PH10011 PC Labs Coursework – Semester 1, 2016/17

Candidate number: 20319

Department of Physics, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
Submitted: 14 January 2020

Question 1
The following histograms display the distribution of data collected from either the ‘primary
transit’ or ‘radial velocity’ mode of detection from multiple planetary systems with respect to
either their orbital periods or parent star masses. Around 1675 planetary systems are
included.

Frequency distribuion of orbital periods

600

500

400
Frequency

300

200

100

0
1 10 100 1000 10000
Orbital period (days)

Primary transit Radial velocity

 Frequency distribution of parent star masses
250

200
Frequency

150

100

50

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Parent star mass (MSun)

Primary transit Radial velocity

Frequency distribution of parent star masses

700

600

500
Frequency

400

300

200

100

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Parent star mass (MSun)

Primary transit Radial velocity

These techniques collected the most data about exoplanets when compared to other
detection types used in collecting all the data in the catalogue. Primary transit is successful
because it measures the decrease in a star’s luminosity level, which is directly proportional to
the size of the planet. Furthermore, it can be confidently combined with data from radial
velocity, because under the condition for observing a planet by primary transit, the minimum
mass provided by radial velocity measurements is often the planet’s actual mass. [1]
Question 2
The following graph displays the relationship between the square of the orbital period of
observed planets, T2, and the cube of the semi-major axis of orbits divided by the mass of the
star the planets orbit, a3/Mstar. Around 1446 planetary systems are included.

7E+17

6E+17

5E+17

4E+17
T2 (s2)

3E+17

2E+17

1E+17

0
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000
a3/M star (m3/kg)

Theoretically, the line of best fit should have the equation of Kepler’s 3rd Law, which is
4𝜋 2 𝑎3
𝑇2 = × (1)
𝐺 𝑀𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟
where T = orbital period (s); G = gravitational constant = 6.67 x 10-11 Nm2/kg2; a = semi-major
axis (m); Mstar = mass of parent star (kg).
To give an indication as to the uncertainty in the measured values of each planetary system,
error bars were added by using the average of the maximum and minimum errors in both the
semi-major axis length and the mass of the parent star, then calculating the total error in
calculated values for a3/Mstar by using

𝜎𝑎 2 𝜎𝑀𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟 2 𝑎3
𝜎𝑥 = √(3 ) +( ) × (2)
𝑎 𝑀𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟 𝑀𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟

where σx = error in a3/Mstar; σa = average error in semi-major axis; σMstar = average error in
mass of parent star.
 7E+17

6E+17

5E+17

4E+17
T2 (s2)

3E+17

2E+17

1E+17

0
-500000 0 500000 1000000 1500000 2000000
a3/M star (m3/kg)

It is known from the equation that a line of best fit for the data should pass through the
origin and have a gradient equal to 4π2/G. A linear trend line was added to the graph.

7E+17

6E+17

5E+17

4E+17
T2 (s2)

3E+17

2E+17

1E+17

0
-500000 0 500000 1000000 1500000 2000000
a3/M star (m3/kg)

For small values for a3/Mstar (<40000 m3/kg), the trend line appears to pass through almost all
plotted points apart from a few anomalies. For the remaining few points with larger values
for a3/Mstar, the trend line is relatively close to each point but it does pass through all of the
error bars. By considering these observations, it is valid to say that these results do indeed
confirm Kepler’s 3rd Law (equation 1).

Question 3
The regression tool of the ‘data analysis’ tool allows the error in the gradient of the trend line
to calculated. The data used from question 2 was split into values for the two main detection
types: radial velocity and primary transit. For each set of data, the ‘regression’ tool was used
with a 95% confidence level to output a calculated value for gradient for all data as well as for
the upper and lower 95% of data values. This allows three values of G to be calculated which
allows a fractional error to be associated with the actual experimental value for G for both
types of detection.
The equation
4𝜋 2
𝐺= (3)
𝑚
where m = gradient of trend line, is used to calculate G.
Table 1 shows the three calculated values for G found from the regression tool for both
detection types.
Table 1: Calculated values for G from both detection types focused on.
Detection type Radial velocity Primary transit
G-“measured” (Nm2/kg2) 6.65 x 10-11 6.93 x 10-11
G-“lower 95%” (Nm2/kg2) 6.70 x 10-11 6.99 x 10-11
G-“upper 95%” (Nm2/kg2) 6.60 x 10-11 6.87 x 10-11

The uncertainty in G can be calculated using equation 4:

𝐺𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 95% − 𝐺𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟 95%
△𝐺 = (4)
2
so that fractional error as a percentage for G can be calculated for each detection type by
using equation 5:
△𝐺
𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 (%) = × 100% (5)
𝐺𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑
Table 2 summarised the value for G and associated fractional error as a percentage for both
detection types, as well as the actual value for G.
Table 2: Summary of values of G.
Value for G (Nm2/kg2) Fractional error (%)
GRadial velocity 6.65 x 10-11 0.8
GPrimary transit 6.93 x 10-11 0.9
Gactual 6.67 x 10-11

The value for G for radial velocity detection type is very close to the actual value, and the
range for G overlaps with the actual value, so this is an accurate estimate for G. The value for
G for primary transit detection type has a range that does not overlap with the actual value,
but it is within a small factor of it, so this value for G is less accurate but still a very good
estimate. Radial velocity detection type can be said to be better than primary transit as the
value for G is more accurate.
References
[1] "Transit Photometry", Planetary.org, 2016. [Online]. Available:
http://www.planetary.org/explore/space-topics/exoplanets/transit-photometry.html.
[Accessed: 15- Dec- 2016].