The collection

Every essay — page 18

One idea per essay, ordered so that the earlier ones set up the later ones — but nothing here depends on being read in sequence. Essays 341–360 of 514.

The observed sky

Coordinates, seasons, phases and shadows — geometry seen from inside it.

Starlight

Distance, brightness and colour: what can be measured when nothing can be visited.

4000 lines averaged into one profile, and 2.3 m/s out of it. A cross-correlation function: the average absorption profile obtained by shifting a mask of 4000 line positions across a spectrum and summing what falls under it. The faint curves behind are individual lines, each with its own depth, its own width and its own small offset; the heavy curve is what averaging them produces. The velocity is the position of the peak, and its precision is the width divided by the contrast, the signal-to-noise and the square root of the number of lines — 2.3 metres a second here. Nothing about this construction is a measurement of any one line. It is a measurement of where a weighted average of thousands of them sits, and the weights are a choice: a mask built for one spectral type applied to another weights the disagreement between the lines differently, and moves the peak.

A velocity that is an average of lines that disagree

A radial velocity measured to a metre a second is not measured from a line. It is the position of the peak of a cross-correlation against a mask of thousands of lines, and those lines do not agree with each other by hundreds of metres a second — because each one forms at a different depth in an atmosphere that is boiling.

8 figures · The Doppler effect
A dome flat that is 3.5 per cent wrong leaves 0.042 magnitudes across the field. Two things called the flat field. The left panel is the true illumination of the focal plane, falling by 12 per cent from centre to corner because of vignetting and the filter's own radial transmission. The middle panel is what a dome flat measures, which is the illumination produced by a screen at a finite distance lit by lamps — a different angular distribution, and therefore a different fall-off by a few per cent. The right-hand plot is what survives dividing one by the other: a smooth radial gradient of 0.042 magnitudes from centre to edge. Pixel-to-pixel response scatter, which is what most people mean by a flat field, is 1.8 per cent per pixel and averages down to 0.255 per cent inside a photometric aperture. The term everybody removes is the one that does not matter, and the term that matters is smooth, is different for every flat-fielding method, and looks exactly like a real gradient in the sky.

A response measured pixel by pixel

Two completely different quantities are called the flat field. One is the detector's pixel-to-pixel response, which everybody removes and which averages away anyway. The other is the illumination pattern of the optics, which is smooth, is different for every method of measuring it, and survives into every magnitude the instrument produces.

7 figures · Photometric systems
A continuum drawn 4.3 per cent below the real one. A short stretch of spectrum with one strong line in it and 150 weak ones scattered across the same interval. The upper dashed line is the true continuum — the flux the star would emit with no lines at all — and it is not observable. The lower one is what a fit through the highest points of the spectrum returns, which is 4.3 per cent lower, because the weak lines have depressed the gaps between the strong ones. Measuring the strong line's equivalent width against the apparent continuum instead of the real one makes it 11.2 per cent too small. The error has a sign, it is worse in spectra with more lines, and it therefore correlates with metallicity — which is exactly the quantity being measured.

A continuum that was never observed

An equivalent width is an area measured relative to the continuum, and the continuum is not in the data. It is drawn — a curve through the highest points of the spectrum — and in any spectrum with many weak lines those highest points are already below the true continuum, because the weak lines have eaten the gaps.

7 figures · Line formation
Four spectra, and 3.9 magnitudes between them at the same redshift. The K-correction — the magnitude that has to be added to compare a redshifted object with a nearby one through the same filter — against redshift, for four power-law spectra. At zero redshift every correction is zero by construction. Beyond that they diverge, because a filter at a fixed observed wavelength samples a different part of the source's own spectrum at every redshift, and how much flux is there depends on the spectrum. A flat spectrum needs no correction at all at any redshift, and the two extremes drawn differ by 3.9 magnitudes by z = 1.2. The circularity is the point: applying the correction requires the spectrum, and the spectrum is what a magnitude is being used to constrain. The dashed line is the way out — observe in a band chosen so that it lands on the rest-frame band of interest, and the spectral term cancels, leaving only the bandwidth stretch.

A magnitude in a band the source never had

A filter passes light at a fixed observed wavelength, and a redshifted source emitted that light at a shorter one. Comparing a distant galaxy with a nearby one through the same filter therefore compares two different parts of two spectra — and the correction between them needs the spectrum, which is what the magnitude was going to be used to find out.

7 figures · Magnitudes
One over a noisy parallax, at three precisions. The distribution of the distance obtained by inverting a parallax, for a star truly at 100 parsecs measured with fractional errors of 5, 10, 20 per cent. At five per cent the distribution is nearly symmetric and inverting is harmless. At twenty per cent it is strongly skewed: the mean sits at 105 parsecs rather than 100, and the tail runs to distances several times the truth, because a parallax scattered a little towards zero is a distance scattered a long way outward. The asymmetry is a Jacobian and nothing else — the parallax measurement is unbiased and symmetric throughout. Above about twenty per cent the mean of the distribution stops existing at all, because the density falls only as the inverse square of the distance and the integral of d times that diverges.

The distance is not one over the parallax

A parallax is measured with symmetric errors and a distance is one over it. Inverting a noisy positive quantity is not a change of units — it is a change of distribution, and the one that comes out is skewed, biased outward, and above about twenty per cent error has no mean at all.

7 figures · Parallax
A sample that gets brighter with distance because the faint ones drop out. The mean absolute magnitude of a magnitude-limited sample, relative to the population it is drawn from, against distance. The population has a spread of 0.5 magnitudes about a mean of -4, and the survey stops at apparent magnitude 20. Nearby, everything is detected and the sample is unbiased. Beyond about 316228 parsecs the faint end of the distribution starts falling below the limit and the survivors are brighter than average; further out the bias deepens without limit, because eventually only the extreme tail is detectable. The horizontal line is the classical Malmquist value of 1.382 times the square of the spread, which is what the bias averages to over a magnitude-limited sample as a whole — it is a property of the sample rather than of any one object, and using it as a correction for an individual star is a common and specific mistake.

A sample brighter than the population it came from

Every survey stops at some apparent brightness. At any distance it therefore contains only the objects luminous enough to make the cut, so the average object in it is brighter than the average object in the universe — by an amount that grows with distance and that has been shortening every distance in astronomy since 1920.

7 figures · Distance ladder
A peak worth 10.8 in a narrow search is worth nothing in a wide one. The probability that noise alone produces a peak at least as tall as a given power, for searches over four different numbers of independent frequencies. A single frequency examined in isolation gives a one-per-cent chance at a power of 4.6; searching fifty thousand frequencies for the same one-per-cent chance requires 15.4. The threshold rises as the logarithm of the width of the search, which is why the penalty is survivable — but it is a penalty, it is often not applied, and the number of independent frequencies in an unevenly sampled time series is not the number of frequencies on the grid. Overestimating that count is conservative and underestimating it is not, which is the one asymmetry worth remembering.

The tallest peak in nothing at all

A periodogram of pure noise has peaks in it, and the tallest is not small. How tall it has to be before it means something depends on how many frequencies were searched and on what the noise actually is — and astronomical noise is almost never the white noise the standard formula assumes.

7 figures · Periodograms
Two diagnostics, two bands, and a crossing to 49 kelvin. The plane of effective temperature against surface gravity, with the constraints from two spectroscopic diagnostics drawn as bands. The wings of a hydrogen line are broadened by collisions, so they respond steeply to the gravity and weakly to the temperature: a narrow, steep band. An ionisation balance — requiring that the same element give the same abundance from its neutral and its singly ionised lines — responds to both, and its band is much shallower. Neither diagnostic determines either quantity on its own. Where the two cross is the answer, and the size of the crossing region is set by the band widths divided by the difference of the slopes — so two diagnostics that respond similarly give a long, thin, nearly useless error region however precise each one is. Choosing diagnostics that disagree in their sensitivities is the whole of the art.

A temperature and a gravity that trade against each other

A stellar spectrum contains the star's temperature, its surface gravity and its composition, and no single feature in it contains only one of the three. Every diagnostic is a band in the parameter plane rather than a point, and the answer is where the bands cross — which makes choosing diagnostics that disagree in their sensitivities the whole of the art.

7 figures · Spectra
An instrument 1.4 times as polarised as the sky it is measuring. The Stokes plane, with the two linear polarisation parameters as axes. The tight cluster near the centre is a set of stars known to be unpolarised, observed through the same instrument: they should sit at the origin and do not, and their mean is the instrumental polarisation — 0.77 per cent here, which is 1.4 times the real polarisation of the field. The other cluster is the field stars, whose measured values are the sum of their own polarisation and the same instrumental offset. Subtracting one mean from the other recovers 0.59 per cent at the right angle. Two things make this worth doing carefully. The offset is a vector, so leaving it in rotates the measured position angle as well as changing its magnitude — by 31 degrees here — and a calibration that only fixes the scale does not touch that. And the offset depends on where the telescope was pointing, because the reflection angles do, so the standards have to be observed at the same place in the sky and at the same instrument rotation.

An instrument more polarised than the sky

Every oblique reflection polarises. A telescope is a stack of oblique reflections, so it adds a fraction of a per cent of polarisation to everything it looks at — which for most astronomical sources is more than they have themselves, and which is a vector rather than a scale error, so it rotates the answer as well as changing its size.

7 figures · Polarimetry

Stars

The diagram that sorted them, and the one quantity that decides a star's whole life.

Three causes, three shapes, one residual. An eclipse-timing residual: the observed minus the computed time of each eclipse, against cycle number, in days. Three effects are superposed and each has its own functional form. A slow change in the orbital period — from mass transfer or from magnetic braking — integrates to a parabola. A third body in a wide orbit moves the whole binary towards and away from the observer, so its light-travel time adds a sinusoid at the third body's period. And an eccentric orbit whose apsides are precessing moves the two eclipses in opposite directions, which is a sinusoid that changes sign between primary and secondary minima. The last is why both eclipses have to be timed: a third body moves them together and apsidal motion moves them apart, and a series of primary minima alone cannot tell the two apart at all.

Three causes with three shapes in one curve

The times of eclipse in a binary star are a clock, and the clock runs late and early. Three completely different things make it do so — a third body, a changing period, and a slowly turning orbit — and they are separable only because each imposes a different shape on the residual.

7 figures · Binary stars
A high end that is 2.5 in slope steeper than the one stars were born with. The mass function a star count measures against the one stars were born with, for a population that has been forming stars steadily for 10 billion years. Below about a solar mass nothing has had time to die, so the two coincide exactly. Above it the fraction still alive is the main-sequence lifetime divided by the age, and since the lifetime falls as the two-and-a-half power of the mass, the present-day function is steeper than the initial one by exactly that exponent. A count of massive stars in an old population therefore under-represents them by orders of magnitude, and reading it as an initial mass function gives a slope far too steep. The correction is large, it is calculable, and it depends on the star-formation history — which is usually the thing the mass function was going to be used to constrain.

A mass function corrected by an age

Counting stars by mass gives the stars that are alive. What every argument needs is the stars that were born, and the two differ by the fraction of each mass still on the main sequence — which is a lifetime divided by an age, and which for massive stars in an old population is a very small number.

7 figures · Initial mass function
4 per cent in one observable is 48 per cent in an age. How an error in the calibration of the large frequency separation propagates into the quantities derived from it. The two scaling relations are exact in their exponents, so a fractional error in the separation appears as twice that in the radius, four times in the mass, and — because a main-sequence lifetime falls as roughly the two-and-a-half power of the mass — ten times in an age. At the 4 per cent level, which is about what the theoretical corrections to the relation amount to for a red giant, that is 15 per cent in mass and 48 per cent in age. Nothing about the seismology is uncertain at that level; the frequencies are measured to parts in a thousand. What is uncertain is the constant of proportionality, and it is uncertain because it was calibrated on one star.

Two scaling relations calibrated on one star

Asteroseismology gives a star's mass and radius from two numbers read off its oscillation spectrum. The two relations are exact in their exponents and approximate in their constants, and the constants were fixed by requiring that the Sun come out right — so an error of a few per cent in one observable is tens of per cent in a mass and nearly a factor in an age.

7 figures · Asteroseismology
A free parameter worth 88 kelvin across its plausible range. The effective temperature a stellar model predicts, against mass, for three values of the mixing-length parameter. The parameter has no derivation: it is the distance a convective blob is supposed to travel before dissolving, in units of the local pressure scale height, and it is fixed by requiring that a model of the Sun reproduce the Sun. The three curves span 88 kelvin, which at fixed luminosity is a radius difference of 1.5 per cent — comparable to the precision with which radii are now measured by interferometry and by eclipsing binaries. Every stellar age, every isochrone and every mass inferred from a position in the temperature–luminosity plane depends on the value chosen, and there is no reason beyond convenience to expect the solar value to apply to a red giant or to a metal-poor dwarf.

A length nobody derived, fitted to one star

Convection in a star is turbulent, three-dimensional and impossible to compute inside an evolution code. What is used instead is one number — how far a blob of gas travels before dissolving — fixed by requiring that a model of the Sun come out with the Sun's radius, and then applied to every star ever modelled.

7 figures · Energy transport
A free parameter worth 42 per cent of an age. The main-sequence lifetime of a star against its mass, for four values of the convective overshoot parameter. A convective core has a boundary where buoyancy vanishes, and a rising blob arriving there still has momentum, so it penetrates into the stable region above and mixes fresh hydrogen into the core. How far it penetrates is not computed — it is a parameter, quoted in pressure scale heights, and the values in current use range from zero to about a third. A larger core is a larger fuel supply, so the lifetime rises and the turn-off at a given age is more massive. Across the plausible range the lifetime of a two-solar-mass star changes by 42 per cent, and an age read off a cluster's turn-off changes by the same amount. That is larger than the quoted uncertainty on almost every cluster age in the literature.

A convective boundary with no theory to fix it

A convective core has an edge where buoyancy vanishes. A blob arriving there still has momentum, so it carries on, mixing fresh hydrogen into the core and extending the star's life. How far it carries on is a fitted parameter, and across its plausible range every stellar age changes by nearly half.

7 figures · Stellar evolution
A flux that measures a temperature to 0.12 per cent. Neutrino flux against central temperature, in units of the standard model's, for the three main solar channels. The exponents are not arbitrary: each reflects how far up the Gamow peak the reaction has to reach, so the channel with the largest Coulomb barrier is the steepest. The boron-8 flux goes as roughly the twenty-fourth power, which means a measurement good to 3 per cent constrains the Sun's central temperature to 0.12 per cent — better than any other technique by an order of magnitude. The same steepness is why the flux is useless as a check on anything else: a stellar model whose central temperature is uncertain at the half-per-cent level predicts this flux to within a factor, and the disagreement between two model families is far larger than the measurement.

A flux that is a thermometer to a tenth of a per cent

The boron-8 neutrino flux from the Sun's core rises as roughly the twenty-fourth power of the central temperature. That makes it the sharpest thermometer in astrophysics and simultaneously the most fragile prediction — a model uncertain in its central temperature by half a per cent predicts the flux to within a factor.

7 figures · Solar neutrinos

Spaceflight

Celestial mechanics used forwards — where to burn, and what it costs.

Every sequence · Every named object · Search