Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

False-positive — where it appears

A detection produced by something other than the signal being searched for — a blended eclipsing binary, an instrumental artefact, or noise crossing the threshold. Their rate rises steeply near the detection limit, which is exactly where the most interesting candidates are.

Named by 7 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A 6.2 m s⁻¹ signal at the rotation period, made by no planet at all. Above: the apparent radial velocity of a star carrying one dark spot over 0.4 per cent of its disc, rotating with an equatorial velocity of 3.2 km s⁻¹, over 3 rotations — and beside it a circular-orbit planet of the same period fitted to the same amplitude, 6.2 metres a second. That amplitude is several times the precision of a modern spectrograph and squarely inside the range in which warm sub-Neptunes are claimed, so the two are competing on equal terms. The spot signal is not a sinusoid: the spot is in view for half the rotation and hidden for the other half, so the curve is truncated, and its power at half the period is 1.16 of its power at the period. A Keplerian orbit at the same period has none there at all. Below: the diagnostic that actually settles it. A planet moves the whole spectrum bodily, so every line keeps its shape and the bisector — the locus of midpoints up a line profile — does not move; a spot removes light from one side of the profile, so the bisector tilts in step with the velocity and against it. The two clouds correlate at -0.92 and 0.14. What the picture cannot show is why this took so long to become routine: measuring a bisector to a few metres a second needs a signal-to-noise ratio of several hundred per spectrum, so for two decades the diagnostic existed and could not be applied to the faint stars the interesting claims were about.

A planet that was the star's own rotation

A dark spot rotating across a star removes light from the approaching limb and then the receding one, and the line centroid moves. That is several metres a second at the rotation period, from no planet at all — and two of the most celebrated nearby planets were withdrawn on exactly this evidence.

exoplanets · Reflex velocity A gap where planets should be. The number of planets per star per interval of log radius, for orbital periods under a hundred days, corrected for detection efficiency. There are two peaks — super-Earths near 1.3 R⊕ and sub-Neptunes near 2.4 R⊕ — and a deficit between them at 1.89 R⊕, where the occurrence falls to 33% of the peak. The gap is not a gap in what can be detected: detection efficiency rises smoothly through it, so a smooth underlying distribution could not produce a dip there.

The planets that were not seen

An occurrence rate is a count divided by a probability, and the probability can be a five-hundredth. Everything difficult about saying how common planets are lives in that denominator.

exoplanets · Occurrence rates Four defensible boxes, and a factor of 2.9 between the answers. Above: the occurrence surface in starlight received against planet radius, with four published definitions of "an Earth-size planet in the habitable zone" drawn on it as rectangles. The surface is a stated parameterisation — two lognormal populations at 1.3 and 2.4 Earth radii, with the radius valley at 1.9 between them, normalised so that the whole of it comes to 0.5 planets per star between one and four Earth radii inside a hundred days. Integrating it over the four boxes gives 17%, 8%, 6%, 10% — a factor of 2.9 between the conservative zone and a broad definition, before any error bar is attached to any of them. The dashed curve is what a transit survey can actually see: at one year around a Sun-like star the smallest detectable planet is 1.6 Earth radii, so the lower-left corner of every box contains no detections at all and the rate there is an extrapolation of a fitted surface rather than a count of anything. Below: the same integral with only one corner moved. Holding the flux range fixed and sliding the radius bound from 1.5 to 1.75 Earth radii — a quarter of an Earth radius, well inside the uncertainty of a measured planetary radius — changes the answer by 43 per cent, which is larger than every error bar quoted with any of these numbers. The published values of η⊕ span two per cent to sixty; roughly a factor of 2.9 of that is definition, and the rest is how far each author was willing to extrapolate past the dashed line.

The part of a rate that is a definition

Published values for the frequency of Earth-size planets in habitable zones span two per cent to sixty. The spread is not measurement error — it is where the box was drawn, on a surface that is steepest exactly at the corner every author has to choose, and outside the last detection.

exoplanets · Occurrence rates Below 1.3 km a shadow stops getting smaller. The relative rate at which a star is occulted, against the smallest body a survey can detect, for size distributions with slopes 3.5, 4, 4.5. The cross-section of a body is not its own diameter: diffraction gives every shadow a minimum width of about the Fresnel scale, √(λD/2), which at 40 AU and 550 nm is 1.28 km. Above that the cross-section grows with the body, so lowering the limit gains events as the limit to the power -1.5 for the shallowest distribution drawn; below it the cross-section stops shrinking and only the number of bodies keeps rising, which is a shallower gain by one power. Pushing the limit from 40 km to 0.2 multiplies the rate by 3106196 at the steepest slope and 14131 at the shallowest — so the rate a survey measures is a measurement of the size distribution, which is the quantity a collisional history predicts and nothing else can reach at these sizes.

A population counted by shadows that never repeat

A body a kilometre across at forty astronomical units is a hundred million times too faint to image and casts a shadow just as dark as a large one. Monitoring enough stars fast enough catches those shadows — each one a single unrepeatable event of a fraction of a second, and the measurement is not any event but the rate.

sky · Occultations Four transiting planets, one star, and a density that must agree. The stellar density implied by each of four transiting planets of one simulated star, each fitted as though its orbit were circular, relative to the star's true density, against orbital period, both logarithmic, with one-sigma errors of 8, 10, 14, 20 per cent from the transit fits. Three planets have eccentricities of a few hundredths and agree with one another and with the truth (dashed line: their weighted mean, 0.950). The planet at 15.9 days has e = 0.2 with its periastron 70° from the line of sight, which makes it cross the star faster than a circular orbit would, and its implied density is 2.10 times the star's — 5.2 standard deviations from the others. A single planet's density can be reconciled with any star by choosing its eccentricity; several planets must share one star, and the odd one out is caught.

Every planet of a star must agree on its density

A single transiting planet gives the density of its star only if its orbit is known to be circular, and an eccentric orbit can disguise almost any star as almost any other. A star with four transiting planets has four such measurements of one number. They must agree — and the way they disagree measures how eccentric the orbits are, catches the candidate that orbits some other star, and pins down the star better than its own spectrum does.

exoplanets · Transits Two models through the same points, one with a planet. 60 simulated velocities over 200 days of a star rotating every 25 days, with spot activity drawn from a quasi-periodic process of 3 m/s amplitude and a 40-day decay, white noise of 1 m/s, and a planet of 2.5 m/s semi-amplitude on a 27.0-day orbit — 1.08 times the rotation period. Two models are fitted, each with its activity amplitude and decay time chosen by maximum likelihood: activity plus the planet (solid), whose planet comes out at 3.3 m/s, and activity alone (dashed), which has no planet in it. Both pass through the points; the likelihoods differ by 3.6 in the logarithm, a ratio of 34.9, which is not decisive. Near the rotation period a flexible model of the star can carry the planet's signal by itself.

A model of the star that can carry the planet

Starspots are modelled as correlated noise with the star's rotation period built in, and the model is good enough to remove signals that would otherwise be announced as planets. It is also good enough to remove planets. Near the rotation period no amount of data in one season separates the two, and away from it a flexible noise model quietly takes most of the evidence a planet would have had.

exoplanets · Reflex velocity The red velocity against the blue one. Simulated velocities of two stars, each measured simultaneously in a blue channel at 0.45 micrometres (across) and a red one at 0.8 (up), with 0.6 m/s of noise in each. One star (filled) has a 4 m/s planet on a 9.3-day orbit: its points lie along the diagonal, slope 0.97, because a Doppler shift is the same velocity in every colour. The other (open) has no planet and a spot 900 K cooler than its 5100 K photosphere, rotating every 12 days and evolving: its points lie along a shallower line, slope 0.64, which is the ratio of the spot's contrasts in the two channels. Neither star's blue velocities alone say which it is. The flux-deficit spot model is the simplest case; a spot whose signal is mostly suppressed blueshift lies closer to the diagonal.

A planet has one velocity in every colour

A Doppler shift moves every line in a spectrum by the same velocity, because it is the whole star that moves. A starspot does not move anything; it removes light, and how much light it removes depends on the colour it is seen in. Measuring the velocity in the blue and the red at once separates the two in a single night — until the star's magnetic field, which grows more visible towards the red, takes part of the separation back.

exoplanets · Reflex velocity

Named alongside it

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

Radial-velocityRotation periodStarspotCompletenessConvective blueshiftDetection thresholdEta earthExtrapolationHabitable zoneOccurrence rateStellar activityWindow function

All concepts