Field

Orbits

Kepler's three laws, and the family of curves a single force allows.
An orbit at eccentricity 0.6. An orbit of eccentricity 0.6. The primary sits at a focus, offset from the centre by 0.6 of the semi-major axis, and the closest and furthest points differ by a factor of 4.00.

The orbit is an ellipse, and the Sun is not in the middle of it

Kepler's first law is usually drawn wrong. The interesting content is not the ellipse — it is the focus, and the fact that one of the two is empty.

Equal areas in equal times, at eccentricity 0.65. Positions of an orbiting body at equal intervals of time, obtained by solving Kepler's equation. The two shaded sectors span the same interval and enclose the same area — a long thin one at the far end, a short fat one at the close approach.

Equal areas in equal times, which is angular momentum in disguise

Kepler's second law is a statement about the area a radius line sweeps. It looks like an odd thing to have noticed, and it turns out to be a conservation law arriving eighty years early.

What an eccentricity does to the shape, and what it does to the offset. The fractional flattening 1 − b/a and the fractional focal offset c/a, against eccentricity. The offset is first order in e and the flattening is second, so at Earth's e = 0.0167 the outline is 0.014% from a circle while the Sun sits 1.67% of the semi-major axis off the centre — a factor of 120.

An orbit can look exactly like a circle and still not be one

Earth's orbit departs from a circle by fourteen parts in a hundred thousand. The Sun's offset from its centre is a hundred and twenty times larger, and everything interesting is in the offset.

A vector that does not change, drawn five times. The Laplace–Runge–Lenz vector A = v × L − GM r̂, constructed at five points of one orbit at e = 0.45 under a force ∝ r^−2, each drawn from the body rather than from the focus so that its length and direction can be compared point by point. Under the inverse square every one of them is the same vector: identical to machine precision in length and in direction. Its length is 0.4500, which is the eccentricity, and it points at pericentre — so the orbit's orientation is a conserved quantity and not a constant of integration, which is why the ellipse does not turn.

The third thing that is conserved

Energy fixes an orbit's size and angular momentum fixes its shape. Neither fixes which way it points — so a curve that closes needs a third conserved quantity, and only two force laws in the universe supply one.

The three anomalies at E = 1.15 rad. The auxiliary circle construction. The eccentric anomaly E is measured at the centre, the true anomaly ν at the focus, and the mean anomaly M is time expressed as an angle. Here E = 1.150, ν = 1.827 and M = 0.602 radians, related by M = E − e sin E.

The position that has no formula, and is computed anyway

Kepler's equation relates where a body is to when it is there. It cannot be solved in elementary functions, Kepler said so, and nobody has managed it since — which has stopped nothing.

Period against size for the planets, around the Sun. Orbital period against semi-major axis on logarithmic axes. The line has slope exactly three-halves — the harmonic law — and the measured bodies sit on it.

The law that links period to size, and weighs everything

Kepler found that the square of the period goes as the cube of the orbit. Newton found the constant of proportionality, and that constant is a mass — which is how every mass in astronomy has been obtained since.

Every orbit one force allows. Circle, ellipse, parabola and hyperbola, all sharing a focus and a closest approach. The eccentricity alone decides which one a body is on, and whether it returns.

Every orbit one force allows, and the number that picks between them

Circle, ellipse, parabola, hyperbola. A single inverse-square force permits exactly these four, and one number decides which — including whether the body ever comes back.

An orbit at i = 42°, Ω = 35°, ω = 55°. The three orientation elements. The orbit is generated in its own plane and rotated by the standard sequence, so the inclination, the node line and the argument of periapsis are the angles that produced the drawn curve rather than labels applied to it.

Six numbers that fix an orbit for all time, and the sixth is the awkward one

Five of the orbital elements describe a curve that never changes. The sixth says where on it the body is, and it is the only one that has to keep being measured.

The energy budget of an orbit at e = 0.7. Kinetic, potential and total energy per unit mass against distance from the primary, in units where GM = 1. The total is a horizontal line — it depends only on the semi-major axis — and the vis-viva relation is that statement solved for the speed.

One equation for the speed anywhere, and the eccentricity is not in it

The vis-viva relation gives the speed at any point of any orbit from two numbers. What it leaves out is the surprise — the shape of the orbit does not appear at all.

One series, two eccentricities, and a limit between them. The Lagrange series for E − M, summed to 1, 2, 3, 6, 22 terms, against the exact solution of Kepler's equation, over half a revolution. Left, at e = 0.5: the partial sums close on the exact curve and the last two are indistinguishable from it. Right, at e = 0.8: they do not, and the 22-term sum is worse than the 1-term one, missing the exact value by 0.24 radians at M = π/2. Nothing about the orbit changes between the two panels — an eccentricity of 0.8 is an ordinary comet — and nothing about the equation changes either. What changes is that a singularity of E as a function of complex e has come inside the circle of radius e, at the Laplace limit 0.6627434, which is the root of e·exp√(1+e²) = 1 + √(1+e²) and has no astronomical meaning whatever. The coefficients are computed from the Bessel expansion in logarithms; the first two are sin M and ½sin 2M exactly, which is what the generator asserts before drawing.

The formula that exists, and is not used

Kepler's equation does have a closed-form solution — an infinite series in the eccentricity, written down by Lagrange. It converges up to e = 0.6627434 and not one part beyond, and that number has nothing to do with astronomy.

Three rotations, applied in order. An orbit of eccentricity 0.45 carried into space by the three orientation angles, one panel per rotation: the argument of periapsis ω = 40°, then the inclination i = 42°, then the longitude of the ascending node Ω = 55°. The last panel applies the same three angles in the reverse order and arrives somewhere else, because rotations about different axes do not commute.

Three rotations that put an orbit in space, and they do not commute

An orbit's orientation takes three angles. Give the same three angles in a different order and the orbit ends up somewhere else — which is why the convention is part of the data.

The effective potential, for three angular momenta. The radial motion of an orbiting body is one-dimensional motion in an effective potential: the attraction −GM/r plus the centrifugal term L²/2r² that the angular momentum contributes. The barrier at small radius is what stops a body with any angular momentum at all from reaching the centre, and the bottom of each well is the circular orbit.

The wall that angular momentum builds

A body falling toward a star almost never arrives. Sideways motion, which looks like a detail of the initial conditions, turns the attraction into a well with a wall around the middle of it — and the wall is why it costs more fuel to hit the Sun than to leave the solar system.

The osculating semi-major axis of a perturbed orbit. The semi-major axis a test particle would have if the perturber vanished, computed from its position and velocity at every step of an integration over 26 orbits of the perturber. It is not constant: a short-period ripple rides on a slow trend, and only the trend accumulates.

Elements that do not stay constant

Six numbers fix an orbit for all time, and the phrase is only true in a universe containing two bodies. Add a third and the six start moving — some of them wandering and returning, one or two of them drifting in one direction forever, and the difference between those two behaviours is the whole of celestial mechanics after Newton.

The mass correction against the mass. Each planet's departure from the massless harmonic law, against its own mass in solar units, on logarithmic axes. The exact law puts every point on the diagonal. Jupiter and Saturn are the only planets whose mass correction is larger than the perturbations from everything else, and Saturn's measured departure has the opposite sign.

The third law is wrong by the mass of the planet

Kepler's harmonic law says the square of the period goes as the cube of the size. Newton's version has one more term in it, and the term is the orbiting body's own mass — negligible for a planet, decisive for a binary star, and the reason a period can be converted into a mass at all.

1I/ʻOumuamua: an orbit at e = 1.201, and the angle it turned through. The open branch of a conic at eccentricity 1.201 and periapsis 0.2559 AU, with the Sun at the occupied focus. Two numbers fix everything else: |a| = q/(e−1) = 1.273 AU, an impact parameter b = |a|√(e²−1) = 0.847 AU, an asymptote at ν∞ = arccos(−1/e) = 146.37° from periapsis, and a deflection of δ = 2ν∞ − 180° = 112.74° — which is the same statement as sin(δ/2) = 1/e. The asymptotes cross at |a|e = 1.529 AU from the Sun on the periapsis side, where a bound orbit's centre would be on the other. The speed left over at infinity is √(μ/|a|) = 26.40 km/s. Schematic in one respect: the drawing runs at about 119 px to the AU, so the Sun's own disc would be far smaller than its marker.

The orbit that has no period

Above an eccentricity of 1 the conic is open, the energy is positive and the semi-major axis is negative — and the vis-viva relation survives the sign change without a single alteration. What replaces the period is a speed, and that speed is what says where a visitor came from.

The aim point and the miss distance are the same number far out and nothing like it close in. Periapsis distance against aim point for a hyperbolic approach to Jupiter at v∞ = 5.6 km/s, both in planet radii. The diagonal is where the two would be equal — where gravity did nothing — and the curve falls below it everywhere, by more the closer in the aim is. A trajectory aimed at 10.68 radii grazes the surface, because gravitational focusing means the planet's effective size is √(1 + v_esc²/v∞²) times its radius. The slope of this curve is what a navigation team cares about: it is 0.208 at an aim of 12 radii and 0.936 at 150, so the same correction manoeuvre changes the periapsis distance by 4.5 times as much at one end of the range as at the other, while changing B by exactly the same amount at both; far outside this plot, where focusing has run out, it reaches 1.000 and the two numbers become the same one. That is why the aim point is the coordinate a manoeuvre is quoted in, why an error ellipse is published in the B-plane, and why the turn angle — 2 arctan(μ/Bv∞²), 156.0° at 12 radii and 77.8° at 70 — is thought of as a function of B rather than of anything the spacecraft does.

Aiming at a plane instead of at a planet

A spacecraft arriving at a planet is not aimed at a periapsis distance. It is aimed at a point in a plane perpendicular to its own incoming asymptote, because that is the one coordinate in which the miss distance responds linearly to a correction — and every navigation product ever published for a flyby is written in it.

Ceres from five directions and no distance. Ceres seen five times over 41 days, from an Earth on a circular orbit, reduced in the plane. Each sighting gives a direction and no range, so the object is somewhere on its sight line; the five lines here span 1.37° of geocentric arc altogether, and Earth's own motion supplies the only baseline there is — 0.403 AU of its 0.691 AU of travel lies across the sight lines. A planar orbit is four numbers, so five angles over-determine it and one orbit comes out: a = 2.7658 AU, e = 0.0785. That is the answer and not an input — the sightings were generated at a = 2.7658 AU and e = 0.0785, and the solve, which sees only the directions and the dates, returns them to 3e-12. The two shaded sectors are what closes the determination: between the first and middle sightings the radius vector sweeps 0.2993 AU² in 21.0 days and between the middle and last 0.2853 AU² in 20.0 days, a ratio of 1.04918 against a time ratio of 1.04918. Slide all three crossings out along their sight lines together and that equality fails at once, so it fixes the distance by itself, with no propagation anywhere in the argument — and it gives a = 2.7658 AU over again. The two dashed curves are candidates that thread the same three sight lines at 85% and 108% of the recovered distance: a = 1.86 AU at e = 0.35, sweeping its areas in a ratio 4.5% wrong; and a = 5.61 AU at e = 0.49, sweeping its areas in a ratio 2.9% wrong. A few per cent in the distance is an orbit of another kind, which is the same fact the conditioning panel measures: one arcsecond of angle error moves a by 0.60% on this arc.

Five directions and no distance among them

An image of a moving point records an angle and throws the range away, so an orbit has to be assembled out of angles alone. How many angles are needed is not a detail of the method — it is the whole of what a determination is.

Four conics through one periapsis, drawn by one solve. Distance from the Sun against time for four orbits sharing a periapsis of 0.5 AU, at e = 0.6, e = 1, e = 1.0001, e = 1.4, over 900 days. Every point on every curve came from the same universal Kepler solve — no branch on the conic class anywhere in it — and each curve was then checked against the classical solution of its own kind at the midpoint: Kepler's equation at e = 0.6 agrees to machine precision; Barker's cubic at e = 1 agrees to machine precision; e sinh H − H at e = 1.0001 agrees to machine precision; e sinh H − H at e = 1.4 agrees to machine precision. The curve to read twice is e = 1.0001: over this arc it lies within 0.02% of the parabola and is indistinguishable from it, and it is the only one of the four whose fate the drawing cannot show. What the classical parameterisation costs there is arithmetic rather than impossibility: at the midpoint of this arc, e sinh H − H throws away 3.3 of its sixteen digits to cancellation, against 0.2 at e = 1.4 — enough to matter to an ephemeris and not enough to stop a plot.

The one solve that does not ask which conic it is

Kepler's equation is for ellipses, Barker's cubic for parabolas, and a hyperbolic sine for the rest — three parameterisations of one motion, each worst exactly where its neighbour takes over. The universal variable removes the question, and the removal is not a convenience.

Four averages of one distance, and the two of them that are the semi-major axis. The average distance of a body from its primary, against eccentricity and in units of the semi-major axis, computed four ways: averaged over time, over true anomaly, over eccentric anomaly, and as the harmonic mean in time. Every curve is a quadrature over the orbit — 2,048 panels uniform in eccentric anomaly, with Kepler's equation supplying the time weight — and not a closed form. Two of the four are exactly a at every eccentricity, which is why they are drawn as one line: the eccentric-anomaly average, because the mean of cos E over a turn is zero, and the harmonic mean in time, because the time weight cancels 1/r at every node before the sum begins. The other two are not: the time average is a(1 + e²/2), which rises to 1.4050 a at e = 0.9, and the true-anomaly average is a√(1−e²) — the semi-minor axis — which falls to 0.4359 a there. So a is the average distance in two senses out of four, and the ordering b ≤ a ≤ ⟨r⟩ₜ holds at every eccentricity with equality only on the circle. At Earth's e = 0.0167 the four agree to 0.014%, and at Mercury's e = 0.2056 the spread is 2.14%. The distinction is invisible for the planets and unavoidable for a comet, and it is the reason a quoted "mean distance" has to say which mean.

The average depends on what is being averaged

Four ways of averaging one orbit's distance from its primary give four different numbers, and only two of them are the semi-major axis. Which two is not a matter of convention, and the same arithmetic decides how much sunlight a planet receives in a year.

One squaring, and the singularity is gone. Left, a harmonic oscillator: an ellipse centred on the origin, marked at 24 equal steps of its own phase. Right, the same points after squaring as complex numbers, u ↦ u². The image is an ellipse with the origin at a focus — checked here by the focal property, r₁ + r₂ = 2a to nine figures at four points — with semi-axes (A²+B²)/2 = 2.5000 and AB = 1.5000 and the focus at (A²−B²)/2 = 2.0000, which is ae exactly. Three things follow at once. The angle doubles, so one turn of the oscillator is one whole orbit traversed twice as fast in phase; the equal phase steps on the left arrive as the eccentric anomaly on the right, which is why that anomaly and not the true one is what the equations want; and the collision at r = 0, where the inverse square is infinite, is the point u = 0, where the oscillator has a perfectly ordinary velocity. The singularity was a property of the coordinates.

The singularity that is a change of variable

The Kepler problem blows up at zero separation, and a fixed-step integrator falls apart long before it gets there. Divide time by the radius and the equations become a harmonic oscillator — exactly, for every conic at once.

Flight time against semi-major axis, for a fixed 135° sweep. Lambert's theorem drawn: the time to fly between two points 1 and 1.524 AU out and 135° apart, against the semi-major axis of the orbit that does it. Nothing else about the orbit enters — not its eccentricity, not where its periapsis is, not how it is oriented — which is the content of the theorem and the reason a two-point transfer is a one-dimensional search rather than a six-dimensional one. Two branches: the lower one is the ellipse whose arc stays short of apoapsis, falling towards the parabolic floor at 103.2 days as a grows without limit; the upper one is the ellipse of the same size whose arc runs through apoapsis, rising without limit. They meet at a = s/2 = 1.2161 AU, 244.2 days, which is the minimum-energy transfer and the slowest ellipse available — every faster one is bigger. Each branch is monotone, checked point by point across the drawn range, so a horizontal line cuts each at most once: for a given pair of points and a given time there is exactly one ellipse, and at 260 days it is a = 1.2189 AU on the upper branch. The freedom a mission designer has is not in this picture: it is the choice of the two points, which is what a porkchop plot sweeps.

Two places and a clock decide the path

The time to fly between two points depends on the semi-major axis, the chord between them, and the sum of their distances — and on nothing else about the orbit. Not the eccentricity, not where periapsis is, not the orientation. Lambert's theorem is why an interplanetary launch date is the root of one equation.

The angle that has nowhere to be measured from. An eccentricity vector carried round a circle of radius 0.034 centred at 0.031 — which is what a secular perturbation does to one, a forced eccentricity with a free one turning about it. Below, the two components e cos ϖ and e sin ϖ, which are smooth, bounded and perfectly ordinary throughout. Above, the longitude of pericentre read off them, which is not: as the eccentricity passes its minimum of 0.0030 the pericentre sweeps through most of a circle, at up to 4080° per unit time against the 12° the free vector itself turns in the same interval. Nothing has happened to the orbit. The pericentre is a place on the orbit, and a nearly circular orbit does not have one — so ω, and Ω with it at zero inclination, are angles measured from a feature that is not there. The equinoctial elements are the pair drawn below, and a propagator written in them steps through this instant without noticing it.

The elements that stop existing

An orbit needs six numbers, and three of the usual six are angles measured from features a perfectly ordinary orbit may not have. At zero eccentricity there is no pericentre to measure from, and the arithmetic knows it.

An eccentricity and an inclination trading, at 65° of mutual tilt. The secular equations integrated from a nearly circular orbit (e = 0.02) inclined at 65° to a distant perturber's plane, over three oscillations. Above, the eccentricity; below, the inclination, with the constant √(1−e²)cos i drawn as the flat line it is. The eccentricity climbs to 0.8380 and the inclination falls to 39.25° at the same instant, and neither is a coincidence: the product is fixed, so one can only rise as the other falls. That floor is the same for every starting tilt — at maximum eccentricity j = √(5/3)Θ, so cos i = √(3/5) and the inclination arrives at 39.23° whether the orbit began at 50° or at 89°. The closed form for a circular start is e_max = √(1 − (5/3)cos²i₀) = 0.8380, which contains nothing about the perturber — not its mass, not its distance. Those set the clock and not the amplitude, and the period here is 4.83 Kozai times. What the figure cannot show is what happens at the top of the cycle in a real system: at e = 0.838 the pericentre is 0.1620 of the semi-major axis, where tides, general relativity or a stellar surface all intervene, and the quadrupole picture ends.

An inclination that turns into an eccentricity

A distant companion cannot change an orbit's size or its energy. It can take a circular orbit tilted past 39.23 degrees and drive it to an eccentricity near one, and back, over and over — and the companion's mass and distance set only the clock.

The same thrust is worth 2.08 times more at perigee, and out of plane it is worth nothing at all. The rate of change of the semi-major axis under a unit acceleration in each of the three directions, against position around an orbit of eccentricity 0.35, from Gauss's variational equations. The along-track curve carries the factor p/r = 1 + e cos f and therefore peaks at perigee, where the same impulse is worth 2.08 times what it is worth at apogee — the whole of the Oberth effect, arriving as a term in a differential equation rather than as an argument about kinetic energy. The radial curve is antisymmetric about apoapsis and integrates to exactly zero over a revolution: pushing outwards for half an orbit and being pushed back for the other half changes the energy by nothing, which is checked here by quadrature and comes out at -9.0e-18. And the out-of-plane response is identically zero at every point of the orbit, because W is perpendicular to the velocity and does no work. An orbital plane can be rotated without touching the energy, and that is why a plane change is so expensive: none of what is spent goes anywhere useful.

Which direction moves which element

Resolve a small force into three components and Gauss's equations say exactly what each one does. The out-of-plane component can rotate an orbit and can never change its energy; the along-track component owns the semi-major axis outright and is worth more at perigee than at apogee by a factor that is pure geometry.

Earth's eccentricity is a sum of 8 sinusoids. The eccentricity of Earth over 800 thousand years, from the Laplace–Lagrange solution for all eight planets — the secular matrix built from the JPL masses and semi-major axes, symmetrised, and diagonalised by Jacobi rotations. It runs between 0.0035 and 0.0436, and it has no period, because it is a sum of 8 incommensurable frequencies. The two largest contributions to this planet are the modes at 3.73 and 7.33 arcseconds per year, drawn as the flat lines: those are constants, and everything moving in the figure is their beat. The check is the quadratic form ½ΣΛe², which a symmetric secular matrix conserves exactly and which drifts by 6.7e-16 across the whole interval — computed from the same curves the figure draws and from nothing the eigenvalues were fitted to. The true angular momentum deficit, Σ Λ(1 − √(1−e²)), drifts by 7.1e-4, and that difference is not an error either: the two agree only to fourth order in e, and Mercury at 0.206 supplies almost all of the gap.

No planet has an eccentricity of its own

Strip the short-period terms out of the planetary equations and what is left is a linear system. Its eigenvectors are modes of the whole solar system, and the number a catalogue quotes for a planet's eccentricity turns out to be a reading of a clock rather than a property of the planet.

One admissible root, 0.01% from the truth. Gauss's reduction of three directions to a distance, drawn as the two relations whose intersection it is. Three observations of Ceres on days 0, 20, 40 of an arc, generated from its elements and used only as sight directions — no range, no radial velocity. The rising curve is geometry: the heliocentric distance a candidate at geocentric distance ρ₂ would have, r₂² = ρ₂² + 2ρ₂(R₂·L̂₂) + R₂², which contains no dynamics at all. The falling curve is dynamics: ρ₂ = A + µB/r₂³, with A and B built from the three sight vectors, the three observer positions and the three times, and containing no orbit. Eliminating ρ₂ between them gives r₂⁸ + a r₂⁶ + b r₂³ + c = 0 — an eighth-degree equation, from a problem with exactly as many equations as unknowns. Here they cross once at a positive ρ₂, at r₂ = 2.5893 AU against the true 2.5890. The other 2 real roots are rejected not by fitting but by sign: the ρ₂ each implies is negative, and an object behind the observer was not the thing observed.

Three observations and no orbit at all

Three directions in space give six numbers for the six elements of an orbit, which sounds like a solved problem. The algebra that solves it is of the eighth degree, and for a near-Earth asteroid three perfect observations can be consistent with three different orbits.

5 transfers through the same two points in the same 1400 days. Time of flight against semi-major axis for every transfer through two points 135° apart at 1 and 1.524 AU, with the revolution count running from 0 to 2. Each count contributes two branches, and for N ≥ 1 the pair folds: the time has a minimum at a = 1.2426 AU for one revolution — only 2.2 per cent above the minimum-energy value of 1.2161, which is why the horizontal axis is the excess over that value and logarithmic — so a flight time above it is met twice and below it not at all. Reading the crossings of the 1400-day line off the drawn curves gives 5 of them — 0 revs high, 1 rev low, 1 rev high, 2 revs low, 2 revs high — which is 2N + 1 with N = 2, and the count is a property of the time rather than of the geometry. That is the practical content: a root-finder started from a single guess returns one of these 5 and gives no sign that the other 4 exist, and the cheapest of them is often not the one nearest the guess.

One time of flight and five ways round

Lambert's theorem says two positions and an interval fix the transfer. Allow the transfer to complete whole revolutions and that stops being true: the flight time folds, one number admits five arcs, and the cheapest of them is usually not the one a solver started nearest to.

Mars to five metres and Neptune to five thousand kilometres, in the same file. Present-day heliocentric position uncertainty for each planet, in kilometres, with the range component marked separately below it. The two differ because a transponder measures a distance along the line of sight and says nothing about the two directions across it, so a planet with an orbiter is known radially some 17 times better than it is known altogether. Neptune is 10⁶ times less well determined than Mars and only 20 times further away, which is the whole point: the accuracy is a property of the observations, not of the geometry. Mars has carried a transponder almost continuously since 1976; Neptune has been visited once, in 1989, and everything else known about it is meridian-circle astrometry covering 1.07 of one orbit. The two ice giants are the only entries here whose ephemerides are still limited by nineteenth-century technology, and the only cure is a spacecraft.

The table that is a fit

A planetary ephemeris is not evaluated from Kepler's laws and is not evaluated from a theory. It is a numerical integration whose starting conditions were least-squares fitted to a century and a half of observations, and its accuracy is a property of those observations rather than of the mathematics.

After one revolution the error is 3π times longer than it is wide, and after 300 it is 2827. The two semi-axes of a fitted orbit's position uncertainty, against elapsed revolutions, for a solution whose semi-major axis is uncertain by 12 kilometres. The radial extent does not grow at all: a body on a slightly larger orbit is slightly further out and stays so. The along-track extent grows linearly, because δn/n = −(3/2)δa/a makes a semi-major-axis error into a mean-motion error and a mean-motion error into a phase that runs away — a·δM = 3πN·δa after N revolutions. The ratio is 3π ≈ 9.42 after a single revolution and 2827 after 300, which is why an asteroid recovered after one apparition is found within a few arcseconds of its predicted place along its own track and could be a long way from it in time. Every consequence of this in practice — that an impact probability is a one-dimensional integral rather than a volume, that a keyhole is an interval, that the next observation worth taking is the one across the track rather than the one that fits best — is a restatement of these two lines diverging.

An error that is nearly all in one direction

A fitted orbit's uncertainty is not a ball. Within a few revolutions it has collapsed onto a line along the track, because an error in the size of an orbit is an error in its period and an error in period is a phase that runs away — which is why an impact probability is an integral along a curve rather than over a volume.

Every model curve has slope −1, and four measurements agree on κ to 1.5×. Semi-major-axis drift against body diameter, for a thermal recoil in which a fraction κ = 0.085 of the absorbed sunlight comes back out along-track. The three curves are the same expression at 1, 1.6, 2.5 astronomical units, and each has a slope of exactly −1: the acceleration is the absorbed power divided by the mass, which is a cross-section over a volume, so it falls as one over the size and nothing else on this axis changes it. A kilometre-wide body drifts a few metres a year; a ten-metre one drifts hundreds. The four filled marks are the bodies whose drift has actually been measured as a fitted parameter in an orbit solution, and they do not lie on any single curve because each carries its own density, distance and obliquity. What they agree about is the number beside each: solve every measured drift for the efficiency that would produce it and the four answers are 0.084, 0.085, 0.089, 0.129 — a factor of 1.5 apart, for a quantity that could in principle have been anything from zero to a fifth. That agreement is the evidence that the mechanism is understood, and it is the only evidence there is, because the thermal conductivity that sets κ has never been measured for any of them.

An orbit moved by heat

A rotating body re-radiates absorbed sunlight from the hemisphere that has had time to warm, so the recoil is not aimed at the Sun. The resulting force is a few parts in ten billion of gravity, it is the only orbital force whose sign depends on which way the body spins, and it has been measured to four figures.

The divisor is 0.129″/yr and the theory's own error is 0.24. Six frequencies of the secular solar system on one logarithmic axis, in arcseconds per year. The top two are the pair whose near-equality is the whole story: the perihelia of Mercury and Jupiter separate at 1.333″ a year, the nodes of Mercury and Venus at 1.462, and the difference of those two differences is 0.129 — a resonant argument that turns once every 10.0 million years. A term with that argument in the disturbing function acts in one direction for five million years at a stretch, which is what pumps Mercury's eccentricity, and it is the reason the inner solar system's Lyapunov time is what it is. The bottom three bars are why this figure exists. The divisor is smaller than the corrections the theory that computes it leaves out. Relativity contributes 0.4298″ a year to g₁ alone — the same 43 arcseconds a century that broke Newtonian gravity — which is 3.3 times the divisor; the fourth-order terms in the eccentricity that Laplace–Lagrange truncates come to about 0.24″, which is 1.8 times it; and the second-order solution computed on this page gets 0.35″, missing the published value by more than the value itself. A theory cannot bound what it cannot resolve. Laplace's proof that the eccentricities stay bounded is a proof about a system whose frequencies are constants, and the frequency that decides the question is not one.

The bound that holds only in the linear theory

Laplace proved the planetary eccentricities bounded, and the proof is a proof about a linearised system with constant frequencies. One combination of those frequencies is nearly zero — and it is smaller than the terms the linearisation threw away, which is why the stability of the solar system is a probability rather than a theorem.

A 128.8-million-year-old collision, dated from the shape of a scatter plot. The Erigone family: 165 members drawn at their diameters and their proper semi-major axes, with inverse diameter up the page. The cloud is a V, and the V is a clock. Each member has been drifting in semi-major axis ever since the collision at a rate that goes as one over its diameter, with a sign set by which way it spins — prograde outward, retrograde inward — so after 130 million years the small members have moved far and the large ones have barely moved at all. Plotted against 1/D that envelope is a straight line through the family's centre, and its slope is the drift rate for a one-kilometre body multiplied by the elapsed time. Fitting the two edges of the points actually drawn here returns 128.85 million years against the 130 the members were generated from. The rounding at the bottom is not an artefact: it is the ejection velocity, some 15 metres per second, which every member got at the moment of the collision and which is the same for all sizes. The picture cannot show the interlopers — background asteroids that happen to lie inside the V and have nothing to do with the family — and it cannot show the members that have drifted into a resonance and left the belt entirely, which is the reason the oldest families have the softest edges.

A collision dated by a scatter plot

Nothing in the solar system carries a date. A collisional family does — because a force that depends on a body's size has been pushing its fragments apart ever since, so the cloud is a V whose slope is an elapsed time, and one of those dates is confirmed by fossil meteorites in Swedish limestone.

A clock that is a straight line for three billion years and then is not. The lunar chronology function: craters of a kilometre or more per square kilometre against the age of the surface, with the count logarithmic and time not. The dashed line is the present impact rate extrapolated backwards, and it accounts for the whole curve up to 3.1 billion years — over that entire range, dating a surface is dividing a crater count by a constant. The rate itself, read off the slope of the drawn curve at the present day, is 8.4·10⁻⁴ craters per square kilometre per billion years, which over the whole Moon is about 32 new craters of a kilometre or more per million years. Past three and a half billion years the exponential term takes over and the curve turns almost vertical: ground that is 4.1 billion years old carries 26 times the crater density of ground 3.5 billion years old, for a difference in age of six hundred million years. Most of the craters on the Moon were made in a small fraction of its life, and nothing that happened after them is recorded anything like as densely. The six marked ages are laboratory measurements on returned rock, and they are what makes the curve a chronology rather than a shape — the Moon is the only body whose crater counts and whose radiometric ages have ever been measured on the same square kilometre.

A surface dated by counting holes in it

Every age quoted for a surface in the solar system outside the Earth — a Martian lava flow, a crater on Mercury, the ice of Europa — comes from counting craters and passing the count through one curve. That curve was calibrated on nine square kilometres of the Moon, and it is nearly a straight line for three billion years and then is not.

An impulse delivered inside 0.5 AU, and a comet 2050 hours early. Above: Marsden's outgassing law, the factor g(r) that scales a comet's non-gravitational acceleration, against distance from the Sun over one orbit of a comet with perihelion at 0.336 AU and aphelion at 4.09. It is close to an inverse square inside the water snow line and then falls off a cliff, because water ice that is not being heated does not sublimate. Half the whole revolution's impulse is delivered inside 0.55 AU — a few weeks out of a 3.3-year orbit — so the force is effectively a kick at perihelion rather than a perturbation spread around the path. Below: what a kick of that kind does to the timekeeping. A transverse component changes the semi-major axis and so the period, by 2.5 hours per revolution here, and a constant change in the period accumulates as the square of the number of revolutions rather than in proportion to it. After 40 returns the comet arrives 2050 hours — more than 85.4 days — before an orbit fitted without the term predicts, and doubling the number of returns multiplies the discrepancy by 3.90. That is why the effect was found in the eighteen-twenties from nothing but arrival times, and a century and a half before anyone photographed a jet.

A comet that arrives a day early

Encke's comet returned two and a half hours ahead of prediction, every revolution, for decades before anybody could say what was pushing it. The force is a rocket — a few tonnes a second of vapour leaving the sunward side of a rotating nucleus, delivered almost entirely in the few weeks around perihelion, and it accumulates in the arrival time as the square of the number of returns.

Mass at the top, area at the bottom, 10 decades apart. Two moments of a collisional cascade's size distribution, per logarithmic interval of diameter, over 10 decades from a ten-micron grain to a hundred-kilometre parent body. Both axes are logarithmic and the vertical scale is arbitrary; only the slopes carry the argument. A population in which every collision makes fragments that go on to collide reaches a steady state where the same mass flows through every size per unit time, and that fixes the differential number distribution at an index of 3.5. The two consequences pull opposite ways. Mass per decade goes as the diameter to the power 0.5, so it climbs and almost all the mass is in the largest few bodies. Cross-sectional area per decade goes as the diameter to the power -0.5, so it falls, and almost all the area — which is what scatters light, what is detected, and what anything passing through gets hit by — is in the smallest. Over the range drawn the small end carries 10⁵ times the area of the large end and 10⁻⁵ times its mass. A disc's brightness therefore measures a population whose mass it says nothing whatever about, and the two numbers are connected only through the index of this line.

Where the mass is and where the light is

A population that grinds itself up settles into a size distribution with a fixed slope, and that slope puts almost all the mass in the largest bodies and almost all the cross-section in the smallest. So a debris disc's brightness measures a population whose mass it says nothing about, and the two are connected only by the exponent.

Relativity switches the cycle off, halving its reach at a ratio of 0.80. The greatest eccentricity a Kozai–Lidov cycle reaches, against the strength of the orbit's own relativistic pericentre precession, measured in units of the cycle's own precession rate at zero eccentricity. The horizontal axis is logarithmic and spans three decades. At the left the relativistic term is negligible and the cycle reaches 0.838, which is the closed-form value for a start at 65 degrees and is what the integration is checked against. At the right it is gone. The mechanism depends on the pericentre staying put while the outer body pulls on the same side of the orbit for a whole cycle, and the relativistic precession is a competing rotation of that same pericentre; when it is faster, the pull averages away. The threshold sits near one by construction and the transition is sharp rather than gradual, with the reach halved at 0.80. What makes it matter is where the relativistic term is largest: it grows as the pericentre falls, so it strengthens exactly as the cycle drives the orbit inward, and it therefore sets a floor on the pericentre distance that this mechanism can deliver a body to.

The precession that switches the cycle off

A distant companion can trade an orbit's inclination for its eccentricity, over and over, and drive a pericentre almost onto the central body. General relativity's own precession competes with the mechanism for the same pericentre, and when it wins the cycle stops — sharply, at a ratio of one, which puts a floor on how close anything can be delivered.

An invariant that moves by 8.0e-3 once the planet's orbit is real. The Tisserand parameter of a comet on an orbit of semi-major axis 5 and eccentricity 0.8, followed through a close passage of Jupiter, integrated twice. The lower trace has Jupiter on a perfect circle, which is the problem the parameter is an exact constant of: it survives the encounter having moved by 1.0e-4, which is the integrator's own error and not a physical change, and the spike at the moment of closest approach is the osculating elements being briefly meaningless while the comet is inside Jupiter's sphere of influence rather than the constant failing. The upper trace is the same encounter with Jupiter on its real orbit, eccentricity 0.0489. The parameter comes out changed by 8.0e-3, 79 times as much, because the Jacobi constant exists only when the rotating frame is uniformly rotating and a planet on an ellipse does not provide one. That number is small and it is not negligible: comet families are separated by boundaries in this parameter placed to two decimal places, and a comet that drifts across one over several encounters has changed class without anything having happened to it that a single encounter could account for.

An invariant that is only almost one

The Tisserand parameter survives a close encounter with Jupiter exactly, and comet families are separated by boundaries in it drawn to two decimal places. The exactness holds for a Jupiter on a circle. Jupiter's eccentricity is 0.0489, and integrating the same encounter twice shows what that costs.

The 2.3-hour spin barrier, and the small bodies that are allowed through it. Rotation period against diameter for a synthetic asteroid population, both axes logarithmic, with the horizontal lines marking where a body held together by nothing but its own gravity would fly apart. That limit is P = √(3π/Gρ) and it contains only the density: 3.30 hours at 1 gram per cubic centimetre, 2.33 hours at 2 gram per cubic centimetre, 1.91 hours at 3 gram per cubic centimetre. Size does not appear in it, which is what makes the figure's shape informative rather than obvious — a barrier that depended on size would be drawn as a slope, and a horizontal line crossing five decades of diameter is a much stronger statement. The observed population respects it. Above about two hundred metres nothing rotates faster than the 2.3-hour line, and the crowding just below that line is real: bodies pile up against a limit they cannot cross. Below two hundred metres the wall stops applying and the fast rotators appear, some of them turning in minutes. Nothing about gravity changes at that size. What changes is that a body small enough is a single coherent rock with tensile strength, while a body large enough is a pile of fragments with almost none, and the barrier is a measurement of which is which. The picture is a synthetic population drawn at random from a fixed seed rather than a catalogue, so the individual points are not asteroids; what is real is the barrier, its value, and the fact that only the smallest bodies are found beyond it.

A wall with no size in it

Spin a body held together by nothing but its own gravity, and past a certain rate it comes apart. The rate depends on density alone — 2.3 hours for the stuff asteroids are made of — and the observed population respects the limit exactly, for every body larger than a couple of hundred metres.

Drift against thermal inertia: a peak at Γ = 93, in the same place for every size. How fast an asteroid's orbit drifts under its own re-radiated heat, against the thermal inertia of its surface, at a rotation period of 4.3 hours and 1.13 astronomical units. Both axes are logarithmic, and the curves are four diameters. The non-monotonic shape is the content. A surface that conducts nothing re-radiates its heat the instant it receives it: the emission is then symmetric about the sub-solar point and the transverse push cancels exactly. A surface that conducts perfectly is isothermal, has no temperature contrast at all, and again pushes nowhere. The force lives between those two nothings, and peaks where the surface's thermal time constant is comparable to the rotation period — here at Γ = 93 in SI units, and at the same place on every curve, because the size scales the drift without moving the optimum. That separation is what makes the effect a measurement. A drift rate on its own is a single number with several unknowns in it; a drift rate together with a size from radar, a spin from a light curve and a density from a flyby leaves the thermal inertia as the only thing not measured, and solving for it says what the surface is made of. Fine dust sits near 50, bare rock in the thousands, and the values measured for the bodies spacecraft have visited — Bennu at 310, Ryugu at 225, Itokawa at 700 — straddle the peak, with the two rubble piles a factor of two or three above it and the Moon's dust well below. Being past the optimum is not a small effect but it is a gentle one: the curve falls as one over the thermal inertia on that side, so a surface three times more conductive than optimal still drifts at a third of the best rate, while one three times more insulating drifts at a third as well. The shape is symmetric in the logarithm, which is why the measurement is a good one for telling dust from pebbles and a poor one for telling pebbles from boulders. The curve is one-dimensional linear theory for a rotating half-space: it has the right limits and the right peak, and it omits the body's shape, which for an irregular asteroid changes the answer by tens of per cent.

A drift rate that says what the surface is made of

The thermal recoil that moves an asteroid's orbit depends on how long its surface holds heat, and the dependence is not monotonic — a perfect insulator and a perfect conductor both push nothing. The peak in between means a measured drift is a measurement of thermal inertia, which is a measurement of grain size.

A period below which every orbit is round. Orbital eccentricity against period for binaries in four clusters of 0.125, 0.625, 6, 4 billion years, with the eccentricities drawn from one seeded distribution and then damped by exp(−age/τ), where τ rises as the 5.333 power of the period. Each cluster shows the same thing: below a boundary period nothing survives eccentric, above it the original distribution is untouched, and there is almost nothing in between because the timescale is so steep. The boundary is a clock. It moves as the three-sixteenths power of the age, which the figure checks against the drawn curves, and the calibration puts it at 6.5 days at 125 million years, 8.8 at 625 million and 12.5 at four billion — against measured cut-offs near 7.2, 8.5 and 12.5 days in the Pleiades, the Hyades and M67. The boundaries are also read back off the plotted points rather than trusted, and required to move outward with age. This is the cleanest measurement of tidal dissipation in ordinary stars that exists, and its cleanliness comes from the ages: a cluster's age is read off its main-sequence turn-off and owes nothing whatever to the tide being measured.

A cut-off period that is an age

Plot eccentricity against orbital period for the binary stars of one cluster and the picture has a wall in it. Below a certain period every orbit is circular; above it, the original spread survives untouched. The wall moves outward as the cluster ages, and where it stands is a measurement of how stars dissipate a tide.

Who holds the mass, and who holds the spin. The solar system's two ledgers on one logarithmic axis, each row a body or a group of them, with the pale bar its share of the mass and the dark bar its share of the angular momentum. Both columns are computed rather than quoted: the Sun's spin from 0.07 M R² Ω at a 25.38-day rotation, each planet's orbit from M √(GM☉ a (1 − e²)) with its own semi-major axis and eccentricity, and both sums are required to close to one part in a billion. The Sun holds 99.866 per cent of the mass and 0.61 per cent of the angular momentum. Jupiter holds 0.095 per cent of the mass and 61.1 per cent of the angular momentum, so a body a thousandth of the system by weight carries most of its rotation. The four inner planets together account for 0.0016 of it. A cloud collapsing to make this system had to move nearly all of its spin outward onto a small fraction of its mass, and the ledger is what that operation looks like when it is finished. What the figure cannot show is where the transfer happened, because everything that carried it away has either fallen in or left.

Ninety-nine per cent of the mass and none of the spin

The Sun holds 99.87 per cent of the solar system's mass and 0.6 per cent of its angular momentum. Jupiter holds a thousandth of the mass and three-fifths of the spin. That is not a curiosity of accounting — it is the record of the single operation that had to succeed before a star could form at all.

A resonance with the planet's rotation, and it sorts by size. Above: the radii at which a charged grain's orbital frequency is commensurate with the planet's spin, in planetary radii, with the measured edges of Jupiter's halo ring drawn over them. The synchronous radius is 2.24; the 3:2 resonance falls at 1.71 and the 2:1 at 1.41. The halo's outer boundary is at 1.71 and its inner extent near 1.4 — the ring ends where the resonances are, and both numbers were measured by a spacecraft camera with no reference to this arithmetic. Below: which grains care. The charge on a grain is proportional to its radius and the mass to the cube, so the force per unit mass goes exactly as the inverse square of the size, and the resonance grips sub-micron dust while leaving anything larger on a Keplerian orbit. That is why the halo is a cloud of fine dust puffed a thousand kilometres out of the ring plane while the coarse material stays flat: the same field acting on the same orbit sorts the material by size, which no gravitational resonance can do.

A resonance with the planet itself

Every other resonance in celestial mechanics is a commensurability between two orbits. A charged dust grain has a third clock available — the planet's rotation, which sweeps its magnetic field past the grain — and the commensurability with that selects by charge-to-mass ratio, which means by grain size.

The two halves of what is left over. The disturbing potential of a perturber on a test particle, against the difference in longitude between them, at a semi-major axis ratio of 0.62. The upper curve is the direct term — the perturber's own attraction, which peaks at conjunction where the separation is smallest and falls to 1/(1+α) half a turn later. The lower one is the indirect term, which exists only because the coordinates are centred on a primary that is itself being accelerated, and which is a pure cosine of the longitude difference. The indirect term is the larger of the two over 3 per cent of the circle, and it averages to exactly zero while the direct term averages to something positive. Everything that happens slowly in a planetary system comes from that asymmetry: the part that survives averaging is not the part that dominates the instantaneous force.

The series that is subtracted

The two-body problem is solved, so nobody solves it twice. Every planetary theory since Newton begins by taking that solution away and asking what is left — and what is left is an infinite series whose terms are stacked in a hierarchy that makes the first half-dozen of them enough.

The best-fitting eccentricity of a circular orbit. What a fitted eccentricity comes out at when the orbit's true eccentricity is 0 and each component of the eccentricity vector carries an error of 0.03. The distribution is not centred on the truth and cannot be: an eccentricity is the length of the vector (e cos ϖ, e sin ϖ), lengths are not negative, and a quantity bounded below by zero whose components scatter symmetrically has a distribution pushed away from the bound. For a circular orbit the most likely fitted value is exactly one error bar, 0.0300 here, and the mean is 0.0376 — 1.2533 error bars, which is √(π/2) and comes from geometry rather than from any property of the data. The practical consequence is a catalogue of small eccentricities that are all measurements of their own error bars, and the fix is not a better fit but a different question: an upper limit rather than a value.

An eccentricity that cannot be zero

Fit an orbit to noisy data and the eccentricity that comes back is never zero, not even when the orbit is a perfect circle. The reason has nothing to do with the data and everything to do with the fact that a length cannot be negative.

Three passes, and the fourth is below the noise. How far the position is still wrong after each pass of the light-time iteration, for five targets, on a logarithmic scale of kilometres. The first pass uses the body's position now and is wrong by exactly the distance the body travels while its light is in transit — 6254 kilometres for Mars near opposition, which is about twenty-five arcseconds and larger than any residual in an ephemeris fit. Each further pass multiplies the error by the body's speed divided by the speed of light, so the lines are straight and their slopes are that ratio and nothing else. Three passes take every one of these below a metre, which is why the loop in an ephemeris code has a fixed trip count rather than a convergence test. The same argument run backwards is why the correction cannot be applied to the observation instead: the direction light arrived from is what the observation is, and the position it corresponds to is not known until the body's orbit is.

Where a planet is and where it is seen

An ephemeris is fitted to observations, and no observation is of a position. It is of a direction light arrived from, at a time that is not the time the light left, bent by a Sun that is nowhere near the line of sight. Three corrections stand between the two, and all three are larger than the residuals.

A branch that adds nothing above 1 km and everything below it. Cumulative crater counts on a 3.5-billion-year-old surface, with the population split into the craters made by objects arriving from outside and the craters made by blocks thrown out of larger ones on the same surface. The two are indistinguishable in a photograph and completely different as a statistic. Secondaries stop at about 1 kilometre, because that is the largest crater a block leaving at a few hundred metres a second can excavate, so the upper half of the plot is unaffected. Below it they are steeper — slope -3.2 against the primaries' -2 — and by the smallest diameter drawn they outnumber the primaries 292 to one. A count taken at 100 metres and read through the primary production curve returns an age of 4.34 billion years for ground that is 3.5, and it returns it with a small formal error, because the counting statistics are excellent. The error is not in the counting.

The craters that were not primary

Counting craters dates a surface, and the method works because impacts from space arrive at a known rate. Some of the holes were not made from space. They were made by rock thrown out of the larger holes on the same surface, and they are far more numerous than anything that arrived.

Four known pieces of hardware, and the anomaly is the sum of them. The reported anomalous acceleration of a deep-space probe, in units of 10⁻¹⁰ metres per second squared, built up from the heat the spacecraft was known to be radiating. The generators put out about two and a half kilowatts of waste heat and sit on booms beside a large dish that reflects a share of it backwards, which is 62 per cent of the total on its own; the instrument compartment radiates through louvres on one face; the radio transmitter beams eight watts at the Earth, which is a torch pointing the wrong way. Sunlight is negligible this far out and is drawn to show that it is. The four sum to 8.65 against a measured 8.74 ± 1.33, and the agreement is the answer. What makes the episode worth keeping is that none of these numbers was discovered later: every one was in the spacecraft's own thermal documentation from before launch, and the model that produced the anomaly was a model of a point mass.

An acceleration that was the spacecraft's own heat

Two probes leaving the solar system were tracked for thirty years and both drifted from their predicted paths by a tenth of a nanometre per second squared. The residual was real, it was constant, and it was the same on both. It was also the waste heat of the reactors that powered them, radiating slightly more one way than the other.

Below 0.46 microns a grain is not in orbit at all. The ratio of the radiation force to the gravitational force on a dust grain, against the grain's radius, for three densities. Every line has slope exactly −1 because gravity acts on the mass and radiation on the cross-section, and the ratio of a volume to an area is a length. Two horizontal lines matter and they are different statements. At β = 1 the star does not attract the grain at all. At β = 1/2 a grain released at rest from a circular orbit is already unbound, because it keeps the speed appropriate to the full stellar mass while feeling only half of it — and since dust is made by breaking up larger bodies that were on circular orbits, the lower line is the one that applies. For rock at 2500 kilograms a cubic metre that is 0.46 microns; for ice it is 1.15, and for iron 0.15. A collisional cascade that grinds material finer runs into this floor and stops, and the material that would have been finer leaves the system on a hyperbola.

The drag that sorts a disc by size

Starlight does three different things to a dust grain depending on how big it is — blows it out of the system, drags it inward over millennia, or ignores it entirely. Which one happens is decided by a single length, and whether it happens at all is decided by how crowded the disc is.

June sunlight at 65°N, against where perihelion sits. Daily-mean insolation at latitude 65 degrees north on the June solstice, at an obliquity of 23.44 degrees, against the longitude of perihelion measured from the March equinox — the angle that precesses right round in about twenty-one thousand years. Three eccentricities are drawn. The swing is ±10.0 per cent at e = 0.05 and ±1.0 per cent at e = 0.005, in proportion to the eccentricity, because the Sun–Earth distance on a fixed date carries e cos of the precession angle and that is first order. Over the same range of eccentricity the annual mean at this latitude moves by 0.12 per cent, because the annual mean carries 1/√(1−e²) and that is second order. The two together are the whole of the precession term in Milankovitch's theory: the eccentricity does almost nothing to how much sunlight the Earth receives and a great deal to when it arrives, and the ice sheets of the northern hemisphere respond to the summer they might melt in rather than to the year's total. It also explains why the precession signal disappears when the orbit is nearly circular: multiply a large angular swing by a vanishing eccentricity and there is nothing left, which is what the innermost curve here is.

An average that precession cannot move

Sunlight arrives as the inverse square of the distance and time passes as its square, so the two cancel exactly in a year's integral. The longitude of perihelion therefore changes the annual mean insolation at every latitude by precisely nothing — and changes June at 65°N by ten per cent.

A family of 276, or of 582, depending on one number. Membership of a synthetic family against the cutoff velocity used to define it, for a family of 260 genuine fragments ejected at 15 metres a second sitting in a background of 417 unrelated bodies. The clustering is single linkage in the standard proper-element metric, started from one object and grown until nothing more is within the cutoff of anything already absorbed. Three curves: the number of objects claimed, scaled to its largest value; the fraction of the real family recovered; and the fraction of the claim that is background. The shape is the whole difficulty. At low cutoff the family is fragmented and only its core is found. There is then a plateau — near 58 metres a second here, giving 276 members of which 6 per cent are background — and that plateau is what every published family list is chosen at. Past it the count runs away, because single linkage absorbs an object and then searches from the object it has just absorbed: one chance interloper bridges the family to the belt and the algorithm returns half the main belt. Completeness and contamination rise together, so there is no cutoff at which both are good and the plateau is a compromise rather than a discovery.

A family whose size is a choice

Nothing observable distinguishes a collisional fragment from an asteroid that happens to be nearby. Membership is assigned by clustering at a cutoff velocity, and the same family has 276 members or 582 according to which cutoff is used — with completeness and contamination rising together, so no cutoff is good.

Nine dates, and a gap from 0.8 to 3.1 billion years. The lunar crater chronology and the samples that fix it: crater density per square kilometre against age, the density axis logarithmic. Every point is a laboratory measurement on returned rock — six mare and highland units dated by crystallisation, four young craters dated by how long their ejecta has been exposed to cosmic rays. The curve is a fit of N(T) = A(e^(λT) − 1) + BT with the exponential rate swept over 6 to 7.9 per billion years and the two amplitudes refitted at each; the best fit lands at λ = 6.95, against the 6.93 the published chronology uses, which is a check on the fitting rather than an input to it. What the figure exists to show is where the anchors fall in time. Six of them lie between 3.15 and 3.92 billion years, four between 0.026 and 0.80, and there is nothing whatever between 0.8 and 3.1 — a gap covering half the age of the solar system. The consequence is drawn as the spread of the acceptable curves: a surface whose crater density says 3.5 billion years is dated to ±0.03 billion by this family, and a surface at 2 billion to ±0.13. The chronology is a measurement where the astronauts landed and an interpolation everywhere else.

Nine dates for every surface in the solar system

Every absolute age quoted for a planetary surface — Martian volcanism, Mercury's plains, the resurfacing of Europa — descends from radiometric dates on rocks returned from nine landing sites on one body. Six of them fall between 3.15 and 3.92 billion years, and there is nothing at all between 0.8 and 3.1.

The two force laws whose orbits close. The apsidal angle — the angle swept from periapsis to the next apoapsis — against the exponent of the force law, for F ∝ r^p. The dashed curve is the near-circular limit π/√(3+p), which has a closed form; the solid curve is the same angle for an orbit of eccentricity 0.4, computed by quadrature of ∫(L/r²)dr/√(2(E−U)) between its two turning points, with U the effective potential. An orbit closes when the apsidal angle is a rational multiple of π, and an orbit closes at every eccentricity only where the two curves meet: p = −2 at exactly 180° and p = +1 at exactly 90°, which is Bertrand's theorem. The quadrature returns 180.0000° and 90.0000° at those two exponents and departs from the near-circular curve by 1.4° at p = 0. The angle diverges as p approaches −3, where the circular orbit stops being stable and there is no well left to oscillate in.

Only two force laws let an orbit come back

That a planet returns to the same point of its own path after one lap is not a fact about orbits. It is a fact about the exponent in the force, and out of the whole continuum of attractions only two — the inverse square, and a spring — bring every bound orbit back to where it started.

The same well after the primary has lost 45 per cent of its mass. Two effective potentials for one body: the solid curve before the primary loses mass and the faint one after, both at the same angular momentum, because a central force of any strength exerts no torque. The well shallows and its floor moves out from r = 1.00 to 1.82. The body's own level moves with it — from E = -0.420 to -0.127 — and the two horizontal lines are drawn where the radial action is conserved, which puts the turning points at 0.71–1.67 before and 1.30–3.03 after. The ratio between them is 2.3333 in both, so the orbit is the same shape at a larger size: everything about the body's path has scaled and its eccentricity of 0.4 has not moved. That is what a slow change leaves behind, and it is not what a sudden one leaves.

The well moves, and the body keeps its share of it

When the Sun becomes a white dwarf it will throw away half its mass, and every planet's orbit will swell by the same factor. Their eccentricities will not change at all — provided the loss is slow, and the only meaning "slow" has here is slow compared with one orbital period.

A wall measures a ratio, and a ratio is a line. The tidal quality factor against the system's age, with each line the locus of one measured circularisation boundary. For a planet the eccentricity damping time τₑ goes as Q′P^(13/3), so the cut-off period goes as (age/Q′)^(3/13) and only the ratio of the two appears. A measured wall is therefore a straight line of slope exactly 1 in this plane and never a point on it: a 5-day boundary is consistent with Q′ = 2·10⁵ in a one-billion-year-old system and with Q′ = 2·10⁶ in a ten-billion-year-old one, and nothing in the light curve chooses. The stellar version of this measurement escapes because the cluster supplies the age, from a main-sequence turn-off that owes the tide nothing — which is why a cut-off period read off four clusters is a dissipation measurement and the same wall in the hot-Jupiter plane is not. The shaded band is what a field star's age is actually worth: known to a factor of 3, it leaves Q′ known to a factor of 3 and no better, against a quantity whose published values for giant planets span 10⁴ to 10⁹. What would break the degeneracy is a second measurement with a different power of P in it — an orbital decay rate, which goes as Q′⁻¹ with no age in it at all, and which has now been measured for one planet.

A wall measures a ratio, and a ratio is a line

The same circularisation boundary drawn for planets probes the dissipation inside the planet rather than inside the star. But the boundary depends only on age over Q′, so with no cluster to date the system the measurement is a line in a plane and never a point on it.

Two damping times, one crossing, and the slope that separates them. Circularisation timescale against orbital period for the two tidal mechanisms, both logarithmic, normalised to 1.217 Gyr at 10 days. On logarithmic axes a power law is a straight line and the index is its slope, so the figure's content is that the two lines have different slopes and one crossing. The equilibrium tide gives 5.33, the bulge raised on a convective envelope being dragged ahead by a viscosity that is turbulent convection itself; the dynamical tide gives 7, gravity waves launched at the convective boundary carrying angular momentum to wherever they break. The horizontal lines are the ages of populations a boundary can be read in: where each curve crosses one is the wall that population shows — at 0.125 Gyr, 6.5 days against 7.2; at 0.625 Gyr, 8.8 days against 9.1; at 4 Gyr, 12.5 days against 11.9; at 10 Gyr, 14.8 days against 13.5. One cluster measures one number and both theories have a free normalisation, so one cluster cannot choose. The separation across every age available is a factor of 1.11. The discriminator that does not depend on the normalisation is mass: the equilibrium tide needs a convective envelope, and above about 1.3 solar masses there is not one, so the two predict different behaviour on either side of a boundary the theory names in advance. That is a measurement about where the wall stops behaving, not about where it is — and it is the reason the samples had to grow from tens of binaries per cluster to hundreds.

Two damping times, one crossing, and the slope that separates them

The equilibrium tide gives a damping time going as the sixteen-thirds power of the period and the dynamical tide as the seventh. One cluster measures one number and both theories have a free normalisation, so one cluster cannot choose.

A wall at 2.33 hours that bends into a slope below 598 metres. The fastest rotation period a body of bulk density 2 g/cm³ can hold against its own spin, against its diameter, on logarithmic axes, for cohesive strengths of 0, 10, 100, 1000 pascals. With no cohesion the limit is the density-only barrier √(3π/Gρ) = 2.33 hours at every size. A cohesion C adds a stress that does not depend on size to a gravitational stress that goes as the square of the radius, so small bodies are held mostly by cohesion and can spin faster in proportion to their smallness: below the corner the limiting period goes as the diameter. The corner is where the two stresses are equal, at a diameter of 189 m for 10 Pa, 598 m for 100 Pa, 1.9 km for 1000 Pa. The scaling is the strength-regime form with a single coefficient of order one; detailed limits depend on the angle of friction and the shape. What the figure makes plain is why the observed spin barrier is sharp for kilometre-sized asteroids and fades below a few hundred metres, and why a handful of fast rotators a few hundred metres across can be rubble piles with a few tens of pascals of cohesion — a strength far below that of any rock — rather than monoliths.

A spin barrier with a corner in it

A rubble pile cannot spin faster than a period set by its density alone — 2.3 hours for most asteroids — at any size. Give it a cohesion of a few tens of pascals, weaker than any rock, and the barrier bends into a slope below a corner at a few hundred metres. The thermal torque that drives bodies to the barrier doubles their spin in a time that grows as the square of their size, so the bodies it pushes hardest are the ones that can go past.

A rubble pile that splits below a mass ratio of 0.204 can lose its piece; above it, the piece stays. The total energy of two spherical components of equal density in contact, spinning together at the rate at which their mutual gravity just holds them against the spin, against the mass ratio of the smaller to the larger, in units of G m₁²/R₁. The energy is the kinetic energy of the rotating pair minus their mutual gravitational binding. When the smaller piece is a small fraction of the whole, the spin carries more energy than the binding and the total is positive: a body spun to breakup that sheds a fragment of that size has enough energy for the fragment to escape entirely, becoming a separate asteroid on a nearly identical orbit. The total changes sign at q = 0.204. Above that ratio the pair cannot separate without an energy source; it stays as a binary, orbiting and eventually synchronising, or re-accretes. As q goes to zero the energy tends to 0.2 G m₁²/R₁, the rotational energy of the primary alone at its breakup rate. Nothing in the threshold depends on the size or the density of the body — it is a pure number from the geometry of two touching spheres — and asteroid pairs sharing an orbit have been found overwhelmingly with estimated mass ratios below it.

A split that decides whether the piece can leave

A rubble pile spun past its limit splits in two, and whether the smaller piece escapes or stays in orbit is not a matter of luck. Two touching spheres spinning at their shared limit have positive total energy only when the smaller is less than 0.204 of the larger's mass — a number with no size and no density in it. Below it the pieces can become a pair of asteroids on nearly identical orbits; above it, a binary. And the larger the piece that leaves, the slower the body left behind.

The ladders in this field

24 anchors · one idea each

The ellipseAngular momentumConic sectionsHarmonic lawOrbital elementsVis-vivaEffective potentialPerturbationsHyperbolic orbitsOrbit determinationUniversal variablesOrbital averagesLambert's problemKozai–LidovSecular theoryEphemeridesNon-gravitational forcesAsteroid familiesSurface chronologyCollisional cascadeTisserand parameterRubble pilesCircularisationPlanetary rings

All fields · All essays