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 5 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 Brightness temperature across the infrared, for three profiles. The brightness temperature of the planet's emission against wavelength from 1 to 12 microns, for the three temperature profiles, with water and carbon monoxide bands in the opacity. In a band the opacity is high, so the light comes from higher, lower-pressure layers; in the windows between bands it comes from deeper. Over a profile falling outward the bands are cooler than the windows: at 6.3 microns 1457 K against 1570 K at 3.6. Over the inverted profile they are hotter: 1851 against 1538. Over the isothermal profile every wavelength has the same brightness temperature and the spectrum is a blackbody, whatever molecules are present.

Molecules seen only through a change of temperature

The heat a planet gives off, measured colour by colour as it disappears behind its star, carries the fingerprints of the molecules in its atmosphere — but only because the atmosphere's temperature changes with height. Water absorbs where the air cools upward and emits where it warms, and in an atmosphere at one temperature every molecule vanishes from the spectrum, however much of it there is. An emission spectrum is a sounding of a temperature gradient, and the molecules are what it is taken with.

exoplanets · Exoplanet atmospheres Four rocky planets against the bare-rock limit: TRAPPIST-1b at 0.99, TRAPPIST-1c at 0.87, LHS 3844b at 1.01, GJ 367b at 0.99. Published day-side brightness temperatures of four small planets orbiting M dwarfs, each divided by the temperature its day side would have as dark bare rock re-radiating where it absorbs (dot, with its uncertainty), with the value for heat spread evenly over the whole planet marked for comparison (grey tick, at 0.71). TRAPPIST-1b: 503 ± 26 K against a bare-rock 508 K; TRAPPIST-1c: 380 ± 31 K against a bare-rock 434 K; LHS 3844b: 1040 ± 40 K against a bare-rock 1031 K; GJ 367b: 1728 ± 90 K against a bare-rock 1741 K. Three sit at the bare-rock limit within their errors, which leaves room for no thick atmosphere on dark rock. TRAPPIST-1c sits about one in eight below it, which a thin atmosphere could explain, and so could a moderately reflective surface. None comes near the even-redistribution value that a thick atmosphere would give.

A day side as hot as bare rock

A planet with no air can be no hotter on its day side than bare rock that re-radiates every photon where it lands. An atmosphere carries some of that heat to the night side, so the day side comes out cooler. For a rocky planet too small for its spectrum to be read, that difference is the test: three of the first four small planets around red dwarfs measured this way sit at the bare-rock limit, and the fourth sits below it by an amount that a thin atmosphere, or a brighter surface, could explain equally well.

exoplanets · Exoplanet atmospheres One parabola, two causes. Transit times of a planet on a 1.0914-day orbit over 12 years, minus the best straight-line ephemeris, with timing errors of 30 seconds — the shape a period shrinking by 29 milliseconds a year produces, a parabola 116 seconds deep. The curve is drawn once because it is the same curve for both explanations: an orbit decaying at that rate, or a star accelerating towards the observer at 2.9e-6 m/s², which shortens the light-travel time to each successive transit by the same steadily growing amount. Nothing in the transit times can tell them apart.

A clock that slows, or a star that falls

Transit times that curve away from a straight line can mean a planet's orbit is shrinking — the tides draining it into its star — or that the star itself is accelerating along the line of sight under a distant companion's pull. Both draw the same parabola, and the transit times cannot choose. The star's velocities can, but only for the shortest orbits: the acceleration that would fake a given decay grows as one over the period, and beyond a day or two an unseen Saturn can mimic more decay than the tides produce.

exoplanets · Transit timing

Named alongside it

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

Brightness temperatureEmission spectrumHeat redistributionPhase curveTidal lockingAbundance degeneracyAlbedoApsidal precessionAstrophysical false-positiveAtmospheric escapeA background eclipsing binaryBlend

All concepts