Extrasolar Planets (updated catalogue)

The home for finished/released addons.
Avatar
fyr02
Posts: 149
Joined: 19.04.2019
Age: 14
With us: 9 months 9 days
Location: San Diego, California (United States)

Post #41by fyr02 » 05.11.2019, 05:25

According to Sirius_Alpha there's a paper somewhere that effectively deconfirmed Dagon and characterized it as some dust cloud or smth.
I have my messed up origins; I can't control my mind. Also, did you know that cashews grow on top of apples?

Avatar
SevenSpheres
Posts: 188
Joined: 08.10.2019
With us: 3 months 20 days

Post #42by SevenSpheres » 05.11.2019, 22:07

According to Wikipedia, it was disconfirmed then reconfirmed, but is not certain to be a planet. I don't know of a more recent paper that disproves it as an object.
PC specs: HP desktop, Windows 10 Home 64-bit, Intel Core i7-7700 (3.60 GHz), 16 GB RAM, 1 TB HDD + 128 GB SSD, Intel HD Graphics 630
My Addons: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=19978 • Admin of the Other Discord: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20158 • Contributing to development as much as I can...

Avatar
Topic author
Sirius_Alpha
Posts: 67
Joined: 21.03.2019
With us: 10 months 7 days

Post #43by Sirius_Alpha » 07.11.2019, 20:36

SevenSpheres wrote:Why isn't Fomalhaut b included? It should at least be in Exoplanets_Unconfirmed.ssc.

Great question! Basically, a third observation of the object showed that its orbit crossed the debris ring around Fomalhaut A. This gives you a dynamical constraint on the mass of the planet to being less than ~3 Earth-masses (any higher and it would have disrupted the disk). A ~3 Earth-mass planet cannot be directly imaged with current instrumentation, which demonstrates that the object that was imaged as "Fomalhaut b" must have a significant contribution from dust.

Janson, et al. (2012) pursued Fomalhaut b looking for an infrared detection, but didn't see anything, and noted
Concerning the visible-light point source, its underlying physics is unclear, but the only hypothesis that can be shown to reasonably fit all existing data is an optically thin dust cloud, which is transient or has a transient component. If this interpretation is valid, the cloud may or may not be physically bound to a central object in the super-Earth mass regime.

So now we're at the situation where we know there's probably a lot of dust at the location of "Fomalhaut b," but otherwise no real strong evidence for a planet.

Lawler, et al. (2014) calculate that asteroid collisions within the Fomalhaut disk should produce large debris clouds that we may be able to detect, and that this might be the nature of "Fomalhaut b." They write
The relatively high collision rate that we calculate here would mean that another Fom b-like object should appear within the next decade, and Fom b itself will fade over the coming years, possibly becoming resolved. In order to test these two predictions, continued follow-up observations capable of detecting objects as faint as Fom b are vital. For now, the only telescope capable of detecting Fom b is Hubble, but the upcoming James Webb Space Telescope will be able to resolve the dust cloud, and provide some additional constraints on the dust composition with near IR measurements.

As it stands now, the current status of Fomalhaut b is that there is no reason to think a planet exists there. As a result it has not been added to this addon.

Also, non tidally locked planets are defined with unrealistically long rotation periods. (This is great work otherwise!)

Thanks! I've been curious as to what to do about this. I assume all planets are in a tidal equilibrium -- pseudosynchronous rotation for eccentric fluid planets, spin-orbit resonances for solid planets. Clearly as you point out this is not the case for the vast majority of systems haven't been around long enough to reach tidal equilibrium. If I can find some rotation rate relations for planet's mass vs age, that's what I'd like to do. I've considered just extrapolating downward from the brown dwarf regime -- something that should be somewhat well characterized, but I haven't managed to find some decent research on it since I haven't kept track of brown dwarf research. For terrestrial planets, the various stochastic processes that lead to their formation give them fairly randomized rotation rates, so the only systematic is the influence of tides. This might be worth pursuing -- i.e., planets that are still reaching tidal equilibrium being represented in some sort of intermediate rotation regime. But since the initial rotation rate is random, how do you calculate this?

Unless there's some alternative -- and I'm open to suggestions, for sure -- I figure the tidal equilibrium rotation rate makes the most sense as a "default," at least until I can get some decent mass-age-rotation relations for giant planets.

Avatar
SevenSpheres
Posts: 188
Joined: 08.10.2019
With us: 3 months 20 days

Post #44by SevenSpheres » 07.11.2019, 22:45

Re Fomalhaut b:

So the Wikipedia article is incorrect then? Someone should fix it... And why did the IAU name it without vetting it first? :fie:

Re rotation periods:

The 2013 extrasolar.ssc file uses tidal spin-down formulas from a book called "Solar System Dynamics" by CD Murray & SF Dermott. If you can get that book you could potentially use those formulas, taking the system's age into account where known. For the initial rotation period you could use the three arbitrary values from extrasolar.ssc, or try to determine it from the very small sample, or as you said to extrapolate from brown dwarfs. (Somewhat related: this is the only brown dwarf catalog I know of, but it hasn't been updated since 2015. Doesn't have rotation periods either.)
PC specs: HP desktop, Windows 10 Home 64-bit, Intel Core i7-7700 (3.60 GHz), 16 GB RAM, 1 TB HDD + 128 GB SSD, Intel HD Graphics 630
My Addons: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=19978 • Admin of the Other Discord: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20158 • Contributing to development as much as I can...

Avatar
Topic author
Sirius_Alpha
Posts: 67
Joined: 21.03.2019
With us: 10 months 7 days

Post #45by Sirius_Alpha » 07.11.2019, 23:24

SevenSpheres wrote:So the Wikipedia article is incorrect then? Someone should fix it...
And that is why I don't use Wikipedia as a source for this.

Yeah the IAU giving names to ... let's face it, radial velocity curves... seemed premature. The IAU-named Pollux b is somewhat controversial as well (the literature has gone back and forth). I only include the proper names in the addon because I know people value such things, but they appear nowhere in the literature, and don't seem to have any interest to the wider astronomical community. "Fomalhaut b" and "Pollux b" are just fine.

SevenSpheres wrote:The 2013 extrasolar.ssc file uses tidal spin-down formulas from a book called "Solar System Dynamics" by CD Murray & SF Dermott. If you can get that book you could potentially use those formulas, taking the system's age into account where known.
Yeah! I have looked for it but haven't found it. I might be able to recover the relation from the rotation periods given in that .ssc file though.

Avatar
Fafers_br
Posts: 14
Joined: 01.12.2018
Age: 45
With us: 1 year 1 month
Location: Belo Horizonte - Brazil

Post #46by Fafers_br » 08.11.2019, 03:13

Sirius_Alpha wrote:If I can find some rotation rate relations for planet's mass vs age, that's what I'd like to do. I've considered just extrapolating downward from the brown dwarf regime -- something that should be somewhat well characterized, but I haven't managed to find some decent research on it since I haven't kept track of brown dwarf research. For terrestrial planets, the various stochastic processes that lead to their formation give them fairly randomized rotation rates, so the only systematic is the influence of tides. This might be worth pursuing -- i.e., planets that are still reaching tidal equilibrium being represented in some sort of intermediate rotation regime. But since the initial rotation rate is random, how do you calculate this?

Hi Sirius and all forum members. Hope you are all fine.

I have one suggestion.
I used, in my "educated guesses" for Celestia, the paper A UNIVERSAL SPIN-MASS RELATION FOR BROWN DWARFS AND PLANETS from Scholz et al to estimate rotation periods of planets that are beyond the tidal-locking radius of a star. It gives good insight in the matter. They explore the idea that there is a spin-mass relation for solar system planets and extra-solar planetary-mass objects (the idea itself is not new). Refer to figure 6 of the paper, where a graph is presented. Unfortunatelly they don't provide an exact equation but you can deduce it from the graph itself (I found Veq~12.8*M^0.5 Km/s, where M is in Jupiter masses).
This relation gives the final rotation velocity of the sub-stellar bodies (after their contraction). Then, by angular momentum conservation one can find the rotation velocities for other ages, by using a table that gives mass-radius-age relations. There are works from Baraffe et al in that subject:
https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/abs/2003/17/aa3343/aa3343.html
https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2015/05/aa25481-14/aa25481-14.html
Unfortunatelly, the tables in these papers cover masses above 0.0005Ms (~0.524Mj). So far, I haven't found a source that covers mass-radius-age relations for masses bellow that limit. So, in my "educated guesses" I had to assume that planets bellow that limit have the same radius and rotational velocity throughout their whole lifetime.

Hope this helps.
Best regards from Brazil.

Avatar
Topic author
Sirius_Alpha
Posts: 67
Joined: 21.03.2019
With us: 10 months 7 days

Post #47by Sirius_Alpha » 01.12.2019, 03:37

TESS Sector 16 planets are out! There are also candidates from southern hemisphere sectors that I'm guessing are continuing to be found as the data continues to be analyzed. Long-period planets in sector overlaps are being found, such as TOI-1338 for example with a ~71 day period. This update also includes KELT-5 (TOI-1414), a planetary system that has had a long road to go toward confirmation, and has taken many years because of how challenging the system is (though the details of this, I am not privy to... we're still waiting on that publication. See this page). The system remains unconfirmed, but is among the better-characterized in this released.

M. Mugrauer went through the Gaia DR2 data and use it to confirm the presence of stellar companions to numerous extrasolar planet hosts. Of particular noteworthiness is the discovery of eight white dwarf companions, which more than doubles the number of main-sequence planet hosting stars with white dwarf companions.

The orientation of stellar binary systems has been improved when there is no available data for the 3D orbit -- the overwhelming majority of cases. If a position angle is known, the system is rendered as a face-on system with the star in the correct position corresponding to the measured PA. The orbits are face-on because that's really the only way to simply use the mean anomaly to get the position of the star right, and setting it this way sets up the visual appearance of the system from Earth as it would be from a telescope.

The following is a list of extrasolar planet host stars that have been given a new stellar companion:
Spoiler
41 Com, 42 Dra, 75 Cet, Aldebaran, β Cnc, CoRoT-9, EPIC 201828749, HAT-P-3, HAT-P-16, HAT-P-22, HAT-P-35, HAT-P-67, HATS-30, HATS-65, HD 4732, HD 8535 (WD!), HD 11343, HD 23596, HD 25171, HD 79498, HD 89744, HD 93385, HD 96167, HD 100655, HD 101930, HD 102956, HD 103774, HD 108341, HD 109749, HD 118904 (WD!), HD 126614, HD 142245, HD 155233, HD 164595, HD 197037, HD 214823, HD 215456, HD 220842, KELT-3, KELT-4, KELT-18, Kepler-20, Kepler-25, Kepler-78, Kepler-83, Kepler-99, Kepler-104, Kepler-130, Kepler-136, Kepler-167, Kepler-197, Kepler-333, Kepler-353, Kepler-390, Kepler-410, Kepler-411, Kepler-454, Kepler-477, Kepler-504, Kepler-514, Kepler-515, Kepler-517, Kepler-519, Kepler-530, Kepler-538, Kepler-560, Kepler-636, Kepler-755, Kepler-779 (WD!), Kepler-795, Kepler-908, Kepler-951, Kepler-970, Kepler-1008, Kepler-1086, Kepler-1027, Kepler-1063, Kepler-1130, Kepler-1150, Kepler-1341, Kepler-1480, Kepler-1540, KOI-4427, K2-22, K2-27, K2-31, K2-32, K2-122, K2-148, K2-267, µ2 Oct, ω Ser, o UMa, Pr0211, Qatar-6, TrES-1, WASP-3, WASP-11, WASP-24, WASP-26, WASP-33, WASP-36, WASP-45, WASP-49, WASP-55, WASP-56, WASP-64, WASP-68, WASP-75, WASP-98 (WD!), WASP-104, WASP-108, WASP-114, WASP-127, WASP-129, WASP-139, WASP-140, WASP-145, WASP-168

The following is a list of extrasolar planet host stars whose stellar systems have only been updated:
Spoiler
11 Com, 79 Cet, CoRoT-2, GJ 617, GJ 676, GJ 777, HAT-P-1, HAT-P-41, HD 11964, HD 28254, HD 33283, HD 46375, HD 75289, HD 102365, HD 106515, HD 107148, HD 114729, HD 125612, HD 142022, HD 147513, HD 170469, HD 188015, HD 189733, HD 195019, HD 202772, HD 204941, HD 212301, HD 213240, HIP 116454, K2-29, K2-151, K2-266, KELT-2, KELT-15, KELT-22, Kepler-89, Kepler-560, Kepler-743, Kepler-1319, Kepler-1651, λ2 For, υ And, WASP-8, WASP-18, WASP-70, WASP-77, WASP-87, WASP-94, WASP-111, WASP-160, XO-2

I wanted to work on the giant planet rotation periods problem this month, but the Mugrauer paper and the subsequent work that went into re-doing how binary stars were represented ended up taking a lot more time than I anticipated. Perhaps giant planet rotation periods will be improved in the next update.

55CncB_Position_Correct.png
55 Cnc B as it appears in SIMBAD, versus Celestia.

KELT-4_Image.png
The KELT-4 stellar system as it appears in the KELT-4b discovery paper versus its representation in Celestia.


01 December 2019
- 115 TESS candidate planets added (TOI-1337 through TOI-1453).
- 34 TESS candidate planets have been determined to be false positives since the last update and excluded.
- Added TOI-# ID's for known transiting planets detected by TESS (WASP-178=TOI-1337, HAT-P-6=TOI-1373, etc).
- 2 TESS Community TOI's added.
- Added 5 new TESS candidate planets in known TOI systems (TOI-1136, TOI-1238, TOI-1246, TOI-1266, TOI-1277).
- Binary stars now oriented correctly in the sky where position angles are available.
- Fixed issue where star spin periods were being calculated from v sin i even if it was explicitly known.
- Fixed issue where [GJ < 1000] identifiers for barycenters were given as "GJ" rather than "Gliese."
- Fixed issue where formal names ("Ogma" for HD 149026) were not included for single stars.
- Fixed FL Lyr, again.
- Added unconfirmed planet R Leo b (Wiesemeyer, et al. (2008)).
- Added the "planets" at SWIFT J1756.9-2508 (Krimm, et al. (2007)), HD 125390 and AB Dor.
- Added OGLE-2015-BLG-1771L, NGTS-8 and NGTS-9 (Costes, et al.), OGLE-2016-BLG-1227L.
- Added planets around six giant stars (HD 6037, HD 13652, HD 114899, HD 126105, HD 159743 and HD 205577) from Wittenmyer, et al.
- Updated TOI-132, HD 118203, HD 297549, TOI-263, K2-25, β Pic.
- Updated HIP 41378 and added sixth planet (see Santerne, et al).
- Updated CD-35 2722, GJ 504, HR 2562, HD 95086, HD 116434, PDS 70, κ And, DH Tau, Ross 458 (see Bowler, et al).
- Added several stellar companions to known Exoplanet host stars (see text).
- Removed planets at HD 41248 (see Faria, et al).

8346 planets (+1 asteroid).
4264 confirmed.
4082 unconfirmed.
Attachments
Celestia_Exoplanets_2019_12_01.rar
Extrasolar planet catalogue up to date as of 01 Dec 2019.
(772.4 KiB) Downloaded 34 times

Avatar
Art Blos M
Moderator
Posts: 678
Joined: 31.08.2017
Age: 27
With us: 2 years 4 months
Location: Volgodonsk, Rostov Oblast, Russia

Post #48by Art Blos » 05.12.2019, 06:47

I hope Sirius_Alpha will not mind. :smile: I'll post a slightly corrected version.
It will be included in the 10th release of Celestia Origin. :wink:
Attachments
Celestia_Exoplanets_2019_12_04.rar
(776.67 KiB) Downloaded 23 times
Founder and head of the project "Celestia Origin"

Avatar
Topic author
Sirius_Alpha
Posts: 67
Joined: 21.03.2019
With us: 10 months 7 days

Post #49by Sirius_Alpha » 01.01.2020, 05:28

Happy New Years, everyone. I hope you have all had a good holiday season. TESS Sector 17 and 18 planets are out!

In the last update, I implemented orbit orientations for numerous multi-stellar systems that allowed for the system to be rendered as multiple while preserving the observed position angles of the companion stars. I have gone through and done this for numerous directly imaged planets.

Systems with updated imaged planet orbits:
Spoiler
2MASS J12073346-3932539, GQ Lup, AB Pic, CHXR 73, HD 203030, HN Peg, Oph 11, UScoCTIO 108, 1RXS J160929.1-210524, CT Cha, FU Tau, GSC 06214-00210, 2MASS J04414489+2301513, HIP 78530, WISEP J045853.90+643451.9, WD 0806-661, CFBDS J145829+101343, SR 12, WISEP J121756.91+162640.2, HD 142250, HD 106906, FW Tau, ROXs 12, ROXs 42B, 2MASS J01225093-2439505, 2MASS J01033563-5515561, USco J161248.9-180052, GU Psc, HD 284149, HD 133803, 2MASS J02192210-3925225, HD 135778, VHS J125601.92-125723.9, 2MASS J22362452+4751425, TYC 9486-927-1, HD 36112, 2MASS J02495639-0557352, HD 144844

As many of you know, the IAU has released a list of formal names for a hundred extrasolar planets and their host stars. These have been implemented, but there were some challenges. Many of them contain special characters, for which some advice from SevenSpheres proved very valuable. Still there are unsupported characters that prevented the implementation of some names, specifically Naqaỹa (HD 48265 b) and Ditsö̀ (WASP-17 b). I did update the name for Ægir (ε Eri b) as well.

Rotation periods have been implemented, with all fluid planets beyond 1 AU given primordial rotation periods according to the mass-period relation given by Fafers_br from this post (and paper therein). Tidal spin-down is handled crudely at the moment: All planets with semi-major axes ≤ 1 AU are tidally locked. Rotating planets are assigned oblateness values using the same formula that was used for stars. This still needs to be improved. I would really like to see the formula that Celestia's default extrasolar.ssc used.

In any event, several extrasolar planets do have measured v sin i measurements from direct imaging: β Pic b, 2MASS J12073346-3932539 b, GU Psc b, GQ Lup b, Ross 458 (AB)b, ROXs 42B (AB)b, VHS J125601.92-125723.9. These have been implemented rather than estimated.

ExoNames2.png
The planet Ægir.


01 January 2020
- 172 TESS candidate planets added (TOI-1454 through TOI-1554 TOI-1625).
- 33 TESS candidate planets have been determined to be false positives since the last update and excluded.
- Added TOI-# ID's for known transiting planets detected by TESS (HAT-P-16=TOI-1458, Qatar-5=TOI-1463, etc).
- Added planetary systems at HD 158259, WD J0914+1914, XO-7, KMT-2019-BLG-0842L, TYC 8998-760-1, OGLE-2013-BLG-0911L, HD 38677, HD 11231, HD 42936.
- Updated G 9-40, KELT-25 and KELT-26, 28 planets from Wittenmyer, et al., DS Tuc, GJ 1252, TOI-564 and TOI-905, Kepler-278 and Kepler-391.
- Updated EPIC 211939692 and added single-transit planet systems from Kepler-K2 at EPIC 211953574, EPIC 211821192, EPIC 211633458, EPIC 211351097 and EPIC 211351543 (Dholakia, et al).
- Corrected 54 Psc B position.
- Updated the orbits of planets from direct imaging to properly reflect their position angle where that information is available.
- Fixed issue where multi-word planet names were not being recognized as formal names (for example, 47 UMa b and c = Taphao Thong and Taphao Kaew) and being placed first in the .ssc files.
- Fixed an issue where there were naming/planet-star mis-assignments between Kepler-54, Kepler-55 and Kepler-59.
- Terrestrial planets given Lunar Lambert 1.0.
- Fixed WASP-49 Ab I.
- Added Fomalhaut C (since Fomalhaut B is a possible exoplanet-host).
- Removed duplicate GJ 667.

8501 planets (+1 asteroid).
4284 confirmed,
4217 unconfirmed.
Attachments
Celestia_Exoplanets_2020_01_01.rar
Extrasolar Planet Catalogue up to date as of 01 Jan 2019.
(796.22 KiB) Downloaded 30 times
Last edited by Sirius_Alpha on 27.01.2020, 03:50, edited 1 time in total.

Avatar
LukeCEL
Posts: 214
Joined: 26.09.2017
With us: 2 years 4 months

Post #50by LukeCEL » 01.01.2020, 17:39

Happy New Year to you too!

I have a question: where are the sources for the binary star definitions? I noticed that systems like 11 Com have a full definition including all the parameters, but I can't find any reference to those orbital elements. Apologies if this was mentioned somewhere else and I haven't noticed it.

Also, a more general question. What has happened to the Sixth Orbit Catalog? I have not been able to access the original site at https://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/astrometry/optical-IR-prod/wds/orb6 for quite some time now. But I have found this site: http://www.astro.gsu.edu/wds/orb6.html Is this the new location for the catalog?

Thanks,
Luke

Avatar
Topic author
Sirius_Alpha
Posts: 67
Joined: 21.03.2019
With us: 10 months 7 days

Post #51by Sirius_Alpha » 01.01.2020, 18:40

LukeCEL wrote:where are the sources for the binary star definitions? I noticed that systems like 11 Com have a full definition including all the parameters, but I can't find any reference to those orbital elements. Apologies if this was mentioned somewhere else and I haven't noticed it.

As I stated in the post for the December update, if a binary system lacks 3D information, then it is rendered as face-on in order to place the companion star with the correct position angle.

I'm afraid I haven't really done a lot with the Sixth Orbit Catalog, so I don't know about your question there.

Added after 7 hours 16 minutes:
A couple systems had incorrect distances: Kepler-997 and TOI-1558. The first because I did not correctly update the parallax, the second because the distance was estimated photometrically based off just the JHK values and it ended up being a bad estimate. It's a Mira variable so the systm is almost certainly a false positive but until that gets determined by the TESS Follow-up Project, I'll keep it in here for now. Adding more photometry made the distance estimate less bad, so it's no longer ~10 light-years away.

I have attached a corrected version here. My apologies for the inconvenience. Thanks to SevenSpheres for pointing out the errors.
Attachments
Celestia_Exoplanets_2020_01_02.rar
Extrasolar Planet Catalogue up to date as of 02 Jan 2019.
(796.33 KiB) Downloaded 34 times


Return to “Add-on releases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Lafuente_Astronomy