Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 52

Thread: Seeing if I can prove a technical arXiv.org paper right or wrong, just for fun

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Lightbulb Seeing if I can prove a technical arXiv.org paper right or wrong, just for fun

    One of the papers I have liked best from arXiv.org was this one, on the relationship between masses and radii of exoplanets. It is well worth a read, though it's had some later corrections and criticisms.

    https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.08614
    Probabilistic Forecasting of the Masses and Radii of Other Worlds
    Jingjing Chen, David M. Kipping
    (Submitted on 29 Mar 2016 (v1), last revised 3 Nov 2016 (this version, v2))
    Mass and radius are two of the most fundamental properties of an astronomical object. Increasingly, new planet discoveries are being announced with a measurement of one of these terms, but not both. This has led to a growing need to forecast the missing quantity using the other, especially when predicting the detectability of certain follow-up observations. We present am unbiased forecasting model built upon a probabilistic mass-radius relation conditioned on a sample of 316 well-constrained objects. Our publicly available code, Forecaster, accounts for observational errors, hyper-parameter uncertainties and the intrinsic dispersions observed in the calibration sample. By conditioning our model upon a sample spanning dwarf planets to late-type stars, Forecaster can predict the mass (or radius) from the radius (or mass) for objects covering nine orders-of-magnitude in mass. Classification is naturally performed by our model, which uses four classes we label as Terran worlds, Neptunian worlds, Jovian worlds and stars. Our classification identifies dwarf planets as merely low-mass Terrans (like the Earth), and brown dwarfs as merely high-mass Jovians (like Jupiter). We detect a transition in the mass-radius relation at 2.0 +0.7/−0.6 M⊕, which we associate with the divide between solid, Terran worlds and Neptunian worlds. This independent analysis adds further weight to the emerging consensus that rocky Super-Earths represent a narrower region of parameter space than originally thought. Effectively, then, the Earth is the Super-Earth we have been looking for.

    ===

    So, to start with I am looking at the relationship between masses and radii of terrestrial worlds (planets and moons) that have achieved hydrostatic equilibrium in the Solar System, both icy and rocky/dense worlds, to see if there is a relationship between the two. See attachments for results.

    Comments, criticisms, etc., are welcome at any point. I just realized I missed a few spherical moons, more shortly.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Lightbulb

    Second try with more information, including a terrestrial exoplanet for scale.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Mar-18 at 01:12 AM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Lightbulb

    Here is the graph from the arXiv paper that I am trying to duplicate, if it will. I am using info up to 2020, when the original paper used 2015-2016 data. Need to go exponential, of course, to get straight lines.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Mar-18 at 04:16 AM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Collected some Earth-size exoplanets but need to get better data on their masses and radii before entering them into the table and graphing. In order from smaller mass to larger (roughly), are:

    Kepler-138b
    K2-266c
    TRAPPIST-1d
    TRAPPIST-1e
    Kepler-138d
    TRAPPIST-1f
    TRAPPIST-1b
    K2-239c
    K2-239d
    TRAPPIST-1g
    TRAPPIST-1c
    K2-239b
    Gliese 1132 b
    Gliese 357 b
    Kepler-138c
    Gliese 1252 b
    LTT 1445 Ab
    K2-229b
    Kepler-406c
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    I have to come up with a hypothesis about the results that might be achieved. Let's go for this one: The upper-mass end of the terrestrial planet graph, going into the lower end of the sub-Neptunes, will be composed of Ultra Short Period USP planets, baked dry from being too close in to their suns, chthonic planets that could have been the cores of ice giants and gas giants. Super-Earths will either be truly sub-Neptunes (gas atmospheres) or large USPs or Earthlike worlds about 2-3 Earth-radii or less. We will see.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,858
    Interesting. I'll keep reading to see what you find.

    If you can make your graphs in log-log format, it will be easier to compare them to the published one.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by StupendousMan View Post
    Interesting. I'll keep reading to see what you find.

    If you can make your graphs in log-log format, it will be easier to compare them to the published one.
    That's my next trick, have to experiment with Excel
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Exclamation

    Whoa! Changed the values of mass and radius of the Solar System bodies, plus the one exoplanet, into log10 values, then graphed them on a regular graph... and there's a straight line! Labels coming later.

    Okay, math wizards, is this the same as graphing on a log10 x log10 graph? Is this legit?
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Thumbs up

    Same chart as above, but with labels. Yeeehaaaw! LATER: Also with table from which graph was derived in Excel.

    EVEN LATER: It matches Figure 3, the graph from the science paper! YES!
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Mar-19 at 05:24 PM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Smile

    Now with other terrestrial Earth-types and super-Earths (mostly USPs). IT WORKS
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Okay, math wizards, is this the same as graphing on a log10 x log10 graph? Is this legit?
    Functionally equivalent. Keep going.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Going to do a lot more of this, as I am apparently a Nonessential Government Employee and have been sent home for the duration.

    Trying to find a big list of exoplanets with masses and radii in Earth terms.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Question

    Next update, with graph commentary. Feedback welcome.

    Beginning to appear as if I was wrong, that the Super-Earth/USP planets do not form a right-side bar sticking out from where the mini-Neptunes branch upward. Chart is as Chen & Kipping said it would be, so far.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Chen & Kipping said that Iapetus and Rhea formed the boundary of hydrostatic equilibrium in the Solar System, Iapetus not being spherical, but it appears this was wrong. Worlds down to Miranda and Hygiea are spherical, or just about so. I did leave out several prospective dwarf planets like Orcus and Quaoar in the K Belt.

    Alphabetical list of worlds used so far at attached. Suggestions for worlds with precise radii and masses from Kepler/TESS are welcome. Using smaller world data right now. Not using "minimum mass" data from radial velocities.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Mar-20 at 07:00 PM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Continuing to add new mini-Neptunes, Super-Earths, and Solar System objects to list.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Whoa, just discovered means of accumulating data from various sources en masse. More soon.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Exclamation

    And here is the first sheet, incomplete but masses are appearing. See attached.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Second attempt, using Wikipedia lists of Kepler and K2 planets that have both masses and radii. Noticing that the ice giants/miniNeptunes+Neptunes+Super-Neptunes and Jovian gass giants+brown dwarfs are clumped, not in a real line. Also, what is the new clump with the two? Think a lot of the ice giant and Jovian/bd scatter is due to temperature/inflation.

    Best defined groups is by far the terrestrials, which appear to follow a fairly strong and exact power law between mass and radius.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Exclamation

    Done. 596 points plotted from original paper and later additions like Kepler and K2.

    Comments: If I may be permitted to say, not having an astronomy degree, I don't believe a linear plot works for anything but the terrestrial rocky/icy planets (plus rocky super-Earths) and the late M-dwarfs, to which a few more points could be added.

    The ice giants and Jovians/brown dwarfs are clumps, not linear, too much scatter here. There is also a clump of something else marked with ???, have to investigate this.

    Love the terrestrial line, works so beautifully. Need to investigate both ice giants/Neptunians and gas giants/brown dwarfs more closely.

    Anyone else?
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Got up from stomachache, realize some fixes that need to be applied to graphs. Apologies for misplaced labels.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Smile

    New and for now final graph of mass x radius for smaller celestial bodies. Comments welcome. 596 data points compared to 320 or so in original paper.

    Most important thing now is to check precision of data points, as there seems to be disagreement on some values. Unclear values will be discarded.

    Trying to reproduce long long list of values for public examination, but having trouble converting Excel page into something I can post here. Suggestions welcome.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Mar-22 at 02:15 PM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Possible division of Neptunians (Chen & Kipping say Saturn is a high-end Neptunian) and Jovian gas giants, the giant planets and brown dwarfs.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Attempts to confirm some oddball point placements have led me to start authenticating certain points, using http://exoplanet.eu/catalog/ as my definitive source with the NASA catalog only as backup. More soon.
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Mar-23 at 03:00 PM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,858
    This is interesting and useful. Please continue.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Went to the EU exoplanet catalogue, as above, downloaded the mass and radius (in Jovian terms, then converted to Earth-related values of mass and radius) of every confirmed planet that had these details, then added Solar System data but no red dwarf stars (yet).

    This is the result, with 906 data points.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    more to come, accidental double post
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    555
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Trying to reproduce long long list of values for public examination, but having trouble converting Excel page into something I can post here. Suggestions welcome.
    I'm not sure what you mean by "converting Excel page". Have you considered putting the Excel file (.xlsx or other) into a Zip file and uploading that? XLSX files can be read by other spreadsheet programs, like LibreOffice Calc. Zip is one of the upload formats supported by the CosmoQuest forum's "Manage Attachments" option.

    Alternatively, you should be able to export from Excel to a filetype of .CSV (Comma Separated Values), which actually is a plain-text format. If you rename a .CSV file to have a .TXT flietype, you then can do with it whatever you can to to any other plain text file. Of course, this format cannot include any formulae you might have in Excel cells.
    Selden

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by selden View Post
    I'm not sure what you mean by "converting Excel page". Have you considered putting the Excel file (.xlsx or other) into a Zip file and uploading that? XLSX files can be read by other spreadsheet programs, like LibreOffice Calc. Zip is one of the upload formats supported by the CosmoQuest forum's "Manage Attachments" option.

    Alternatively, you should be able to export from Excel to a filetype of .CSV (Comma Separated Values), which actually is a plain-text format. If you rename a .CSV file to have a .TXT flietype, you then can do with it whatever you can to to any other plain text file. Of course, this format cannot include any formulae you might have in Excel cells.
    Hmm, let me try that. Thank you! Not sure if my ZIP thinger still works, though.

    Here is the semi-final version of the table, using over 900 (exactly 958) values from Exoplanet.eu's catalog, including a few values I added like red dwarfs and Solar System worlds. TRAPPIST-1 planets are shown but did not mark them exactly, quite a few. Saturn turns out to be a giant planet, not a Neptunian giant, as far as I can tell.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Mar-23 at 05:21 PM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Have no WinZip, not able to buy it at this time, might have limited funds if I don't get paid from being assessed as nonessential to work, then sent home due to CV. Will see what I can do.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,913
    Any requests for locations of certain planets or red dwarfs on the graph, pointed out by arrow? If you have some late M-type red dwarf stats, or something else, I can add those, too, if they aren't already on there.

    This work isn't copyrighted, obviously, so it is free for anyone to use.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •