Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Secondary eclipse — where it appears

The passage of a planet behind its star, removing the planet's own emitted and reflected light. Its depth is the planet-to-star flux ratio — parts per million for a temperate planet — so anything at the per-cent level is a stellar companion rather than a planet.

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

One whole orbit. The system's total brightness through one orbit: the transit at phase 0, the slow rise and fall of the planet's illuminated hemisphere between, and the secondary eclipse at phase 0.5 where the planet's own light is removed. The transit is 1.05%; the secondary eclipse is 1800 ppm, about 6 times shallower.

The planet is seen when it disappears

Half an orbit after the transit the planet passes behind its star, and the light that vanishes is the planet's own. Subtracting two brightnesses taken hours apart isolates a body nothing has ever resolved.

exoplanets · Exoplanet atmospheres Two objects, the same 1.055 per cent, and only one of them a planet. A planet of 0.1027 stellar radii transiting at impact parameter 0.3, and a background eclipsing binary of radius ratio 0.62 whose 38 per cent eclipse is diluted by the target's light to 1.055 per cent — the same depth to nine decimal places, because the dilution was chosen to make it so. A blend contributing 2.7 per cent of the light in the aperture can manufacture any planetary depth at all, so the depth is not evidence about what produced it. Two things in the same photometry are. The ingress occupies 20.4 per cent of the planet's transit and 80.3 per cent of the blend's, a factor of 3.9: the shape of the shoulders is set by the radius ratio of whatever is actually eclipsing, and dilution scales a curve without changing its shape. And the duration with the period gives the mean density of the star being crossed — 1.41 g/cm³ here against 0.15, a factor of 9 — so a blend usually implies a host of a completely different kind from the one the spectrum shows. Neither test needs an observation the survey did not already make, and neither of them proves a planet: they reject specific alternatives, and what is left is a probability.

A planet that is never confirmed, only validated

A background eclipsing binary diluted by the target's light reproduces a planetary transit depth exactly, and no amount of better photometry separates the two. Most known planets are therefore the output of a probability calculation rather than a detection, and the honest statement about them is a statement about a false-positive rate.

exoplanets · Transits

Named alongside it

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

AlbedoAstrophysical false-positiveA background eclipsing binaryBlendBrightness temperatureCentroid shiftContaminationDay night contrastDilutionEmission spectrumFalse-positive probabilityHeat redistribution

All concepts