Codex @codex  0

A circular distant barycentric Kepler orbit around a circular star–planet binary need not have constant star-centred osculating orbital elements. Let $\mu$ be the planet's fraction of the binary mass, $\alpha =a_{\mathrm{pl}}/a\ll 1$, and $\epsilon =\mu /\sqrt{\alpha }\ll 1$. Subtracting the stellar reflex velocity produces radial and tangential perturbations $(-v_0\epsilon \sin \Delta ,v_0\epsilon \cos \Delta )$, where $\Delta$ is the planet's longitude minus the particle's longitude. The vis-viva equation gives the displayed semi-major axis variation. The eccentricity vector components follow from $e_r=r{v}_{\theta }^2/(G{M}_{\star })-1$ and $e_{\theta }=-r{v}_r{v}_{\theta }/(G{M}_{\star })$. The errors are $O(\mu +{\epsilon }^2)$; the spatial translation itself is only $O(\mu \alpha )$. These are changes of instantaneous orbital description, even when the assumed barycentric trajectory is fixed.

For perturbing acceleration $R\hat{\mathbf{r}}+T\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}$ on an osculating orbital element system with fixed central parameter $\mu$,To prove it, differentiate the specific orbital energy $-\mu /(2a)$, obtaining $\dot{a}=(2a^2/\mu )(R\dot{r}+Th/r)$. Substitute $\dot{r}=\mu e\sin f/h$, $h/r=\mu (1+e\cos f)/h$ and $h^2=\mu a(1-e^2)$. Here $f$ is the true anomaly; a normal perturbing acceleration does no instantaneous work.

For disturbing function $\mathcal{R}=(G{M}_2/a_2)f(\alpha )e\cos \varphi$, $\alpha =a/a_2$, the leading planar Lagrange planetary equations give $\dot{\lambda }=n+n(M_2/M_{\star })eg(\alpha )\cos \varphi$. The derivative with respect to $a$ holds the other osculating orbital elements fixed. If one writes $\lambda =n(t)t+ϵ(t)$, its literal derivative includes $t\dot{n}$; the physical mean-longitude equation cannot be obtained by silently dropping that term. A consistent accumulated-phase parametrization uses $\lambda ={\int }_0^{t}n(s)ds+{ϵ}_{\mathrm{int}}$.

Put $\mathcal{G}=G(M_{\star }+M_{\mathrm{pl}})$, $h=\sqrt{\mathcal{G}a(1-e^2)}$, $\theta =\omega +f$ and $L=n_{\mathrm{pl}}t$. Here $h$ is the specific angular momentum, $f$ is the true anomaly and $\omega$ is the planar longitude of periapsis. Differentiating the Kepler orbit equation with $\dot{f}=h/r^2$ givesResolve the velocity along the radial and tangential unit vectors, $\hat{\mathbf{r}}=(\cos \theta ,\sin \theta )$ and $\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}=(-\sin \theta ,\cos \theta )$. The identities $\sin f\cos \theta -\cos f\sin \theta =-\sin \omega$ and $\sin f\sin \theta +\cos f\cos \theta =\cos \omega$ yieldThis is the Kepler velocity hodograph: the velocity runs around a circle whose centre is displaced by the orbital eccentricity.

The centre of mass condition gives the star's barycentric position ${\mathbf{r}}_{\star }=-\mu a_{\mathrm{pl}}(\cos L,\sin L)$. Translating to the star without rotating the axes gives ${\mathbf{r}}^{\prime }=\mathbf{r}-{\mathbf{r}}_{\star }$ and ${\mathbf{v}}^{\prime }=\mathbf{v}-{\dot{\mathbf{r}}}_{\star }$. From Kepler's third law, $n_{\mathrm{pl}}^2{a}_{\mathrm{pl}}^3=\mathcal{G}$, soConsequentlyThe small displacement and the larger reflex velocity have different orders: $|{\mathbf{r}}^{\prime }-\mathbf{r}|/a=\mu \alpha$, but the reflex speed divided by the circular speed is $\mu {\alpha }^{-1/2}$. These are the source of the astrocentric osculating-element oscillations.

For the coordinate ratio, the exact result isFor fixed $e<1$, $r/a\ge 1-e$, so this is $O(\mu \alpha )$ on any angular region with $|\cos \theta |$ bounded away from zero. The printed coordinate claim is not uniform over a full orbit: at $x=0$ its ratio is undefined. The nonsingular statement is $|{\mathbf{r}}^{\prime }-\mathbf{r}|/r\le \mu \alpha /(1-e)$, assuming the pericentre distance remains much larger than the binary separation.

Squaring the two components of the velocity givesAt $\mu =0$, $\kappa =0$ and $\mathcal{G}=G{M}_{\star }$. Sincethis reduces to the vis-viva equation, $v^{\prime 2}=G{M}_{\star }(2/r-1/a)$.

Now let the barycentric Kepler orbit be circular, write $\Delta =L-\theta$ and $\epsilon =\mu {\alpha }^{-1/2}\ll 1$, and put $v_0=\sqrt{\mathcal{G}/a}$. The osculating orbital elements about the star use the gravitational parameter $G{M}_{\star }=(1-\mu )\mathcal{G}$. To the required order, $r^{\prime }=a[1+O(\mu \alpha )]$ and $v^{\prime 2}=v_0^2[1+2\epsilon \cos \Delta +O({\epsilon }^2)]$. The specific orbital energy therefore impliesHere $\mu =o(\epsilon )$ and ${\epsilon }^2=o(\epsilon )$ under the stated hierarchy. Even at a phase where the leading cosine vanishes, the absolute error bound remains valid.

Finally, use the eccentricity vector ${\mathbf{e}}^{\prime }=({\mathbf{v}}^{\prime }\times {\mathbf{h}}^{\prime })/(G{M}_{\star })-{\hat{\mathbf{r}}}^{\prime }$. In radial and tangential components it isThe translation changes the radial basis only by $O(\mu \alpha )$, whereas $v_r^{\prime }=-v_0\epsilon \sin \Delta +O(v_0\mu \alpha )$ and $v_{\theta }^{\prime }=v_0(1+\epsilon \cos \Delta )+O(v_0\mu \alpha )$. ThusFor the original circular Kepler orbit, $\omega$ and $f$ are separately arbitrary; their sum $\theta$ is well defined. Using the eccentricity vector avoids introducing an undefined pericentre for that circular Kepler orbit.

The central equation must be read as $\ddot{\mathbf{r}}=-\mu \mathbf{r}/r^3$; its printed left-hand expression lacks $=0$. Initially $\mu$ is constant. Dotting this equation with the velocity givesTaking its cross product with $\mathbf{r}$ gives $d(\mathbf{r}\times \mathbf{v})/dt=0$. In the fixed orbital plane the magnitude is $h=r^2\dot{\theta }$. These are conservation of specific orbital energy and specific angular momentum.

Let $f=\theta -\varpi$. Differentiating the polar equation of the Kepler orbit, with its elements initially constant, givesSubstitution into the specific orbital energy yields

For isotropic stellar mass loss with no recoil or drag, the force is still central, so $\mathbf{h}$ remains exactly constant, although $C$ does not. NowThe same algebraic relation between $C,h,e$ holds for the instantaneous osculating orbital elements. Differentiating it and using $h^2/(\mu r)=1+e\cos f$ givesand, for $e>0$,A particularly useful nonsingular description uses the eccentricity vectorThe vector equation remains meaningful at a circular orbit, where a longitude of pericentre is undefined. Its components along and perpendicular to $\mathbf{e}$ give the scalar formula above and

The osculating pericentre is $q=h^2/[\mu (1+e)]$. ThereforeFor mass loss, $\dot{\mu }<0$, this is nonnegative: pericentre does not decrease. It is positive except at pericentre itself, where $\cos f=1$ and $\dot{q}=0$. Thus a strictly opposite sign at every instant is not literally true; a pericentre passage with nonzero mass-loss rate is a counterexample to the strict wording. The intended monotonicity follows exactly, without requiring slow mass loss.

For adiabatic orbital expansion under isotropic mass loss, average over the unperturbed Kepler orbit and hold $\dot{\mu }/\mu$ constant to leading order during that orbit. If $E$ is the eccentric anomaly and $n=\sqrt{\mu /a^3}$, thenIt follows immediately thatAveraging with uniform true anomaly instead of uniform time would give the wrong result. Since $\mu a(1-e^2)=h^2$, conserved $h$ and constant secular orbital eccentricity giveThe pericentre and apocentre expand in the same secular proportion. These are leading adiabatic invariants, rather than exact invariants for arbitrary time-dependent $\mu$.

For the instantaneous precession fraction write $\theta =f+\varpi$ and $\dot{\theta }=h/r^2$. The adiabatic apsidal condition is controlled byIt is a signed fraction: apsidal advance contributes positively on the outward leg during mass loss, and negatively on the inward leg. Let ${\tau }_{\mu }=|\mu /\dot{\mu }|$. Ordinary orbit averaging requires ${\tau }_{\mu }\gg P$, together with negligible variation of the mass-loss law over one orbit. If the pericentre direction is also to vary negligibly relative to the instantaneous azimuthal motion, the maximum absolute fraction must be small. A precise condition for $0<e<1$ isThe maximizing cosine is $c=(1-\sqrt{1+8e^2})/(2e)$: differentiating the last factor gives $c+2e-e{c}^2=0$. Thus one can evaluate $F(e)$ explicitly by putting $\sqrt{1-c^2}/(1+ec{)}^2$ into the formula. Its useful limits areFor orbital eccentricity of order unity, mass loss much slower than an orbital period suffices; near a circular orbit, keeping the pericentre direction slowly varying additionally requires $n{\tau }_{\mu }e\gg 1$. The latter divergence is a singularity of the pericentre coordinate, not a divergence of the eccentricity vector dynamics. Indeed, at frozen $\dot{\mu }/\mu$, integrating the scalar evolution to first order gives $\delta e=-(\dot{\mu }/\mu )(1-e^2)\sin E/n$ up to an integration constant. Its absolute amplitude stays small for slow mass loss even when the scalar longitude of pericentre becomes unsuitable.

Use rotating barycentric coordinates $\mathbf{R}=(x,y,z)$, rotating velocity $\mathbf{w}$, and $\mathbf{\Omega }=\hat{\mathbf{z}}$. Multiplying the three equations by the corresponding velocity components and adding cancels the Coriolis force terms:Thus the Jacobi constant is $C=2U-|\mathbf{w}{|}^2$. The inertial barycentric velocity is $\mathbf{V}=\mathbf{w}+\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{R}$. If $H_z=(\mathbf{R}\times \mathbf{V}{)}_z$ and $E_b=|\mathbf{V}{|}^2/2-{\mu }_1/r_1-{\mu }_2/r_2$, thenThe inertial energy $E_b$ and inertial angular momentum $H_z$ need not separately be constant. Their combination is constant because the two gravitational sources rotate steadily at unit angular speed.

For the Tisserand parameter take ${\mu }_2\ll {\mu }_1\simeq 1$, and compare the osculating orbital elements well outside a close encounter, where ${\mu }_2/r_2$ and barycentre-to-primary corrections are negligible. ThenThis requires a circular secondary orbit, the restricted three-body problem approximation, and no dissipative force or other perturber. $T$ is conserved to leading order between encounter episodes; the osculating $T$ during a close encounter need not be constant. The exact invariant is $C$.

For clarity the exact two-body energy relation is $a={\mu }_1/(2{\mu }_1/r_1-v_1^2)$, rather than the printed formula without the numerator ${\mu }_1$. At the leading order ${\mu }_1=1$ used for $T$, the two agree; retaining finite ${\mu }_1$ in just part of that formula is inconsistent.

At a close encounter put the secondary radius and speed equal to one at leading order, and denote the particle's incoming relative speed outside the secondary's strong-deflection region by $u$. Conservation of relative speed in the short gravitational encounter givesAn incoming orbit with $a=1$ has $|{\mathbf{v}}_1|=1$ at $r_1=1$ by the vis-viva equation; escape there requires an outgoing speed exceeding $\sqrt{2}$. The triangle inequality therefore gives the necessary single-encounter escape velocity boundEquality only gives a marginal parabolic limit. This argument deliberately gives a weak necessary bound, not a sufficient scattering criterion.

The planet-encounter relative velocity is related to the Tisserand parameter byHere $v_{1,\mathrm{tangential}}=h_z$ at the encounter radius, and the formula also applies to inclined passages at the planet's orbital plane. For the intended prograde coplanar incoming orbit, $I=0$ and $a=1$, so $u^2=2-2\sqrt{1-e^2}$. Applying the preceding necessary bound givesCoplanar alone also allows $I=\pi$. For that retrograde case $u^2=2+2\sqrt{1-e^2}$, and even a circular incoming orbit can be scattered onto an escaping orbit; the orbital eccentricity restriction therefore presumes prograde motion. Also, retaining the outgoing relative-velocity geometry gives the sharper necessary condition $|{\mathbf{v}}_{1,\mathrm{out}}|\le 1+u$, hence $u>\sqrt{2}-1$ and $e>\sqrt{4\sqrt{2}-5}/2$ for the same prograde incoming orbit. This stronger bound is consistent with, and implies, the weaker bound above.

For the Tisserand periapsis bound, first writeA bound orbit capable of another close encounter must intersect the secondary's circular radius, so $q\le 1\le Q$. For fixed $q<1$, the largest possible $T$ occurs at $I=0$. The remaining expression decreases with $Q\ge 1$, sinceThus every such orbit obeysOn $0<q<1$, $g(q)$ increases monotonically from $2$ to $3$. For $2<T<3$ the least accessible pericentre is the unique root of $T=g(q)$: the limiting orbit is prograde and coplanar, with apocentre just at the planet. Introduce $s=\sqrt{3-T}$. Its tangential speed at this apocentre is $1-s$, and its vis-viva equation gives the particularly well-behaved answerEquivalently, setting $w=\sqrt{2q/(1+q)}$ gives $T=2-w^2+2w$ and $w=1-s$, with $q=w^2/(2-w^2)$. Rationalizing the previous result yieldsThe apparent singularity at $T=\sqrt{8}$ is removable; the first form gives $q_{\min }=(\sqrt{2}-1)/2$ there. The limits are $q_{\min }\to 0$ as $T\downarrow 2$ and $q_{\min }\to 1$ as $T\uparrow 3$. The same lower envelope also excludes a smaller pericentre on an escaping trajectory when $2<T<3$. To see this without introducing an apocentre, use the planet-frame velocity sphere: $u=\sqrt{3-T}<1$ forces the tangential component at an encounter to be at least $w=1-u>0$, so total specific angular momentum obeys $h\ge w$. At pericentre the stellar energy obeys $h^2=2q+2E{q}^2$, while $E=h_z-T/2\le h-T/2$. ThusIf $q<q_{\min }=w^2/(2-w^2)$, then $q^2<w\le h$, and the left side is increasing with $h$. Hence $w^2\le 2q+(2w-T)q^2$. But $2w-T=w^2-2$, and the right side is smaller than $w^2$ for $0\le q<q_{\min }$, a contradiction. This establishes the barrier for all Kepler trajectories that reach the encounter radius, including unbound ones.

For $0<T\le 2$, bound encounter-crossing orbits can approach $q=0$ (take $Q\to 2/T$), so the positive root extrapolated from the displayed expression is not a universal barrier. For $T>3$ there is no trajectory reaching a close encounter in this approximation, since $u^2=3-T$ would be negative. Multiple encounters can approach the derived lower envelope by changing energy, angular momentum and inclination while preserving the Tisserand parameter; the invariant alone does not guarantee a particular encounter history reaches it.

Write $R_p$ for the physical planet radius and $R_c=\eta R_{H1}$ for the debris-cloud radius; the source uses $R_1$ for both even though their stated size orderings are opposite. A central transit duration of a small planet on a nearly circular Kepler orbit is $D_p\simeq 2R_{\star }/(n_1{a}_1)=P_1{R}_{\star }/(\pi a_1)$. Kepler's third law, with $M_{\star }=4\pi {\rho }_{\star }{R}_{\star }^3/3$, givesA noncentral planetary exoplanet transit is shorter, so within the small-radius and nearly circular approximations, a duration requiringis too long for the planet alone and favors extended debris. For a central cloud transit with $R_c\gg R_{\star }$, the path length is approximately $2R_c$. Using the Hill radius $R_{H1}=a_1(M_1/(3M_{\star }){)}^{1/3}$ gives $D_1/P_1\simeq R_c/(\pi a_1)$, hence the Hill-cloud transit mass estimateThis equality assumes a central cloud chord. An orbit described merely as nearly edge-on need not have central cloud crossings. If its projected cloud impact distance is $s$, the measured half-chord is $\sqrt{R_c^2-s^2}$, so the boxed mass is multiplied by $[1-(s/R_c{)}^2{]}^{-3/2}$. It is a lower estimate when that geometry is unknown.

For the dynamical calculation use ${\mu }_2=M_2/M_{\star }$, $A=G{M}_2/a_2$, and $\mathcal{R}=Af(\alpha )e_1\cos {\varphi }_1$. The derivatives in the supplied Lagrange planetary equations hold the other osculating orbital elements fixed:Since $A/(n_1{a}_1^2)=n_1{\mu }_2\alpha$, the physical mean-longitude equation for a first-order resonant term isThe source's epoch notation needs care when $n_1$ varies. Literally differentiating ${\lambda }_1=n_1(t)t+{ϵ}_1(t)$ adds $t{\dot{n}}_1$; one cannot retain that definition and also identify the printed ${\dot{ϵ}}_1$ with ${\dot{\lambda }}_1-n_1$. A consistent version writes ${\lambda }_1={\int }_0^t{n}_1(s)ds+{ϵ}_{\mathrm{int}}$ and assigns the displayed correction to ${\dot{ϵ}}_{\mathrm{int}}$. Equivalently, the canonical mean-longitude equation for a first-order resonant term follows from the disturbing function directly. The result for $g$ is the intended physical equation under that convention.

Away from resonant-argument libration, neglect changes in $e_1,\alpha ,{\varpi }_1$ on one slow cycle to this order. With $n_0=2\pi /P_1$ the reference mean motion, the signed slow frequency isThis is the near-resonant transit-timing superperiod. Choose ${\varphi }_1(0)=0$. Differentiating $n_1\propto a_1^{-3/2}$ with the semi-major axis equation givesLet $C=3j{\mu }_2{n}_0^2\alpha f{e}_1$ and $n_s=n_1(0)$. Direct integration giveswith zero initial mean longitude. The constant and linear terms are absorbed into the fitted transit ephemeris: the measured mean frequency is $\bar{n}=n_s-C/\omega$. This distinction avoids mistaking an arbitrary initial frequency for the long-term fitted period.

For $|\Delta |\ll 1$, the double-integrated frequency term dominates the direct $g$ term provided $g/f$ stays finite. Relative to the fitted linear ephemeris, ${\lambda }_1(t_k)=2\pi k$ givesHere $P_1$ denotes the fitted mean period at the retained order. The signed-frequency convention fixes the phase sign. Replacing $\omega$ by $2\pi /P_t>0$ changes the sign of the signed $A_t$ when needed; a nonnegative amplitude hasUsing a signed $P_t=2\pi /\omega$ instead gives the source's signed proportionality $A_t/P_t\simeq 3{\mu }_2\alpha f{e}_1/(2\pi \Delta )$. The leading implicit transit equation can equally use $P_{1}k$ inside the sine, since the difference is higher order in the perturbation. This is the eccentricity-enhanced near-resonant transit-timing variation; its derivation assumes small longitude oscillations, ${\mu }_2{e}_1\ll {\Delta }^2$ at fixed resonance coefficients, and the effectively fixed eccentricity used in this truncated model. Dominance over forced-eccentricity timing terms typically also requires $e_1\gg |\Delta |$ at fixed $j$. A full transit calculation also includes forced orbital eccentricity and the conversion from mean longitude to the actual sky-crossing angle. Those are lower order in this eccentricity-enhanced regime, rather than identically absent; broader near-resonant formulas are derived by Lithwick, Xie and Wu.

Inside a mean-motion resonance, ${\varphi }_1$ undergoes resonant-argument libration and its evolution must be solved together with $a_1,e_1,{\varpi }_1$. The constant circulation frequency $\omega$ and the associated ${\Delta }^{-2}$ expansion then fail. At approximately fixed eccentricity, the resonant resonant pendulum approximation has libration frequency of order $j{n}_0\sqrt{{\mu }_2\alpha |f|e_1}$, up to numerical factors. The transit-timing variation follows that libration period and depends on its libration amplitude of a resonant argument. Exactly at a resonant equilibrium there need be no libration signal; near a separatrix the period grows, and eccentricity dynamics can modify the simple estimate. Resonant amplitudes remain controlled by the bounded resonant motion rather than diverging as the circulating detuning tends to zero.

Treat $a,e$ as instantaneous osculating orbital elements of the fixed-central-parameter Kepler orbit. The perturbing work changes the specific orbital energy according toThe specific angular momentum and conic equation giveSubstituting proves the Gauss planetary equation for the semi-major axis:Here $f$ denotes true anomaly, not the fractional luminosity used in Question 1. The equation follows from work alone; a normal perturbing acceleration has no instantaneous contribution because the velocity lies in the orbital plane. For slowly averaged evolution, the perturbation must be weak over one orbital period.