Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Transit probability — where it appears

The chance that a planet's orbit is tilted enough to carry it across its star as seen from here, which is the ratio of the star's radius to the orbital distance. It is about half a per cent for an Earth-like orbit around a solar-type star, which is why a transit survey must watch a hundred thousand stars to find a few.

Named by 8 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A transit of a planet 0.103 of its star's radius. The star's brightness through one transit, computed by integrating the uniform stellar disc over the region the planet covers. The depth is 1.05%, which is exactly (Rp/R⋆)² = 0.01055. The four contact points are where the two discs are externally and internally tangent, at separations 1 ± 0.103 stellar radii.

A planet measured by the light it removes

A transit gives a depth, and the depth is a ratio of two radii rather than a size. Everything a transit says about a planet is said in units of a star nobody has visited either.

exoplanets · Transits 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 5 perturbers that draw one 58-day timing signal. Every perturbing planet that gives a 3-day transiting planet the same timing signal — a sinusoid with a 57.8-day super-period and an amplitude of 1.27 minutes — placed wide of the nearest first-order commensurabilities inside and outside its orbit, with its mass found by integrating until the amplitude matched. outside, near 4:3 at 4.070 days needs 7.6 Earth masses and would move the star by K = 3.1 m/s; outside, near 3:2 at 4.620 days needs 12.0 Earth masses and would move the star by K = 4.8 m/s; outside, near 2:1 at 6.329 days needs 25.6 Earth masses and would move the star by K = 9.2 m/s; inside, near 3:2 at 1.966 days needs 6.9 Earth masses and would move the star by K = 3.7 m/s; inside, near 2:1 at 1.462 days needs 45.8 Earth masses and would move the star by K = 26.7 m/s. The period ratio is along the bottom on a logarithmic axis and the required mass up the side. A super-period fixes the distance from some resonance and not which resonance it is, and the amplitude then fixes a mass for each guess — so the timing alone returns a list rather than a planet. The velocity semi-amplitudes differ by a factor of 8.5 across the list, which is one of the two ways the list is shortened.

One timing curve and five planets that could draw it

A transiting planet whose times wander at a 58-day period, by just over a minute, is being pulled by something — but the period says only how far from some resonance the pull comes, not from which. Perturbers inside and outside the orbit, near four different commensurabilities, each with its own mass, reproduce the same curve to a fraction of a per cent. Timing alone returns a list, and even the detail that shortens it hides a coincidence of its own.

exoplanets · Transit timing Three biases against eccentricity, and they do not agree. Four quantities against orbital eccentricity, each relative to a circular orbit of the same semi-major axis, averaged over the argument of periastron. The transit probability rises as (1 − e²)⁻¹, because an eccentric planet spends part of its orbit inside its own semi-major axis: at e = 0.5 a transit is 1.33 times as likely. The transit duration falls as √(1 − e²), so the event carries less signal-to-noise, and the two together — probability times the square root of the time in transit — come to 1.24 at the same eccentricity. They very nearly cancel, and that is the surprise: a transit survey has almost no eccentricity bias at all. The radial-velocity curve is the one that does. A Keplerian of eccentricity e puts less of its variance in the fundamental and more into harmonics no sinusoidal search is looking at — 68 per cent remains at e = 0.6 and 47 per cent at e = 0.8 — so a velocity survey loses amplitude exactly where a transit survey does not. What no figure here can show is which of these the measured eccentricity distribution is made of, because the correction depends on a detection pipeline rather than on geometry, and the two surveys have to be corrected separately before their answers can be compared.

Every method prefers a circle, and not for the same reason

A transit is more likely on an eccentric orbit and shorter when it happens, and the two very nearly cancel. A velocity curve loses amplitude to harmonics no sinusoidal search is looking at, and that one does not cancel at all.

exoplanets · Detection bias How many planets a star has is the hardest thing a catalogue measures. The multiplicity distribution a transit catalogue would contain, for systems that all truly hold 5 planets, at four mutual inclination dispersions. 40,000 systems are drawn per dispersion with an isotropic viewing direction and Rayleigh-distributed inclinations about a common plane, at semi-major axes of 12, 16, 21, 27, 34 stellar radii; the bars are conditioned on at least one planet transiting, which is what makes a system appear in a catalogue at all. At 0.5° of dispersion 33 per cent of the detected systems show all 5 planets and the mean apparent multiplicity is 3.13; at 10° it is 1.39, with 68 per cent of them showing exactly one. Every one of those systems has 5 planets. The entire difference between a catalogue of singles and a catalogue of compact multiples is one number that nothing in the light curve measures. And the two effects run in opposite directions: the fraction of stars showing any planet RISES with the dispersion — 8%, 9%, 12%, 19% across the four — because scattering the orbits gives more of them a chance to cross the line of sight, while the number seen per detected star falls by a factor of 2.2. A survey that scatters its systems finds more stars with planets and fewer planets per star, and neither number on its own says which has happened. What no figure here can show is the true dispersion, because the observable is the ratio of those two and a system with fewer planets and a tighter plane reproduces it exactly.

How many planets a star has is not a measurement

Draw five thousand identical five-planet systems, scatter their orbital planes by half a degree, and a third of the detections show all five. Scatter them by ten degrees and two thirds show exactly one. Every system has five.

exoplanets · Detection bias Small planets and giant planets per star, against the mass of the star. Planets per star against the host star's mass, both on logarithmic axes, for small planets (one to four Earth radii, orbital periods under 200 days) and giant planets (above a third of Jupiter's mass, within 2.5 astronomical units). The small-planet rate is drawn as 1.1 per star at one solar mass rising as M^−0.6; the giant rate as 7 per cent at one solar mass falling towards small stars as M^1. Both are representative of published fits, not fits of their own. At 0.3 solar masses a star has 2.3 small planets and a 2.1 per cent chance of a giant; at one solar mass 1.1 and 7 per cent. The ratio of small planets to giants changes by a factor of 7 between the two, so a statement about how common planets are depends on which star it is about as much as on which planet.

More small planets round smaller stars

A red dwarf has about twice as many small planets as the Sun's kind of star and a third as many giants. The two populations move in opposite directions along the same axis, and the small planets were built from discs several times poorer.

exoplanets · Occurrence rates The ground an eccentric Jupiter sweeps on its way in. The periastron and apoastron of a Jupiter delivered on an eccentric orbit, against its semi-major axis as tides shrink it at fixed angular momentum from 5 au to 0.060 au, both on logarithmic scales. The periastron stays at 0.03 au throughout; the apoastron falls from 10.0 au toward the final circular orbit, a 5.3-day hot Jupiter. Every radius between the two curves is crossed twice an orbit for the whole of the delivery. The shaded strip below the dashed line is where a small companion would have to orbit to be found transiting with the hot Jupiter — periods under 50 days, inside 0.27 au — and the migrator's orbit covers it until the semi-major axis has fallen to 0.15 au, after which the periastron alone keeps passing through its inner edge. A planet there is scattered out, thrown into the star, or swallowed; none survives a delivery that takes thousands of orbits.

A neighbour an eccentric arrival cannot leave

A hot Jupiter that arrived on an orbit of eccentricity near one swept every distance between its closest and farthest point, thousands of times, while tides shrank its orbit — and anything small in that range was scattered, swallowed or thrown into the star. A hot Jupiter carried in by the disc can keep its neighbours. So a hot Jupiter with a close companion came through the disc, and the share of them that have one puts a floor under how many did — a floor whose height is set less by the count than by three chances nobody has measured.

exoplanets · Planet migration The bands of sky from which each planet would be seen to transit. Ecliptic latitude against ecliptic longitude, with the vertical scale stretched 11 times: the band from which each of Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter would be seen to cross the Sun's disc. The Earth's band lies along the ecliptic, ±0.266° wide. Mercury's is the widest, ±0.69°, and tilted by its 7° inclination; the giants' are narrow, ±0.051° for Jupiter. Each crosses the Earth's at the two nodes of its orbit, and only near those crossings can an observer see two planets transit. From nowhere on the sky can more than 3 be seen.

The stars that could catch the Earth in transit

The geometry that lets one Earth twin in two hundred be seen crossing its star works in reverse: the Earth crosses the Sun for observers in a band of sky half a degree wide, under half a per cent of the sky. About two thousand stars within a hundred parsecs sit in it. The band is fixed to the Earth's orbit and the stars are not, so the list changes on the timescale of recorded history — and from no direction can more than three of the eight planets be seen transiting at once.

exoplanets · Detection bias

Named alongside it

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

Occurrence rateSelection effectRadial-velocitySurvey completenessHabitable zoneHot jupiterMutual inclinationOrbital inclinationTransitArgument of periastronChopping signalCompleteness

All concepts