Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Colour term — where it appears

The coefficient by which two photometric systems' magnitudes for the same star differ per unit of colour. It exists because no two instruments have the same response curve, and it is a property of the equipment rather than of the sky.

Named by 3 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The Bouguer line, and the intercept nobody observed. Instrumental magnitude against airmass for one star of magnitude 10 outside the atmosphere, observed at 5 airmasses in 5 bands. Each slope is that band's extinction coefficient, computed from Rayleigh scattering, an aerosol term and ozone rather than assumed: U 0.493, B 0.246, V 0.126, R 0.061, I 0.027 magnitudes per airmass. Every line is fitted through its points and extended to X = 0, and the intercept there is the published magnitude — a measurement made at an airmass no observation is ever taken at, because the smallest airmass available is 1 and that is already a whole atmosphere. Two consequences follow and neither is a detail. The slope has to be re-measured every night, because the aerosol term changes with the weather and is not a property of the site. And the U-band line is 3.9 times steeper than the V-band one, so the extrapolation is 3.9 times longer in exactly the band where photons are scarcest — which is why ultraviolet photometry from the ground was always the least trustworthy part of a magnitude system.

A magnitude measured where nothing was measured

Every published brightness is an extrapolation off the end of a graph. A star is observed through one atmosphere at least, a line is fitted against airmass, and the number quoted is its intercept at zero — a place no observation is ever taken from.

starlight · Extinction A colour term of -0.059 magnitudes per magnitude, and one star that will not obey it. Synthetic photometry of blackbodies from 3,000 to 42,000 K through two V bands: the standard one, and a natural system whose effective wavelength is 9 nm longer and whose width is 1.12 times as large. The vertical axis is the difference between the two magnitudes for the same star — not a constant, because a wider redder band collects a different fraction of a hot spectrum than of a cool one. Fitting a straight line against B − V gives a colour term of -0.0585 magnitudes per magnitude and leaves a residual of 3.1 millimagnitudes, which is why a linear transformation is the standard reduction and why it works. The mark off the line is a cool star with molecular absorption bands in the red, drawn from the same blackbody with three synthetic bites taken out of it: it sits 27 millimagnitudes from the fit, 9 times the blackbody scatter. A colour term knows one number about a star and a spectrum has a shape, and that gap is the reason all-sky photometry stops at a per cent while differential photometry on one field reaches a millimagnitude.

The same star through two telescopes

A magnitude is defined by a response curve, and no two telescopes have the same one. The difference between two observatories' measurements of one star is not a constant to be subtracted but a function of the star's colour — and for a star whose spectrum has structure, not even that.

starlight · Photometric systems A flat sky, and stars that are wrong. The residual brightness after flat-fielding, in per cent, against distance from the field centre, for the sky (flat line) and for a star (curve), with 3 per cent scattered light at the centre of both the flat and the science exposure. The sky, which fills the field as the flat's illumination did, carries the same scattered component and divides out exactly: the corrected image looks perfectly flat, which is the test an observer applies. The star, a point that scatters a negligible fraction of its light into its own aperture, is divided by the scattered component it never had and comes out 2.9 per cent too faint at the centre. The visible check passes and the measurement fails.

Light that adds, corrected as if it multiplied

A flat field is an exposure of something uniform, and some of the light in it did not come through the optics the way starlight does — it scattered off a baffle, a filter face or a dusty window and landed where the geometry never sent it. Dividing by that flat makes the sky in every science image look perfect and makes every star in it wrong, by an amount the image itself cannot show.

starlight · Photometric systems

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Standard-starAerosolAirmassAll-sky photometryAtmospheric extinctionBouguer lineDifferential photometryFlat fieldIllumination correctionMagnitudeMetallicityNatural system

All concepts