,

827

Isaacson, H., Jenkins, J.M., Karoff, C., Kawaler, S.D.,
Kjeldsen, H., Klaus, T.C., Latham, D.W., Li, J., Lillo-Box, J.,
Lund, M.N., Lundkvist, M., Metcalfe, T.S., Miglio, A.,
Morris, R.L., Quintana, E.V., Stello, D., Smith, J.C., Still, M.,
and Thompson, S.E. (2013) A sub-Mercury sized exoplanet.
Nature 494:452–454.
Barnes, J.W. and O’Brien, D.P. (2002) Stability of satellites
around close-in extrasolar giant planets. Astrophys J 575:
1087–1093.
Barnes, R. and Heller, R. (2013) Habitable planets around whiteand brown dwarfs: the perils of a cooling primary. Astrobiology 13:279–291.
Barnes, R., Jackson, B., Greenberg, R., and Raymond, S.N.
(2009a) Tidal limits to planetary habitability. Astrophys J
700:L30–L33.
Barnes, R., Jackson, B., Raymond, S.N., West, A.A., andGreenberg, R. (2009b) The HD 40307 planetary system: super-Earths or mini-Neptunes? Astrophys J 695:1006–1011.
Barnes, R., Mullins, K., Goldblatt, C., Meadows, V.S., Kasting,
J.F., and Heller, R. (2013) Tidal Venuses: triggering a climate
catastrophe via tidal heating. Astrobiology 13:225–250.
Barros, S.C.C., Boué, G., Gibson, N.P., Pollacco, D.L.,
Santerne, A., Keenan, F.P., Skillen, I., and Street, R.A. (2013)
Transit timing variations in WASP-10b induced by stellar
activity. Mon Not R Astron Soc 430:3032–3047.
Batalha, N.M., Rowe, J.F., Bryson, S.T., Barclay, T., Burke, C.J.,
Caldwell, D.A., Christiansen, J.L., Mullally, F., Thompson,
S.E., Brown, T.M., Dupree, A.K., Fabrycky, D.C., Ford, E.B.,
Fortney, J.J., Gilliland, R.L., Isaacson, H., Latham, D.W.,
Marcy, G.W., Quinn, S.N., Ragozzine, D., Shporer, A.,
Borucki, W.J., Ciardi, D.R., Gautier, T.N., III, Haas, M.R.,
Jenkins, J.M., Koch, D.G., Lissauer, J.J., Rapin, W., Basri,
G.S., Boss, A.P., Buchhave, L.A., Carter, J.A., Charbonneau,
D., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., Clarke, B.D., Cochran, W.D.,
Demory, B.-O., Desert, J.-M., Devore, E., Doyle, L.R., Esquerdo, G.A., Everett, M., Fressin, F., Geary, J.C., Girouard,
F.R., Gould, A., Hall, J.R., Holman, M.J., Howard, A.W.,
Howell, S.B., Ibrahim, K.A., Kinemuchi, K., Kjeldsen, H.,
Klaus, T.C., Li, J., Lucas, P.W., Meibom, S., Morris, R.L.,
Prsa, A., Quintana, E., Sanderfer, D.T., Sasselov, D., Seader,
S.E., Smith, J.C., Steffen, J.H., Still, M., Stumpe, M.C.,
Tarter, J.C., Tenenbaum, P., Torres, G., Twicken, J.D., Uddin, K., Van Cleve, J., Walkowicz, L., and Welsh, W.F.
(2013) Planetary candidates observed by Kepler. III. Analysisof the first 16 months of data. Astrophys J Suppl Ser 204,
doi:10.1088/0067-0049/204/2/24.
Baumstark-Khan, C. and Facius, R. (2002) Life under conditions of ionizing radiation. In Astrobiology: The Quest for theConditions of Life, edited by G. Horneck and C. BaumstarkKhan, Springer, Berlin, pp 261–284.
Běhounková, M., Tobie, G., Choblet, G., and Čadek, O. (2012)
Tidally-induced melting events as the origin of south-pole
activity on Enceladus. Icarus 219:655–664.
Ben-Jaffel, L. and Ballester, G.E. (2014) Transit of exomoon
plasma tori: new diagnosis. Astrophys J 785, doi:10.1088/
2041-8205/785/2/L30.
Benner, S.A., Rocardo, A., and Carrigan, M.A. (2004) Is there acommon chemical model for life in the Universe? Curr Opin
Chem Biol 8:672–689.
Bland, M.T., Beyer, R.A., and Showman, A.P. (2007) Unstable
extension of Enceladus’ lithosphere. Icarus 192:92–105.
Bland, M.T., Singer, K.N., McKinnon, W.B., and Schenk, P.M.
(2012) Enceladus’ extreme heat flux as revealed by its relaxed craters. Geophys Res Lett 39:L17204.

828

Bolmont, E., Raymond, S.N., and Leconte, J. (2011) Tidal
evolution of planets around brown dwarfs. Astron Astrophys
535, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117734.
Bolmont, E., Raymond, S.N., Leconte, J., and Matt, S.P. (2012)
Effect of the stellar spin history on the tidal evolution ofclose-in planets. Astron Astrophys 544, doi:10.1051/00046361/201219645.
Brown, R.H., Soderblom, L.A., Soderblom, J.M., Clark, R.N.,
Jaumann, R., Barnes, J.W., Sotin, C., Buratti, B., Baines,
K.H., and Nicholson, P.D. (2008) The identification of liquidethane in Titan’s Ontario Lacus. Nature 454:607–610.
Brown, T.M., Charbonneau, D., Gilliland, R.L., Noyes, R.W.,
and Burrows, A. (2001) Hubble Space Telescope time-series
photometry of the transiting planet of HD 209458. Astrophys
J 552:699–709.
Cabrera, J. and Schneider, J. (2007) Detecting companions to
extrasolar planets using mutual events. Astron Astrophys
464:1133–1138.
Canup, R.M. and Ward, W.R. (2002) Formation of the Galilean satellites: conditions of accretion. Astron J 124:3404–
3423.
Canup, R.M. and Ward, W.R. (2006) A common mass scaling
for satellite systems of gaseous planets. Nature 441:834–
839.
Canup, R.M. and Ward, W.R. (2009) Origin of Europa and theGalilean satellites. In Europa, edited by R.T. Pappalardo,
W.B. McKinnon, and K. Khurana, University of Arizona
Press, Tucson, pp 59–83.
Carr, M.H., Belton, M.J.S, Chapman, C.R., Davies, M.E.,
Geissler, P., Greenberg, R., McEwen, A.S., Tufts, B.R.,
Greeley, R., Sullivan, R., Head, J.W., Pappalardo, R.T.,
Klaasen, K.P., Johnson, T.V., Kaufman, J., Senske, D.,
Moore, J., Neukum, G., Schubert, G., Burns, J.A., Thomas,
P., and Veverka, J. (1998) Evidence for a subsurface ocean on
Europa. Nature 391:363–365.
Carson, J., Thalmann, C., Janson, M., Kozakis, T., Bonnefoy,M., Biller, B., Schlieder, J., Currie, T., McElwain, M., Goto,
M., Henning, T., Brandner, W., Feldt, M., Kandori, R., Kuzuhara, M., Stevens, L., Wong, P., Gainey, K., Fukagawa, M.,
Kuwada, Y., Brandt, T., Kwon, J., Abe, L., Egner, S., Grady,
C., Guyon, O., Hashimoto, J., Hayano, Y., Hayashi, M.,
Hayashi, S., Hodapp, K., Ishii, M., Iye, M., Knapp, G., Kudo,
T., Kusakabe, N., Matsuo, T., Miyama, S., Morino, J., MoroMartin, A., Nishimura, T., Pyo, T., Serabyn, E., Suto, H.,
Suzuki, R., Takami, M., Takato, N., Terada, H., Tomono, D.,
Turner, E., Watanabe, M., Wisniewski, J., Yamada, T., Takami, H., Usuda, T., and Tamura, M. (2013) Direct imaging
discovery of a ‘‘super-Jupiter’’ around the late B-type star j
And. Astrophys J 763, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/763/2/L32.
Carter, J.A. and Winn, J.N. (2009) Parameter estimation fromtime-series data with correlated errors: a wavelet-based
method and its application to transit light curves. Astrophys J
704:51–67.
Carter, J.A., Yee, J.C., Eastman, J., Gaudi, B.S., and Winn, J.N.
(2008) Analytic approximations for transit light-curve observables, uncertainties, and covariances. Astrophys J 689:
499–512.
Cassidy, T.A., Mendez, R., Arras, P., Johnson, R.E., andSkrutsie, M.E. (2009) Massive satellites of close-in gas giant
exoplanets. Astrophys J 704:1341–1348.
Chambers, J.E. (1999) A hybrid symplectic integrator that
permits close encounters between massive bodies. Mon Not R
Astron Soc 304:793–799.

HELLER ET AL.

Chapelle, F.H., O’Neill, K., Bradley, P.M., Methe, B.A., Ciufo,
S.A., Knobel, L.L., and Lovley, D.R. (2002) A hydrogenbased subsurface microbial community dominated by methanogens. Nature 415:312–315.
Charbonneau, D., Winn, J.N., Latham, D.W., Bakos, G., Falco,
E.E., Holman, M.J., Noyes, R.W., Csák, B., Esquerdo, G.A.,
Everett, M.E., and O’Donovan, F.T. (2006) Transit photometry of the core-dominated planet HD 149026b. Astrophys J
636:445–452.
Christensen-Dalsgaard, J. (2004) An introduction to solar oscillations and helioseismology. AIP Conf Proc 731:18–46.
Christiansen, J.L., Jenkins, J.M., Caldwell, D.A., Barclay, T.,
Bryson, S.T., Burke, C.J., Campbell, J., Catanzarite, J.,
Clarke, B.D., Coughlin, J.L., Girouard, F., Haas, M.R.,
Ibrahim, K., Klaus, T.C., Kolodziejczak, J.J., Li, J.,
McCauliff, S.D., Morris, R.L., Mullally, F., Quintana, E.V.,
Rowe, J., Sabale, A., Seader, S., Smith, J.C., Still, M.D.,
Tenenbaum, P.G., Thompson, S.E., Twicken, J.D., andUddin, A.K. (2013) Kepler Data Characteristics Handbook,
KSCI-19040-004, Kepler Project Office, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA. Available online at http://archive.stsci.edu/kepler/manuals/Data_Characteristics.pdf.
Coustenis, A., Achterberg, R.K., Conrath, B.J., Jennings, D.E.,
Marten, A., Gautier, D., Nixon, C.A., Flasar, F.M., Teanby,
N.A., Bézard, B., Samuelson, R.E., Carlson, R.C., Lellouch,E., Bjoraker, G.L., Romani, P.N., Taylor, F.W., Irwin, P.G.J.,
Fouchet, T., Hubert, A., Orton, G.S., Kunde, V.G., Vinatier,S., Mondellini, J., Abbas, M.M., and Courtin, R. (2007) The
composition of Titan’s stratosphere from Cassini/CIRS midinfrared spectra. Icarus 189:35–62.
Crida, A. and Charnoz, S. (2012) Formation of regular satellites
from ancient massive rings in the Solar System. Science
338:1196–1199.
D’Angelo, G., Kley, W., and Henning, T.H. (2003) Orbital
migration and mass accretion of protoplanets in threedimensional global computations with nested grids. Astrophys
J 586:540–561.
Deming, D., Seager, S., Winn, J., Miller-Ricci, E., Clampin, M.,
Lindler, D., and Ennico, K. (2009) Discovery and characterization of transiting super Earths using an all-sky transit
survey and follow-up by the James Webb Space Telescope.
Publ Astron Soc Pac 121:952–967.
Divine, N. and Garrett, H.B. (1983) Charged particle distributions in Jupiter’s magnetosphere. J Geophys Res 88:6889–
6903.
Domingos, R.C., Winter, O.C., and Yokoyama, T. (2006) Stablesatellites around extrasolar giant planets. Mon Not R Astron
Soc 373:1227–1234.
Donnison, J.R. (2010) The Hill stability of the possible moonsof extrasolar planets. Mon Not R Astron Soc 406:1918–1934.
Doyle, L.R., Carter, J.A., Fabrycky, D.C., Slawson, R.W.,
Howell, S.B., Winn, J.N., Orosz, J.A., Prša, A., Welsh, W.F.,
Quinn, S.N., Latham, D., Torres, G., Buchhave, L.A., Marcy,
G.W., Fortney, J.J., Shporer, A., Ford, E.B., Lissauer, J.J.,
Ragozzine, D., Rucker, M., Batalha, N., Jenkins, J.M., Borucki, W.J., Koch, D., Middour, C.K., Hall, J.R., McCauliff,
S., Fanelli, M.N., Quintana, E.V., Holman, M.J., Caldwell,
D.A., Still, M., Stefanik, R.P., Brown, W.R., Esquerdo, G.A.,
Tang, S., Furesz, G., Geary, J.C., Berlind, P., Calkins, M.L.,
Short, D.R., Steffen, J.H., Sasselov, D., Dunham, E.W., Cochran, W.D., Boss, A., Haas, M.R., Buzasi, D., and Fischer,D. (2011) Kepler-16: a transiting circumbinary planet. Science 333:1602–1606.

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

Efroimsky, M. and Lainey, V. (2007) Physics of bodily tides interrestrial planets and the appropriate scales of dynamical
evolution. J Geophys Res 112, doi:10.1029/2007JE002908.
Estrada, P.R., Mosqueira, I., Lissauer, J.J., D’Angelo, G., andCruikshank, D.P. (2009) Formation of Jupiter and conditions
for accretion of the Galilean satellites. In Europa, edited by
R.T. Pappalardo, W.B. McKinnon, and K. Khurana, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp 27–58.
Fanelli, M.N., Jenkins, J.M., Bryson, S.T., Quintana, E.V.,
Twicken, J.D., Wu, H.W., Tenenbaum, P., Allen, C.L.,
Caldwell, D.A., Chandrasekaran, H., Christiansen, J.L.,
Clarke, B.D., Cote, MT., Dotson, J.L., Gilliland, R., Girouard, F., Gunter, J.P., Hall, J., Haas, M.R., Ibrahim, K.,
Kinemuchi, K., Klaus, T., Kolodziejczak, J., Li, J., Machalek,P., McCauliff, S.D., Middour, C.K., Morrris, R., Mullally, F.,
Seader, S., Smith, J.C., Still, M., Thompson, S.E., Uddin,
A.K., Van Cleve, J., and Wohler, B. (2011) Kepler Data
Processing Handbook, KSCI-19081-001, Kepler Project Office, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA.
Available online at http://archive.stsci.edu/kepler/manuals/
KSCI-19081-001_Data_Processing_Handbook.pdf.
Ford, E.B., Ragozzine, D., Rowe, J., Ragozzine, D., Rowe, J.F.,
Steffen, J.H., Barclay, T., Batalha, N.M., Borucki, W.J.,
Bryson, S.T., Caldwell, D.A., Fabrycky, D.C., Gautier, T.N.,
Holman, M.J., Ibrahim, K.A., Kjeldsen, H., Kinemuchi, K.,
Koch, D.G., Lissauer, J.J., Still, M., Tenenbaum, P., Uddin,K., and Welsh, W. (2012) Transit timing observations from
Kepler. V. Transit timing variation candidates in the firstsixteen months from polynomial models. Astrophys J 756,
doi:10.1088/0004-637X/756/2/185.
Forgan, D. and Kipping, D. (2013) Dynamical effects on the
habitable zone for Earth-like exomoons. Mon Not R Astron
Soc 432:2995–3004.
Forgan, D. and Yotov, V. (2014) The effect of planetary illumination on climate modelling of Earth-like exomoons. Mon
Not R Astron Soc 441:3513–3523.
Fortney, J.J., Marley, M.S., and Barnes, J.W. (2007a) Planetary
radii across five orders of magnitude in mass and stellar insolation: application to transits. Astrophys J 659:1661–1672.
Fortney, J.J., Marley, M.S., and Barnes, J.W. (2007b) Erratum:
Planetary radii across five orders of magnitude in mass andstellar insolation: application to transits. Astrophys J 668:1267.
Gaidos, E.J., Nealson, K.H., and Kirschvink, J.L. (1999) Life in
ice-covered oceans. Science 284:1631–1633.
Giese, B., Oberst, J., Roatsch, T., Neukum, G., Head, J.W., andPappalardo, R.T. (1998) The local topography of Uruk Sulcus
and Galileo Regio obtained from stereo images. Icarus
135:303–316.
Giese, B., Wagner, R., Hussmann, H., Neukum, G., Perry, J.,
Helfenstein, P., and Thomas, P.C. (2008) Enceladus: an estimate of heat flux and lithospheric thickness from flexurally
supported topography. Geophys Res Lett 35:L24204.
Glasse, A., Bauwens, E., Bouwman, J., Detre, Ö., Fischer, S.,
Garcia-Marin, M., Justannont, K., Labiano, A., Nakos, T.,
Ressler, M., Rieke, G., Scheithauer, S., Wells, M., andWright, G.S. (2010) The throughput and sensitivity of the
JWST mid-infrared instrument. Proc SPIE 7731, doi:10.1117/
12.856975.
Gomes, R., Levison, H.F., Tsiganis, K., and Morbidelli, H.
(2005) Origin of the cataclysmic Late Heavy Bombardment
period of the terrestrial planets. Nature 435:466–469.
Gong, Y.-X., Zhou, J.-L., Xie, J.-W., and Wu, X.-M. (2013) The
effect of planet-planet scattering on the survival of exomoons.
Astrophys J 769, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/769/1/L14.

829

Grasset, O., Dougherty, M.K., Coustenis, A., Bunce, E.J., Erd,C., Titov, D., Blanc, M., Coates, A., Drossart, P., Fletcher,
L.N., Hussmann, H., Jaumann, R., Krupp, N., Lebreton, J.-P.,
Prieto-Ballesteros, O., Tortora, P., Tosi, F., and Van Hoolst,
T. (2013) JUpiter ICy moons Explorer ( JUICE): an ESA
mission to orbit Ganymede and to characterise the Jupitersystem. Planet Space Sci 78:1–21.
Greenberg, R. (1982) Orbital evolution of the Galilean satellites. In The Satellites of Jupiter, edited by D. Morrison,
University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp 65–92.
Greenberg, R. (2010) Transport rates of radiolytic substances
into Europa’s ocean: implications for the potential origin andmaintenance of life Astrobiology 10:275–283.
Greenberg, R., Geissler, P., Hoppa, G., Tufts, B.R., Durda,
D.D., Pappalardo, R., Head, J.W., Greeley, R., Sullivan, R.,
and Carr, M.H. (1998) Tectonic processes on Europa: tidal
stresses, mechanical response, and visible features. Icarus
135:64–78.
Greenberg, R., Tufts, B.R., Geissler, P., and Hopps, G.V. (2002)
Europa’s crust and ocean: how tides create a potentially
habitable physical setting. In Astrobiology: The Quest for theConditions of Life, edited by G. Horneck and C. BaumstarkKhan, Springer, Berlin, pp 111–124.
Grießmeier, J.M., Stadelmann, A., Motschmann, U., Belisheva,
N.K., Lammer, H., and Biernat, H.K. (2005) Cosmic ray
impact on extrasolar Earth-like planets in close-in habitablezones. Astrobiology 5:587–603.
Griffith, C.A., Hall, J.L., and Geballe, T.R. (2000) Detection ofdaily clouds on Titan. Science 290:509–513.
Groenleer, J.M. and Kattenhorn, S.A. (2008) Cycloid crack
sequences on Europa: relationship to stress history and constraints on growth mechanics based on cusp angles. Icarus
193:158–181.
Guillot, T. (2005) The interiors of giant planets: models andoutstanding questions. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 33:493–530.
Han, C. and Han, W. (2002) On the feasibility of detecting
satellites of extrasolar planets via microlensing. Astrophys J
580:490–493.
Hand, K.P., Carlson, R.W., and Chyba., C.E. (2007) Energy,
chemical disequilibrium, and geological constraints on Europa. Astrobiology 7:1006–1022.
Hansen, C.J., Esposito, L., Stewart, A.I.F., Colwell, J., Hendrix,A., Pryor, W., Shemansky, D., and West, R. (2006) Enceladus’ water vapor plume. Science 311:1422–1425.
Hansen, C.J., Shemansky, D.E., Esposito, L.W., Stewart, A.I.F.,
Lewis, B.R., Colwell, J.E., Hendrix, A.R., West, R.A., Waite,
J.H., Jr., Teolis, B., and Magee, B.A. (2011) The compositionand structure of the Enceladus plume. Geophys Res Lett
38:L11202.
Hayes, A.G, Aharonson, O, Lunine, J.I., Aharonson, O., Lunine,
J.I., Kirk, R.L., Zebker, H.A., Wye, L.C., Lorenz, R.D.,
Turtle, E.P., Paillou, P., Mitri, G., Wall, S.D., Stofan, E.R.,
Mitchell, K.L., Elachi, C., and the Cassini Radar Team.
(2011) Transient surface liquid in Titan’s polar regions from
Cassini. Icarus 211:655–671.
Hedman, M.M., Nicholson, P.D., Showalter, M.R., Brown,
R.H., Buratti, B.J., and Clark, R.N. (2009) Spectral observations of the Enceladus plume with Cassini-VIMS. Astrophys J 693:1749–1762.
Helfenstein, P. and Parmentier, E.M. (1983) Patterns of fracture
and tidal stresses on Europa. Icarus 53:415–430.
Heller, R. (2012) Exomoon habitability constrained by energy
flux and orbital stability. Astron Astrophys 545, doi:10.1051/
0004-6361/201220003.

830

Heller, R. (2014) Detecting extrasolar moons akin to Solar
System satellites with an orbital sampling effect. Astrophys J
787, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/787/1/14.
Heller, R. and Armstrong, J. (2014) Superhabitable worlds.
Astrobiology 14:50–66.
Heller, R. and Barnes, R. (2013) Exomoon habitability constrained by illumination and tidal heating. Astrobiology 13:
18–46.
Heller, R. and Barnes, R. (2014) Runaway greenhouse effect on exomoons due to irradiation from hot, young giant
planets. International Journal of Astrobiology doi:10.1017/
S1473550413000463.
Heller, R. and Zuluaga, J.I. (2013) Magnetic shielding of exomoons beyond the circumplanetary habitable edge. Astrophys
J 776, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/776/2/L33.
Heller, R., Leconte, J., and Barnes, R. (2011a) Tidal obliquity
evolution of potentially habitable planets. Astron Astrophys
528, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015809.
Heller, R., Barnes, R., and Leconte, J. (2011b) Habitability of
extrasolar planets and tidal spin evolution. Orig Life Evol
Biosph 41:539–543.
Henning, W.G., O’Connell, R.J., and Sasselov, D.D. (2009)
Tidally heated terrestrial exoplanets: viscoelastic responsemodels. Astrophys J 707:1000–1015.
Herbst, W. and Mundt, R. (2005) Rotational evolution of solarlike stars in clusters from pre-main sequence to main sequence: empirical results. Astrophys J 633:967–985.
Hinkel, N.R. and Kane, S.R. (2013) Habitability of exomoons atthe Hill or tidal locking radius. Astrophys J 774, doi:10.1088/
0004-637X/774/1/27.
Hoppa, G.V., Tufts, B.R., Greenberg, R., and Geissler, P.
(1999) Strike-slip faults on Europa: global shear patterns
driven by tidal stress. Icarus 141:287–298.
Howett, C.J.A., Spencer, J.R., Pearl, J., and Segura, M. (2010)
Thermal inertia and bolometric Bond albedo values forMimas, Enceladus, Tethys, Dione, Rhea and Iapetus as derived from Cassini/CIRS measurements. Icarus 206:573–593.
Huddleston, D.E, Russell, C.T., Kivelson, M.G., Khurana, K.K.,
and Bennett, L. (1998) Location and shape of the jovian
magnetopause and bow shock. J Geophys Res 103:20075–
20082.
Hussmann, H., Sohl, F., and Spohn, T. (2006) Subsurface
oceans and deep interiors of medium-sized outer planet satellites and large trans-neptunian objects. Icarus 185:258–273.
Hut, P. (1981) Tidal evolution in close binary systems. AstronAstrophys 99:126–140.
Ida, S. and Lin, D.N.C. (2004) Toward a deterministic model ofplanetary formation. I. A desert in the mass and semimajor
axis distributions of extrasolar planets. Astrophys J 604:388–
413.
Ida, S. and Lin, D.N.C. (2008) Toward a deterministic model ofplanetary formation. IV. Effects of type I migration. Astrophys J 673:487–501.
Jackson, B., Barnes, R., and Greenberg, R. (2008) Tidal heatingof terrestrial extrasolar planets and implications for theirhabitability. Mon Not R Astron Soc 391:237–245.
Kaltenegger, L. (2000) What does it take for a moon to support life? In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Exploration and Utilisation of the Moon: ICEUM
4, ESA SP-462, edited by B.H. Foing and M. Perry, European
Space Agency, ESTEC, Noordwijk, the Netherlands, pp 199–
201.
Kaltenegger, L. (2010) Characterizing habitable exomoons.
Astrophys J 712:L125–L130.

HELLER ET AL.

Kaltenegger, L., Sasselov, D., and Rugheimer, S. (2013) Waterplanets in the habitable zone: atmospheric chemistry, observable features, and the case of Kepler-62e and -62f. Astrophys J
775, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/775/2/L47.
Kasting, J.F. (1988) Runaway and moist greenhouse atmospheres
and the evolution of Earth and Venus. Icarus 74:472–494.
Kasting, J.F., Whitmire, D.P., and Reynolds, R.T. (1993)
Habitable zones around main sequence stars. Icarus 101:108–
128.
Kipping, D.M. (2009a) Transit timing effects due to an exomoon. Mon Not R Astron Soc 392:181–189.
Kipping, D.M. (2009b) Transit timing effects due to an exomoon—II. Mon Not R Astron Soc 396:1797–1804.
Kipping, D.M. (2010) How to weigh a star using a moon. Mon
Not R Astron Soc 409:L119–L123.
Kipping, D.M. (2011a) The Transits of Extrasolar Planets with
Moons, Springer, Berlin.
Kipping, D.M. (2011b) LUNA: an algorithm for generating
dynamic planet-moon transits. Mon Not R Astron Soc 416:
689–709.
Kipping, D.M. (2012) An analytic model for rotational modulations in the photometry of spotted stars. Mon Not R Astron
Soc 427:2487–2511.
Kipping, D.M., Fossey, S.J., and Campanella, G. (2009) On thedetectability of habitable exomoons with Kepler-class photometry. Mon Not R Astron Soc 400:398–405.
Kipping, D.M., Bakos, G.Á., Buchhave, L.A., Nesvorný, D.,
and Schmitt, A. (2012) The Hunt for Exomoons with Kepler(HEK). I. Description of a new observational project. Astrophys J 750, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/115.
Kipping, D.M., Hartman, J., Buchhave, L.A., Schmitt, A.R.,
Basko, G.Á., and Nesvorný, D. (2013a) The Hunt for Exomoons with Kepler (HEK). II. Analysis of seven viable
satellite-hosting planet candidates. Astrophys J 770, doi:
10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/101.
Kipping, D.M., Forgan, D., Hartman, J., Nesvorný, D., Bakos,
G.Á., Schmitt, A., and Buchhave, L. (2013b) The Hunt for
Exomoons with Kepler (HEK): III. The first search for an
exomoon around a habitable-zone planet. Astrophys J 777,
doi:10.1088/0004-637X/777/2/134.
Kipping, D.M., Nesvorný, D., Buchhave, L.A., Hartman, J.,
Bakos, G.Á., and Schmitt, A.R. (2014) The Hunt for Exomoons with Kepler (HEK): IV. A search for moons aroundeight M dwarfs. Astrophys J 784, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/
784/1/28.
Kivelson, M.G., Khurana, K.K., Russell, C.T., Walker, R.J.,
Warnecke, J., Coroniti, F.V., Polanskey, C., Southwood, D.J.,
and Schubert, G. (1996) Discovery of Ganymede’s magnetic
field by the Galileo spacecraft. Nature 384:537–541.
Kivelson, M.G., Khurana, K.K., Russell, C.T., Volwerk, M.,
Walker, R.J., and Zimmer, C. (2000) Galileo magnetometer measurements: a stronger case for a subsurface ocean at
Europa. Science 289:1340–1343.
Kivelson, M.G., Khurana, K.K., and Volwerk, M. (2002) The
permanent and inductive magnetic moments of Ganymede.
Icarus 157:507–522.
Kopparapu, R.K., Ramirez, R., Kasting, J.F., Eymet, V.,
Robinson, T.D., Mahadevan, S., Terrien, R.C., DomagalGoldman, S., Meadows, V., and Deshpande, R. (2013) Habitable zones around main-sequence stars: new estimates.
Astrophys J 765, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/765/2/131.
Kraus, A.L. and Ireland, M.J. (2011) LkCa 15: a young exoplanet caught at formation? Astrophys J 745, doi:10.1088/
0004-637X/745/1/5.

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

Kuchner, M.J. (2003) Volatile-rich Earth-Mass planets in the
habitable zone. Astrophys J 596:L105–L108.
Kundurthy, P., Agol, E., Becker, A.C., Barnes, R., Williams, B.,
and Mukadam, A. (2011) APOSTLE observations of GJ
1214b: system parameters and evidence for stellar activity.
Astrophys J 731, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/731/2/123.
Kuzuhara, M., Tamura, M., Kudo, T., Janson, M., Kandori, R.,
Brandt, T.D., Thalmann, C., Spiegel, D., Biller, B., Carson, J.,
Hori, Y., Suzuki, R., Burrows, A., Henning, T., Turner, E.L.,
McElwain, M.W., Moro-Martı́n, A., Suenaga, T., Takahashi,
Y.H., Kwon, J., Lucas, P., Abe, L., Brandner, W., Egner, S.,
Feldt, M., Fujiwara, H., Goto, M., Grady, C.A., Guyon, O.,
Hashimoto, J., Hayano, Y., Hayashi, M., Hayashi, S.S., Hodapp, K.W., Ishii, M., Iye, M., Knapp, G.R., Matsuo, T.,
Mayama, S., Miyama, S., Morino, J.-I., Nishikawa, J.,
Nishimura, T., Kotani, T., Kusakabe, N., Pyo, T.-S., Serabyn,E., Suto, H., Takami, M., Takato, N., Terada, H., Tomono,D., Watanabe, M., Wisniewski, J.P., Yamada, T., Takami, H.,
and Usuda, T. (2013) Direct imaging of a cold jovian exoplanet in orbit around the Sun-like star GJ 504. Astrophys J
774, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/11.
Lagrange, A.M., Gratadour, D., Chauvin, G., Fusco, T., Ehrenreich, D., Mouillet, D., Rousset, G., Rouan, D., Allard, F.,
Gendron, É., Charton, J., Mugnier, L., Rabou, P., Montri, J.,
and Lacombe, F. (2008) A probable giant planet imaged in
the b Pictoris disk. VLT/NaCo deep L’-band imaging. AstronAstrophys 493:L21–L25.
Lammer, H. and Bauer, S.J. (1993) Atmospheric mass loss from
Titan by sputtering. Planet Space Sci 41:657–663.
Lammer, H., Bredehöft, J.H., Coustenis, A., Khodachenko,
M.L., Kaltenegger, L., Grasset, O., Prieur, D., Raulin, F.,
Ehrenfreund, P., Yamauchi, M., Wahlund, J.-E., Grießmeier,J.-M., Stangl, G., Cockell, C.S., Kulikov, Yu.N., Grenfell,
J.L., and Rauer, H. (2009) What makes a planet habitable?
Astronomy and Astrophysics Review 17:181–249.
Lammer, H., Selsis, F., Chassefière, E., Breuer, D., Griessmeier,
J.M., Kulikov, Y.N., Erkaev, N.V., Khodachenko, M.L.,
Biernat, H.K., Leblanc, F., Kallio, E., Lundin, R., Westall, F.,
Bauer, S.J., Beichman, C., Danchi, W., Eiroa, C., Fridlund,M., Gröller, H., Hanslmeier, A., Hausleitner, W., Henning,T., Herbst, T., Kaltenegger, L., Léger, A., Leitzinger, M.,
Lichtenegger, H.I., Liseau, R., Lunine, J., Motschmann, U.,
Odert, P., Paresce, F., Parnell, J., Penny, A., Quirrenbach, A.,
Rauer, H., Röttgering, H., Schneider, J., Spohn, T., Stadelmann, A., Stangl, G., Stam, D., Tinetti, G., and White, G.J.
(2010) Geophysical and atmospheric evolution of habitable
planets. Astrobiology 10:45–68.
Lanza, A.F., Pagano, I., Leto, G., Messina, S., Aigrain, S.,
Alonso, R., Auvergne, M., Baglin, A., Barge, P., Bonomo,
A.S., Boumier, P., Collier Cameron, A., Comparato, M.,
Cutispoto, G., de Medeiros, J.R., Foing, B., Kaiser, A.,
Moutou, C., Parihar, P.S., Silva-Valio, A., and Weiss, W.W.
(2009a) Magnetic activity in the photosphere of CoRoT-Exo2a. Active longitudes and short-term spot cycle in a young
Sun-like star. Astron Astrophys 493:193–200.
Lanza, A.F., Aigrain, S., Messina, S., Leto, G., Pagano, I.,
Auvergne, M., Baglin, A., Barge, P., Bonomo, A.S., Collier
Cameron, A., Cutispoto, G., Deleuil, M., de Medeiros, J.R.,
Foing, B., and Moutou, C. (2009b) Photospheric activity androtation of the planet-hosting star CoRoT-4a. Astron Astrophys 506:255–262.
Le Corre, L., Le Mouélic, S., Sotin, C., Barnes, J.W., Brown,
R.H., Baines, K.H., Buratti, B.J., Clark, R.N., and Nicholson,
P.D. (2008) Cassini/VIMS Observations of cryo-volcanic

831

features on Titan [abstract 1932]. In 39th Lunar and Planetary
Science Conference, Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston.
Leconte, J. and Chabrier, G. (2012) A new vision of giant planet
interiors: impact of double diffusive convection. Astron Astrophys 540, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117595.
Leconte, J. and Chabrier, G. (2013) Layered convection as theorigin of Saturn’s luminosity anomaly. Nat Geosci 6:347–
350.
Leconte, J., Chabrier, G., Baraffe, I., and Levrard, B. (2010) Is
tidal heating sufficient to explain bloated exoplanets? Consistent calculations accounting for finite initial eccentricity.
Astron Astrophys 516, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201014337.
Léger, A., Selsis, F., Sotin, C., Guillot, T., Despois, D., Mawet,
D., Ollivier, M., Labèque, A., Valette, C., Brachet, F., Chazelas, B., and Lammer, H. (2004) A new family of planets?
‘‘Ocean-Planets.’’ Icarus 169:499–504.
Levi, A., Sasselov, D., and Podolak, M. (2013) Volatile transport inside super-Earths by entrapment in the water-ice matrix. Astrophys J 769, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/29.
Lewis, K.M. (2011a) Effect of realistic and filtered stellar photometric noise on the detection of moons using photometrictransit timing. EPJ Web of Conferences 11, doi:10.1051/
epjconf/20101101009.
Lewis, K.M. (2011b) The detectability of moons of extra-solar
planets. arXiv:1109.5332.
Lewis, K.M. (2013) Detecting exo-moons with photometrictransit timing—I. Effect of realistic stellar noise. Mon Not R
Astron Soc 430:1473–1485.
Lewis, K.M., Sacket, P.D., and Mardling, R.A. (2008) Possibility of detecting moons of pulsar planets through time-ofarrival analysis. Astrophys J 685:L153–L156.
Lin, D.N.C. and Papaloizou, J.C.B. (1985) On the dynamical
origin of the Solar System. In Protostars and Planets II,edited by D.C. Black and M.S. Matthews, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp 981–1072.
Lin, L.-H., Wang, P.-L., Rumble, D., Lippmann-Pipke, J.,
Boice, E., Pratt, L.M., Sherwood Lollar, B., Brodie, E.L.,
Hazen, T.C., Andersen, G.L., DeSantis, T.Z., Moser, D.P.,
Kershaw, D., and Onstott, T.C. (2006) Long-term sustainability of a high-energy, low-diversity crustal biome. Science
314:479–482.
Lorenz, R.D., Stiles, B.W., Kirk, R.L., Allison, M.D., Del
Marmo, P.P., Iess, L., Lunine, J.I., Ostro, S.J., and Hensley, S.
(2008) Titan’s rotation reveals an internal ocean and changing zonal winds. Science 319:1649–1651.
Lunine, J.I. (2010) Titan and habitable planets around Mdwarfs. Faraday Discuss 147:405–418.
Maciejewski, G., Dimitrov, D., Neuhäuser, R., Niedzielski, A.,
Raetz, St., Ginski, Ch., Adam, Ch., Marka, C., Moualla, M.,
and Mugrauer, M. (2010) Transit timing variation in exoplanet WASP-3b. Mon Not R Astron Soc 407:2625–2631.
Mardling, R.A. (2007) Long-term tidal evolution of shortperiod planets with companions. Mon Not R Astron Soc
382:1768–1790.
Marois, C., Macintosh, B., Barman, T., Zuckerman, B., Song, I.,
Patience, J., Lafrenière, D., and Doyon, R. (2008) Direct
imaging of multiple planets orbiting the star HR 8799. Science 322:1348–1352.
Mayor, M. and Queloz, D. (1995) A Jupiter-mass companion toa solar-type star. Nature 378:355–359.
Mazeh, T., Nachmani, G., Holczer, T., Fabrycky, D.C., Ford,
E.B., Sanchis-Ojeda, R., Sokol, G., Rowe, J.F., Agol, E.,
Carter, J.A., Lissauer, J.J., Quintana, E.V., Ragozzine, D.,
Steffen, J.H., and Welsh, W. (2013) Transit timing observations

832

from Kepler. VIII. Catalog of transit timing measurementsof the first twelve quarters. Astrophys J Suppl Ser 208,
doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/16.
McKay, C.P. (1996) Elemental composition, solubility, andoptical properties of Titan’s organic haze. Planet Space Sci
44:741–747.
McKay, C.P. and Smith, H.D. (2005) Possibilities for methanogenic life in liquid methane on the surface of Titan. Icarus
178:274–276.
McKay, C.P., Porco, C.C., Altheide, T., Davis, W.L., and Kral,
T.A. (2008) The possible origin and persistence of life on
Enceladus and detection of biomarkers in the plume. Astrobiology 8:909–919.
McKinnon, W.B. and Leith, A.C. (1995) Gas drag and the orbital evolution of a captured Triton. Icarus 118:392–413.
Meyer, J. and Wisdom, J. (2007) Tidal heating in Enceladus.
Icarus 188:535–539.
Meyer, M.R., Backman, D.E., Weinberger, A.J., and Wyatt,
M.C. (2007) Evolution of circumstellar disks around normalstars: placing our Solar System in context. In Protostars andPlanets V, edited B. Reipurth, D. Jewitt, and K. Keil, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp 573–588.
Montalto, M, Gregorio, J., Boué, G., Mortier, A., Boisse, I.,
Oshagh, M., Maturi, M., Figueira, P., Sousa, S., and Santos,
N.C. (2012) A new analysis of the WASP-3 system: no evidence for an additional companion. Mon Not R Astron Soc
427:2757–2771.
Moskovitz, N.A., Gaidos, E., and Williams, D.M. (2009) The
effect of lunarlike satellites on the orbital infrared light curvesof Earth-analog planets. Astrobiology 9:269–277.
Mosqueira, I. and Estrada, P.R. (2003a) Formation of the regular satellites of giant planets in an extended gaseous nebula
I: subnebula model and accretion of satellites. Icarus 163:
198–231.
Mosqueira, I. and Estrada, P.R. (2003b) Formation of theregular satellites of giant planets in an extended gaseous
nebula II: satellite migration and survival. Icarus 163:232–
255.
Muirhead, P.S., Johnson, J.A., Apps, K., Carter, J.A., Morton,
T.D., Fabrycky, D.C., Pineda, J.S., Bottom, M., Rojas-Ayala,B., Schlawin, E., Hamren, K., Covey, K.R., Crepp, J.R.,
Stassun, K.G., Pepper, J., Hebb, L., Kirby, E.N., Howard,
A.W., Isaacson, H.T., Marcy, G.W., Levitan, D., Diaz-Santos,
T., Armus, L., and Lloyd, J.P. (2012) Characterizing the cool
KOIs. III. KOI 961: a small star with large proper motion andthree small planets. Astrophys J 747, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/
747/2/144.
Namouni, F. (2010) The fate of moons of close-in giant exoplanets. Astrophys J 719:L145–L147.
National Research Council. (2000) Preventing the Forward
Contamination of Europa, The National Academies Press,
Washington, DC. Available online at http://www.nap.edu/
openbook.php?isbn=NI000231
Neron de Surgy, O. and Laskar, J. (1997) On the long term
evolution of the spin of the Earth. Astron Astrophys 318:975–
989.
Ness, N.F., Acuna, M.H., Lepping, R.P., Burlaga, L.F., Behannon, K.W., and Neubauer, F.M. (1979) Magnetic fieldstudies at Jupiter by Voyager 2—preliminary results. Science
206:966–972.
Nesvorný, D., Kipping, D.M., Buchave, L.A., Bakos, G.Á.,
Hartman, J., and Schmitt, A.R. (2012) The detection andcharacterization of a nontransiting planet by transit timing
variations. Science 336:1133–1136.

HELLER ET AL.

Neubauer, F.M., Gurnett, D.A., Scudder, J.D., and Hartle, R.E.
(1984) Titan’s magnetospheric interaction. In Saturn, edited
by T. Gehrels and M.S. Matthews, University of Arizona
Press, Tucson, pp 760–787.
Niemann, H.B., Atreya, S.K., Bauer, S.J., Carignan, G.R., Demick,
J.E., Frost, R.L., Gautier, D., Haberman, J.A., Harpold, D.N.,
Hunten, D.M., Israel, G., Lunine, J.I., Kasprzak, W.T., Owen,
T.C., Paulkovich, M., Raulin, F., Raaen, E., and Way, S.H.
(2005) The abundances of constituents of Titan’s atmospherefrom the GCMS instrument on the Huygens probe. Nature
438:779–784.
Nimmo, F., Spencer, J.R., Pappalardo, R.T., and Mullen, M.E.
(2007) Shear heating as the origin of the plumes and heat flux
on Enceladus. Nature 447:289–291.
Norman, L.H. (2011) Is there life on . Titan? Astronomy &Geophysics 52:1.39–1.42.
Noyola, J.P., Satyal, S., and Musielak, Z.E. (2014) Detection of
exomoons through observation of radio emissions. Astrophys
J 791, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/791/1/25.
O’Brien, D.P., Geissler, P., and Greenberg, R. (2000) Tidal heatin Europa: ice thickness and the plausibility of melt-through[Session 38, #38.02 ]. DPS 32nd Meeting Program, Bulletin of
the American Astronomical Society 32:1066.
Ogihara, M. and Ida, S. (2012) N-body simulations of satellite
formation around giant planets: origin of orbital configurationof the Galilean moons. Astrophys J 753, doi:10.1088/0004637X/753/1/60.
Pál, A. (2012) Light-curve modelling for mutual transits. Mon
Not R Astron Soc 420:1630–1635.
Pasek, M.A. and Greenberg, R. (2012) Acidification of Europa’s subsurface ocean as a consequence of oxidant delivery.
Astrobiology 12:151–159.
Payne, M.J., Deck, K.M., Holman, M.J., and Perets, H.B.
(2013) Stability of satellites in closely packed planetarysystems. Astrophys J 775, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/775/2/L44.
Peale, S.J., Cassen, P., and Reynolds, R. (1979) Melting of Io bytidal dissipation. Science 203:892–894.
Peters, M.A. and Turner, E.L. (2013) On the direct imaging of
tidally heated exomoons. Astrophys J 798:98–106.
Pierens, A. and Raymond, S.N. (2011) Two phase, inward-thenoutward migration of Jupiter and Saturn in the gaseous solar
nebula. Astron Astrophys 533, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117451.
Pierrehumbert, R.T. (2010) Principles of Planetary Climate,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Pollack, H.N., Hurter, S., and Johnson, J.R. (1993) Heat flowfrom Earth’s interior—analysis of the global data set. Rev
Geophys 31:267–280.
Pollack, J.B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., Lissauer, J.J.,
Podolak, M., and Greenzweig, Y. (1996) Formation of the
giant planets by concurrent accretion of solids and gas. Icarus
124:62–85.
Pont, F., Zucker, S., and Queloz, D. (2006) The effect of red
noise on planetary transit detection. Mon Not R Astron Soc
373:231–242.
Pont F., Gilliland, R.L., Moutou, C., Charbonneau, D., Bouchy,F., Brown, T.M., Mayor, M., Queloz, D., Santos, N., andUdry S. (2007) Hubble Space Telescope time-series photometry of the planetary transit of HD 189733: no moon, norings, starspots. Astron Astrophys 476:1347–1355.
Porco, C.C., Helfenstein, P., Thomas, P.C., Ingersoll, A.P.,
Wisdom, J., West, R., Neukum, G., Denk, T., Wagner, R.,
Roatsch, T., Kieffer, S., Turtle, E., McEwen, A., Johnson,
T.V., Rathbun, J., Veverka, J., Wilson, D., Perry, J., Spitale,J., Brahic, A., Burns, J.A., Del Genio, A.D., Dones, L.,FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS

Murray, C.D., and Squyres, S. (2006) Cassini observes theactive south pole of Enceladus. Science 311:1393–1401.
Porter, S.B. and Grundy, W.M. (2011) Post-capture evolutionof potentially habitable exomoons. Astrophys J 736:L14–
L20.
Postberg, F., Schmidt, J., Hillier, J., Kempf, S., and Srama, R.
(2011) A salt-water reservoir as the source of a compositionally stratified plume on Enceladus. Nature 474:620–622.
Quintana, E.V., Barclay, T., Raymond, S.N., Rowe, J.F., Bolmont, E., Caldwell, D.A., Howell, S.B., Kane, S.R., Huber,D., Crepp, J.R., Lissauer, J.J., Ciardi, D.R., Coughlin, J.L.,
Everett, M.E., Henze, C.E., Horch, E., Isaacson, H., Ford,
E.B., Adams, F.C., Still, M., Hunter, R.C., Quarles, B., andSelsis, F. (2014) An Earth-sized planet in the habitable zoneof a cool star. Science 344:277–280.
Rabus, M., Alonso, R., Belmonte, J.A., Deeg, H.J., Gilliland,
R.L., Almenara, J.M., Brown, T.M., Charbonneau, D., andMandushev, G. (2009) A cool starspot or a second transiting
planet in the TrES-1 system? Astron Astrophys 494:391–397.
Ragozzine, D. and Holman, M.J. (2010) The value of systems
with multiple transiting planets. arXiv:1006.3727.
Rauer, H., Catala, C., Aerts, C., Appourchaux, T., Benz, W.,
Brandeker, A., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., Deleuil, M., Gizon,
L., Goupil, M.-J., Güdel, M., Janot-Pacheco, E., Mas-Hesse,M., Pagano, I., Piotto, G., Pollacco, D., Santos, N.C., Smith,A., Suárez, J.-C., Szabó, R., Udry, S., Adibekyan, V., Alibert,
Y., Almenara, J.-M., Amaro-Seoane, P., Ammler-von Eiff,
M., Asplund, M., Antonello, E., Ball, W., Barnes, S., Baudin,F., Belkacem, K., Bergemann, M., Bihain, G., Birch, A.C.,
Bonfils, X., Boisse, I., Bonomo, A.S., Borsa, F., Brandão,I.M., Brocato, E., Brun, S., Burleigh, M., Burston, R., Cabrera, J., Cassisi, S., Chaplin, W., Charpinet, S., Chiappini, C.,
Church, R.P., Csizmadia, Sz., Cunha, M., Damasso, M.,
Davies, M.B., Deeg, H.J., Dı́az, R.F., Dreizler, S., Dreyer, C.,
Eggenberger, P., Ehrenreich, D., Eigmüller, P., Erikson, A.,
Farmer, R., Feltzing, S., de Oliveira Fialho, F., Figueira, P.,
Forveille, T., Fridlund, M., Garcı́a, R.A., Giommi, P., Giuffrida, G., Godolt, M., Gomes da Silva, J., Granzer, T.,
Grenfell, J.L., Grotsch-Noels, A., Günther, E., Haswell, C.A.,
Hatzes, A.P., Hébrard, G., Hekker, S., Helled, R., Heng, K.,
Jenkins, J.M., Johansen, A., Khodachenko, M.L., Kislyakova,
K.G., Kley, W., Kolb, U., Krivova, N., Kupka, F., Lammer,
H., Lanza, A.F., Lebreton, Y., Magrin, D., Marcos-Arenal, P.,
Marrese, P.M., Marques, J.P., Martins, J., Mathis, S., Mathur,S., Messina, S., Miglio, A., Montalban, J., Montalto, M.,
Monteiro, M.J.P.F.G., Moradi, H., Moravveji, E., Mordasini,C., Morel, T., Mortier, A., Nascimbeni, V., Nelson, R.P.,
Nielsen, M.B., Noack, L., Norton, A.J., Ofir, A., Oshagh, M.,
Ouazzani, R.-M., Pápics, P., Parro, V.C., Petit, P., Plez, B.,
Poretti, E., Quirrenbach, A., Ragazzoni, R., Raimondo, G.,
Rainer, M., Reese, D.R., Redmer, R., Reffert, S., RojasAyala, B., Roxburgh, I.W., Salmon, S., Santerne, A.,
Schneider, J., Schou, J., Schuh, S., Schunker, H., Silva-Valio,
A., Silvotti, R., Skillen, I., Snellen, I., Sohl, F., Sousa, S.G.,
Sozzetti, A., Stello, D., Strassmeier, K.G., Švanda, M., Szabó,
Gy.M., Tkachenko, A., Valencia, D., van Grootel, V., Vauclair, S.D., Ventura, P., Wagner, F.W., Walton, N.A.,
Weingrill, J., Werner, S.C., Wheatley, P.J., and Zwintz, K.
(2013) The PLATO 2.0 Mission. arXiv:1310.0696.
Razzaghi, A.I., Di Pietro, D.A., Simon-Miller, A.A., Spencer,
J.R., Bly, V., Quinn, D., Sneiderman, G., Tompkins, S., Via,
L., Barr, A., Brinkerhoff, W., Buratti, B., Dalton, J.B.,
Dombard, A., Glavin, D., Helfenstein, P., Kirschvink, J.,
Mitchell, D., and Nimmo, F. (2007) Enceladus: Saturn’s

833

Active Ice Moon, Enceladus Flagship Mission Concept Study,
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD.
Reh, K., Elliot, J., Spiker, T., Jorgensen, E., Spencer, J., andLorenz, R. (2007) Titan and Enceladus $1B Mission Feasibility Study Report, JPL D-37401 B, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA.
Reynolds, R.T., McKay, C.P., and Kasting, J.F. (1987) Europa,
tidally heated oceans, and habitable zones around giant
planets. Adv Space Res 7:125–132.
Riley, J., Hoppa, G.V., Greenberg, R., Tufts, B.R., and Geissler,
P. (2000) Distribution of chaotic terrain on Europa. J Geophys Res 105:22599–22616.
Robinson, T.D. (2011) Modeling the infrared spectrum of the
Earth-Moon system: implications for the detection and characterization of Earthlike extrasolar planets and their moonlike
companions. Astrophys J 741, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/741/
1/51.
Ross, M.N. and Schubert, G. (1987) Tidal heating in an internal
ocean model of Europa. Nature 325:133–134.
Ross, M.N. and Schubert, G. (1989) Viscoelastic models of tidal
heating in Enceladus. Icarus 78:90–101.
Roth, L., Saur, J., Retherford, K.D., Strobel, D.F., Feldman,
P.D., McGrath, M.A., and Nimmo, F. (2014) Transient water
vapor at Europa’s south pole. Science 343:171–174.
Rowe, J.F., Bryson, S.T, Marcy, G.W., Lissauer, J.J., JontofHutter, D., Mullally, F., Gilliland, R.L., Issacson, H., Ford,
E., Howell, S.B., Borucki, W.J., Haas, M., Huber, D., Steffen,
J.H., Thompson, S.E., Quintana, E., Barclay, T., Still, M.,
Fortney, J., Gautier, T.N., III, Hunter, R., Caldwell, D.A.,
Ciardi, D.R., Devore, E., Cochran, W., Jenkins, J., Agol, E.,
Carter, J.A., and Geary, J. (2014) Validation of Kepler’s
multiple planet candidates. III. Light curve analysis and announcement of hundreds of new multi-planet systems. Astrophys J 784, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/784/1/45.
Sanchis-Ojeda, R. and Winn, J.N. (2011) Starspots, spin-orbit
misalignment, and active latitudes in the HAT-P-11 exoplanetary system. Astrophys J 743, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/743/
1/61.
Sano, T., Inutsuka, S., Turner, N.J., and Stone, J.M. (2004)
Angular momentum transport by magnetohydrodynamic turbulence in accretion disks: gas pressure dependence of thesaturation level of the magnetorotational instability. Astrophys J 605:321–339.
Sartoretti, P. and Schneider, J. (1999) On the detection of satellites of extrasolar planets with the method of transits. AstronAstrophys Suppl Ser 134:553–560.
Sasaki, T., Stewart, G.R., and Ida, S. (2010) Origin of the different architectures of the jovian and saturnian satellite systems. Astrophys J 714:1052–1064.
Sasaki, T., Barnes, J.W., and O’Brien, D.P. (2012) Outcomes
and duration of tidal evolution in a star-planet-moon system.
Astrophys J 754, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/754/1/51.
Sato, M. and Asada, H. (2009) Effects of mutual transits byextrasolar planet-companion systems on light curves. Publ
Astron Soc Jpn Nihon Tenmon Gakkai 61:L29–L34.
Sato, M. and Asada, H. (2010) Transiting extrasolar planetwith a companion: effects of orbital eccentricity and inclination. Publ Astron Soc Jpn Nihon Tenmon Gakkai 62:
1203–1213.
Scharf, C.A. (2006) The potential for tidally heated icy andtemperate moons around exoplanets. Astrophys J 648:1196–
1205.
Schenk, P.M., Chapman, C.R., Zahnle, K., and Moore, J.M.
(2004) Ages and interiors: the cratering record of the Galilean

834

satellites. In Jupiter: The Planet, Satellites, and Magnetosphere,
edited by F. Bagenal, T. Dowling, and W.B. McKinnon,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 427–456.
Schubert, G., Anderson, J.D., Spohn, T., and McKinnon, W.B.
(2004) Interior composition, structure and dynamics of theGalilean satellites. In Jupiter: The Planet, Satellites, andMagnetosphere, edited by F. Bagenal, T. Dowling, and W.B.
McKinnon, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK,
pp 281–306.
Schubert, G., Hussmann, H., Lainey, V., Matson, D.L.,
McKinnon, W.B., Sohl, F., Sotin, C., Tobie, G., Turrini, D.,
and Van Hoolst, T. (2010) Evolution of icy satellites. SpaceSci Rev 153:447–484.
Schulze-Makuch, D. and Grinspoon, D.H. (2005) Biologicallyenhanced energy and carbon cycling on Titan? Astrobiology
5:560–567.
Segatz, M., Spohn, T., Ross, M.N., and Schubert, G. (1988)
Tidal dissipation, surface heat flow, and figure of viscoelastic
models of Io. Icarus 75:187–206.
Selsis, F., Kasting, J F., Levrard, B., Paillet, J., Ribas, I., andDelfosse, X. (2007) Habitable planets around the star Gliese
581? Astron Astrophys 476:1373–1387.
Shakura, N.I. and Sunyaev, R.A. (1973) Black holes in binary
systems. Observational appearance. Astron Astrophys 24:
337–355.
Silva, A.V.R. (2003) Method for spot detection on solar-likestars. Astrophys J 585:L147–L150.
Silva-Válio, A. (2010) The influence of starspots activity on thedetermination of planetary transit parameters. Proceedings ofthe International Astronomical Union 264:440–442.
Simon, A.E., Szatmáry, K., and Szabó, G.M. (2007) Determination of the size, mass, and density of ‘‘exomoons’’ fromphotometric transit timing variations. Astron Astrophys 470:
727–731.
Simon, A.E., Szabó, Gy.M., Szatmáry, K., and Kiss, L.L. (2010)
Methods for exomoon characterization: combining transit
photometry and the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect. Mon Not R
Astron Soc 406:2038–2046.
Simon, A.E., Szabó, Gy.M., Kiss, L.L., and Szatmáry, K. (2012)
Signals of exomoons in averaged light curves of exoplanets.
Mon Not R Astron Soc 419:164–171.
Sohl, F., Sears, W.D., and Lorenz, R.D. (1995) Tidal dissipationon Titan. Icarus 115:278–294.
Sohl, F., Spohn, T., Breuer, D., and Nagel, K. (2002) Implications from Galileo observations on the interior structure
and chemistry of the Galilean satellites. Icarus 157:104–
119.
Sohl, F., Choukroun, M., Kargel, J., Kimura, J., Pappalardo, R.,
Vance, S., and Zolotov, M. (2010) Subsurface water oceans
on icy satellites: chemical composition and exchange processes. Space Sci Rev 153:485–510.
Spencer, J.R., Jessup, K.L., McGrath, M.A., Ballester, G.E., andYelle, R. (2000) Discovery of gaseous S2 in Io’s Pele plume.
Science 288:1208–1210.
Spencer, J.R., Pearl, J.C., Howett, C.J., Segura, M.E., and theCassini Team. (2008) High spatial resolution observations ofthermal emission from Enceladus’ active south pole [abstract#P23B-1372]. In American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting
2008, American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC.
Spohn, T. and Schubert, G. (2003) Oceans in the icy Galilean
satellites of Jupiter? Icarus 161:456–467.
Stevens, T.O. and McKinley, J.P. (1995) Lithoautotrophic microbial ecosystems in deep basalt aquifers. Science 270:450–
454.

HELLER ET AL.

Stofan, E.R., Elachi, C., Lunine, J.L., Lorenz, R.D., Stiles, B.,
Mitchell, K.L., Ostro, S., Soderblom, L., Wood, C., Zebker,
H., Wall, S., Janssen, M., Kirk, R., Lopes, R., Paganelli, F.,
Radebaugh, J., Wye, L., Anderson, Y., Allison, M., Boehmer,
R., Callahan, P., Encrenaz, P., Flamini, E., Francescetti, G.,
Gim, Y., Hamilton, G., Hensley, S., Johnson, W.T., Kelleher,K., Muhleman, D., Paillou, P., Picardi, G., Posa, F., Roth, L.,
Seu, R., Shaffer, S., Vetrella, S., and West, R. (2007) The
lakes of Titan. Nature 445:61–64.
Street, R.A. and the SuperWASP Consortium. (2004) SuperWASP: Wide-Angle Search for Planets. Baltic Astronomy
13:707–710.
Szabó, G.M., Szatmáry, K., Divéki, Z., and Simon, A. (2006)
Possibility of a photometric detection of ‘‘exomoons.’’ AstronAstrophys 450:395–398.
Szabó, R., Szabó, Gy.M., Dálya, G., Simon, A.E., Hodosán, G.,
and Kiss, L.L. (2013) Multiple planets or exomoons in Kepler
hot Jupiter systems with transit timing variations? AstronAstrophys 553, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220132.
Tachinami, C., Senshu, H., and Ida, S. (2011) Thermal evolution and lifetime of intrinsic magnetic fields of super-Earths
in habitable zones. Astrophys J 726, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/
726/2/70.
Tanaka, H., Takeuchi, T., and Ward, W.R. (2002) Threedimensional interaction between a planet and an isothermal
gaseous disk. I. Corotation and Lindblad torques and planet
migration. Astrophys J 565:1257–1274.
The JUICE Science Study Team. (2011) JUICE: Exploring theEmergence of Habitable Worlds around Gas Giants, JUICE
assessment study report (Yellow Book), ESA/SRE(2011)18,
European Space Agency, Paris. Available online at http://
sci.esa.int/juice.
Tobie, G., Grasset, O., Lunine, J.I., Mocquet, A., and Sotin, C.,(2005) Titan’s internal structure inferred from a coupled
thermal-orbital model. Icarus 175:496–502.
Tobie, G., Lunine, J.I., and Sotin, C. (2006) Episodic outgassing
as the origin of atmospheric methane on Titan. Nature 440:
61–64.
Tobie, G., Čadek, O., and Sotin, C. (2008) Solid tidal friction
above a liquid water reservoir as the origin of the south polar
hotspot on Enceladus. Icarus 196:642–652.
Tsou, P., Brownlee, D.E., McKay, C.P., Anbar, A.D., Yano, H.,
Altwegg, K., Beegle, L.W., Dissly, R., Strange, N.J., andKanik, I. (2012) LIFE: Life Investigation for Enceladus—asample return mission concept in search for evidence of life.
Astrobiology 12:730–742.
Tufts, B.R., Greenberg, R., Hoppa, G., and Geissler, P. (2000)
Lithospheric dilation on Europa. Icarus 146:75–97.
Turner, E.L. and Peters, M.A. (2013) Direct imaging detectability of Tidally Heated ExoMoons (THEM) [poster #2K072].
In Protostars and Planets VI, Heidelberg, Germany.
Tusnski, L.R.M. and Valio, A. (2011) Transit model of planetswith moon and ring systems. Astrophys J 743, doi:10.1088/
0004-637X/743/1/97.
Veeder, G.J., Matson, D.L., Johnson, T.V., Blaney, D.L., andGoguen, J.D (1994) Io’s heat flow from infrared radiometry:
1983–1993. J Geophys Res 99:17095–17162.
Vidotto, A.A., Jardine, M., Morin, J., Donati, J.-F., Lang, P.,
and Russell, A.J.B. (2013) Effects of M dwarf magnetic fields
on potentially habitable planets. Astron Astrophys 557, doi:
10.1051/0004-6361/201321504.
Waite, J.H., Combi, M.R., Ip, W.H., Cravens, T.E., McNutt,
R.L., Jr., Kasprzak, W., Yelle, R., Luhmann, J., Niemann, H.,
Gell, D., Magee, B., Fletcher, G., Lunine, J., and Tseng, W.L.

FORMATION, HABITABILITY, AND DETECTION OF EXOMOONS(2006) Cassini Ion and Neutral Mass Spectrometer: Enceladus plume composition and structure. Science 311:1419–
1422.
Waite, J.H., Lewis, W.S., Magee, B.A., Lunine, J.I., McKinnon,
W.B., Glein, C.R., Mousis, O., Young, D.T., Brockwell, T.,
Westlake, J., Nguyen, M.-J., Teolis, B.D., Niemann, H.B.,
McNutt, R.L., Perry, M., and Ip, W.-H. (2009) Liquid water
on Enceladus from observations of ammonia and 40Ar in theplume. Nature 460:487–490.
Walsh, K.J., Morbidelli, A., Raymond, S.N., O’Brien, D.P., andMandell, A.M. (2011) A low mass for Mars from Jupiter’s
early gas-driven migration. Nature 475:206–209.
Ward, W.R. (1997) Protoplanet migration by nebula tides. Icarus 126:261–281.
Watson, A.J., Donahue, T.M., and Walker, J.C.G. (1981) The
dynamics of a rapidly escaping atmosphere—applications to
the evolution of Earth and Venus. Icarus 48:150–166.
Weidner, C. and Horne, K. (2010) Limits on the orbits and massesof moons around currently-known transiting exoplanets. AstronAstrophys 521, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201014955.
Williams, D.M. (2013) Capture of terrestrial-sized moons bygas giant planets. Astrobiology 13:315–323.
Williams, D.M. and Knacke, R.F. (2004) Looking for planetary
moons in the spectra of distant Jupiters. Astrobiology 4:400–403.
Williams, D.M., Kasting, J.F., and Wade, R.A. (1997) Habitablemoons around extrasolar giant planets. Nature 385:234–236.
Withers, P. and Barnes, J.W. (2010) Using satellites to probe
extrasolar planet formation. Proceedings of the International
Astronomical Union, Symposium No. 276, Vol. 6, doi:
10.1017/S1743921312000038.
Wolszczan, A. and Frail, D.A. (1992) A planetary system
around the millisecond pulsar PSR1257 + 12. Nature 355:
145–147.
Yoder, C.F. and Peale, S.J. (1981) The tides of Io. Icarus 47:1–35.
Yung, Y.L., Allen, M., and Pinto, J.P. (1984) Photochemistry of
the atmosphere of Titan—comparison between model andobservations. Astrophys J Suppl Ser 55:465–506.

835

Zahnle, K., Schenk, P., Levison, H., and Dones, L. (2003)
Cratering rates in the outer Solar System. Icarus 163:263–
289.
Zarnecki, J.C., Leese, M.R., Hathi, B., Ball, A.J., Hagermann,A., Towner, M.C., Lorenz, R.D., McDonnell, J.A., Green,
S.F., Patel, M.R., Ringrose, T.J., Rosenberg, P.D., Atkinson,
K.R., Paton, M.D., Banaszkiewicz, M., Clark, B.C., Ferri, F.,
Fulchignoni, M., Ghafoor, N.A., Kargl, G., Svedhem, H.,
Delderfield, J., Grande, M., Parker, D.J., Challenor, P.G., andGeake, J.E. (2005) A soft solid surface on Titan as revealedby the Huygens Surface Science Package. Nature 438:792–795.
Zhuang, Q., Gao, X., and Yu, Q. (2012) The Rossiter-McLaughlin
effect for exomoons or binary planets. Astrophys J 758,
doi:10.1088/0004-637X/758/2/111.
Zolotov, M.Y. (2007) An oceanic composition on early andtoday’s Enceladus. Geophys Res Lett 34:L23203.
Zuluaga, J.I. and Cuartas, P.A. (2012) The role of rotation in theevolution of dynamo-generated magnetic fields in super Earths.
Icarus 217:88–102.
Zuluaga, J.I., Bustamante, S., Cuartas, P.A., and Hoyos, J.H.
(2013) The influence of thermal evolution in the magnetic
protection of terrestrial planets. Astrophys J 770, doi:10.1088/
0004-637X/770/1/23.

Address correspondence to:René Heller
Origins InstituteDepartment of Physics and Astronomy
McMaster University
Hamilton, ON L8S 4M1
CanadaE-mail: rheller@physics.mcmaster.ca
Submitted 20 January 2014
Accepted 5 June 2014