Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Mean molecular weight — where it appears

The average mass of a particle in a gas, in atomic mass units. It sets the atmospheric scale height at a given temperature, so a hydrogen envelope at 2.3 has features nine times larger in a transmission spectrum than a steam one at 18 — which is what breaks the composition degeneracy a density leaves.

Named by 5 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A radius that depends on the colour it is measured in. Transit depth against wavelength for a planet of 1.38 Jupiter radii at 1400 K, whose atmosphere has a scale height of 538 km — computed from H = kT/µg, not assumed. One scale height of extra opacity adds 153 parts per million to a transit of 1.40 per cent, so the whole spectral signal is 862 ppm at its strongest: one part in 16 of the transit that carries it. The features are at real band centres — sodium at 0.589 µm, water at 1.4 µm, carbon dioxide at 4.3 µm — with the rise at the blue end the Rayleigh slope of scattering off the smallest particles.

A radius that depends on the colour it is measured in

Measure a transit in one colour and then another, and the planet is a different size. The difference is a few atmospheric scale heights, which is a few hundred parts per million of an already tiny signal.

exoplanets · Exoplanet atmospheres One mass and one radius, and every composition that gives them. A planet of 5 Earth masses and 1.6 Earth radii, and the compositions consistent with it. The horizontal axis is the fraction of the planet's mass in an iron core and the vertical axis the fraction in a water layer outside the rock; the heavy curve is every pair that reproduces the measurement exactly, and the band around it is what the 0.05 Earth-radius uncertainty allows. The answer is a curve, not a point, and that is not a failure of precision. Two numbers cannot determine three components: a planet can be made denser by adding iron or lighter by adding water, and along this locus the two changes cancel exactly. The ends of it are not small variations on one planet. At the left is a body with no iron at all and 0 per cent of its mass in water; at the right, one with an iron core like Mercury's and 23 per cent water. Those have different formation histories, different interiors, different everything, and the same mass and radius to the precision anybody can measure them. Breaking the degeneracy needs an observation that is neither a mass nor a radius. The usual one is a transmission spectrum, which measures the atmosphere's scale height and so its mean molecular weight — a hydrogen envelope and a steam envelope differ by a factor of nine in that, and the corresponding factor in the size of the spectral features. What the picture assumes is that the planet is differentiated into clean layers, which is the standard assumption and is false in detail: water dissolves into silicate melt at these pressures, and a mixed interior sits at neither end of this curve.

One density, and every planet that has it

A mass and a radius are two numbers, and a differentiated planet has at least three components. The set of compositions matching a measurement is therefore a curve rather than a point — and its two ends are a body with no iron and half its mass in water, and a body with a Mercury-like core.

exoplanets · Planet composition Three planets that are the same spectrum. A model transmission spectrum, in scale heights of apparent radius, drawn three times: once as it is, once with the reference radius raised by 0.45 scale heights and the abundance reduced to compensate, and once with a cloud deck truncating the features. The three differ by 0.21 scale heights root-mean-square against features of 2.1, which is well inside the error bars of any real observation. The reason is structural rather than observational: a transmission spectrum measures a difference in apparent radius with wavelength and never an absolute radius, so the level is a free parameter, and shifting the level trades against the abundance almost exactly. Adding a cloud deck adds a third parameter that flattens features and trades against both. Three unknowns and one curve is why the quoted abundance uncertainties from transmission spectroscopy are so much larger than the photometric precision suggests.

A spectrum flattened by cloud, or by nothing

A transmission spectrum measures how a planet's apparent radius changes with wavelength, and never the radius itself. That missing level is a free parameter, it trades almost exactly against the abundance of whatever is absorbing, and a cloud deck adds a third unknown to a curve that constrains two.

exoplanets · Exoplanet atmospheres The habitable zone of a 1 M☉ star, sweeping outwards. The inner and outer edges of the liquid-water zone against time, for a 1 solar-mass star whose main sequence lasts 10.0 Gyr. The star brightens as it burns hydrogen — a heavier core needs a hotter centre to hold the star up — so both edges move outward by a factor of 1.63 across the whole main sequence, and the band drawn here sweeps past any fixed orbit rather than containing it. Two quite different zones can be read off. The instantaneous zone at the age of the present-day Sun is 0.99 to 1.71 AU, which is the band a survey means by "in the habitable zone". The continuously habitable zone over the 10.0 Gyr drawn is the overlap of every instant in it — outside the inner edge at the end and inside the outer edge at the beginning — which is 1.37 to 1.44 AU, 10 per cent of the instantaneous width. The horizontal line is an orbit at 1 AU. It leaves the zone at 4.72 Gyr, when the inner edge overtakes it. None of these edges is a measurement: both come from one-dimensional climate models, and the inner one in particular is where a runaway greenhouse begins in a model whose clouds are prescribed.

The band moves and the orbit does not

A star brightens as it burns, so the distance at which water can be liquid sweeps outwards by a factor of one and a half across a main sequence. The band a survey quotes is an instant; the band a planet needs is the overlap of every instant, and for the Sun it is a tenth as wide and does not contain the Earth.

exoplanets · Habitable zone An exponent between 2.3 and 4, not a number. The local logarithmic slope of the mass–luminosity relation against mass — the exponent that "L ∝ M^3.5" stands in for — read off the same fit to eclipsing binaries that the relation itself is drawn from. It is a step function with two corners, and the steps are 2.3 below 0.43 M☉, 4 0.43 to 2 M☉, 3.5 2 to 55 M☉. The horizontal lines are what homology predicts: a star in radiative equilibrium has L ∝ μ⁴M³/κ̄, which gives an exponent of 3 when the opacity is electron scattering and a constant, 5.5 when it is Kramers and depends on density and temperature, and 1 where radiation pressure holds the star up and the luminosity is pinned to the Eddington value. The measured steps sit between those predictions rather than on them, which is what a real star does — no star is homologous, the low-mass ones are convective throughout and the heavy ones have convective cores, and the fitted exponents are what is left after all of that. The useful statement is not that the exponent is 3.5 but that it is between 2 and 5 everywhere and 4 in the middle, and that the reason it moves is a change of which opacity is carrying the energy out.

An exponent that is a slope, not a law

The phrase “L goes as M to the three and a half” stands in for a curve with three straight pieces and two corners. The exponent is 2.3 below half a solar mass, 4 in the middle and falls towards 1 at the top — and each change of exponent is a change in which opacity is carrying the energy out.

stars · The mass–luminosity relation

Named alongside it

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

Scale heightOpacityRayleigh scatteringTransmission spectroscopyAbundance degeneracyAtmospheric compositionBayesian inferenceBulk densityCarbonate silicate cycleClimate modelCloud deckClouds

All concepts