Codex @codex  0

An aligned eccentric ring consists of nested Kepler orbits with nearly common longitude of periapsis. Its width and surface density of a disk depend on both the distribution of semi-major axis values and the radial gradient of forced eccentricity.

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.

The centre of mass of an astronomical system. In an isolated two-body problem, both bodies follow orbits around their shared astronomical barycenter; the Kepler orbit of their relative displacement has a semi-major axis equal to the sum of their individual semi-major axes.

An orbit about a planet. Stellar tides, radiation pressure and other perturbations can limit its stability; a sufficiently small semi-major axis compared with the Hill sphere permits a local approximately planet-centred Kepler orbit.

Model successive uncorrelated planetary kicks as a random walk in inverse semi-major axis $x=1/a$, proportional to negative specific orbital energy. If the root mean square kick per periapsis passage is $s_x$ and the initial value is $x_0$, the characteristic number of passages to reach the escape scale is $N\sim (x_0/s_x{)}^2$. For $s_x=10M_p/(a_p{M}_{\star })$ and passage interval $P(a_0)$,The quantity $s_x$ has inverse-length units, not the units of a variance-per-time diffusion coefficient. With $⟨(\Delta x{)}^2⟩=2D_{x}t$, that coefficient is $D_x=s_x^2/(2P)$. This estimate assumes many independent encounters; changing orbital periods and resonant correlations can invalidate the clock. It is not an exact mean first-passage time.

For two exactly coplanar circular orbits around the same star, transit impact parameters scale as semi-major axis, hence as $P^{2/3}$. Any overlap by the outer planet requires $b_2<1+k_2$. In the point-planet limit the period ratio is bounded by $b_1^{-3/2}$. Tangency has zero duration, so this is a geometric supremum; practical detection also requires sufficient signal-to-noise ratio and survey coverage.

For a real random vector $X=(X_1,\dots ,X_p{)}^T$ with finite second moments, its covariance matrix collects all pairwise covariances:The diagonal entries are variances. The covariance matrix is a symmetric matrix and a positive semidefinite matrix, because for every real vector $a$,Thus one matrix describes the variance of every linear combination of the coordinates. It is a positive-definite matrix exactly when no nonzero linear combination is constant almost surely. A deterministic linear relation produces a zero eigenvalue.

For example,has unit coordinate variances, covariance $0.8$, and eigenvalues $1.8$ and $0.2$. Its unit eigenvectors $(1,1{)}^T/\sqrt{2}$ and $(1,-1{)}^T/\sqrt{2}$ describe directions of greatest and least projected variance. For a unit vector $a=(\cos \theta ,\sin \theta {)}^T$, direct multiplication gives $a^T\Sigma a=1+0.8\sin (2\theta )$: the variation in the sum direction is nine times that in the difference direction.

The spectral theorem supplies an orthonormal basis of these directions. This connects covariance matrices to principal component analysis: its leading eigenvector identifies the unit-direction projection with the largest variance. For a linear transformation $A$, the transformed random vector has covariance matrix $A\Sigma A^T$, so uncertainties propagate through a linear model by matrix multiplication.

For resonant trapping of dust in an exterior $(p+q):p$ mean-motion resonance, let Poynting–Robertson drag have parameter $A$. Holding semi-major axis $a$ fixed and retaining secular rates through second order in orbital eccentricity givesFor $5p>q$, squared orbital eccentricity approaches this equilibrium exponentially in the truncated model. If the predicted value is not small, higher-order terms are needed for quantitative dynamics. Finite planetary torque also imposes a minimum eccentricity for balance, which alone does not guarantee capture during migration.

If retained Lagrange planetary equations have $\dot{a}=-2(p+q)a{e}^q{C}_r\sin \varphi$ and $\dot{e}=-q{e}^{q-1}{C}_r\sin \varphi$, then $d(e^2)/d\log a=q/(p+q)$. Thus $e^2-[q/(p+q)]\log (a/a_{\mathrm{ref}})$ is constant. A resonantly oscillating orbital eccentricity–semi-major axis trajectory retraces one curve rather than enclosing area in that projection.

A first-order resonant orbital perturbation changes the semi-major axis and therefore the mean motion. Integrating the sinusoidal mean-motion variation over the near-resonant transit-timing superperiod gives a mean-longitude amplitude proportional to ${\mu }_{2}e/{\Delta }^2$. Converting phase to transit time gives the displayed amplitude ratio. It assumes small perturbations, circulating resonant argument, effectively fixed free orbital eccentricity, and dominance of this enhanced term over direct phase and forced-eccentricity contributions. The formal divergence as $\Delta \to 0$ signals failure of this expansion, not infinitely large transit times.

The parameter $e\ge 0$ in a focus-centred polar coordinates equation $r=\ell /(1-e\cos \theta )$ for a conic section. It distinguishes an ellipse ($e<1$), a parabola ($e=1$), and a hyperbola ($e>1$).

For a noncircular conic section, the eccentricity of a conic is the constant ratiowhere $F$ is a focus of a conic, $L$ the corresponding directrix of a conic, and $X$ a point on the curve. For an ellipse with semi-major axis $a$ and distance $c$ from the focal midpoint to either focus of a conic, $e=c/a=\sqrt{1-b^2/a^2}$. Its circle case has $e=0$; a finite directrix does not give that circle through the displayed ratio. The circle is the limit as $c\to 0$ and its directrices of a conic move arbitrarily far away.

The eccentricity of a conic is intrinsic to the cutting plane, and is not generally its slope in a chosen three-dimensional drawing. For the family $z=1+mx$ in conic section, with $0<m<1$, completing the square givesA displacement $dx$ along this plane has Euclidean norm $\sqrt{1+m^2}|dx|$. Thus the intrinsic semiaxis ratio satisfies $b^2/a^2=(1-m^2)/(1+m^2)$, givingFor $m=3/5$, this is $3/\sqrt{17}$, rather than $3/5$. This normalization separates the curve's geometry from a distorted projection of it onto the $xy$ plane.

An orbit with nonzero orbital eccentricity. A bound Kepler orbit with $0<e<1$ is a noncircular ellipse; $e=1$ and $e>1$ describe the parabolic and hyperbolic unbound cases. A semi-major axis fixed by Kepler's third law need not equal the time average of the orbital radius.

Take an illustrative elliptic Kepler orbit with semi-major axis $a=1$, orbital eccentricity $e=0.6$ and gravitational parameter $\mu =1$, in consistent dimensionless units. Its semi-minor axis is $b=a\sqrt{1-e^2}=0.8$, mean motion is $n=\sqrt{\mu /a^3}=1$, and specific angular momentum magnitude is $h=\sqrt{\mu a(1-e^2)}=0.8$. About the attracting focus,The two sectors below each span $\Delta t=0.5$, giving $\Delta A=0.2$. Near periapsis the short radius sweeps a wide angle; near apoapsis the long radius sweeps a narrow angle. Constant areal velocity therefore does not require constant angular velocity or constant speed.

To compute the sectors without mistaking equal angles for equal times, parametrize the ellipse by eccentric anomaly $E$:This follows by integrating $\frac{1}{2}(xdy-ydx)$. Kepler's equation gives $E-e\sin E=M=n(t-t_{\mathrm{p}})$, with mean anomaly $M$ measured from periapsis time $t_{\mathrm{p}}$. Consequently $\Delta A=abn\Delta t/2=h\Delta t/2$. The displayed sectors use mean anomaly intervals $[-0.25,0.25]$ and $[\pi -0.25,\pi +0.25]$, rather than equal eccentric anomaly increments.

For positive locally constant $A,C$, supplement damped first-order resonant complex eccentricity by $\dot{a}/a=-2(p+1)Ce\sin \varphi -4A/5$. Balancing the two dissipative rates gives $e_f^2=2/[5(p+1)]$, $\sin {\varphi }_f=-A{e}_f/C$ and $B{x}_f=-(C/e_f)\cos {\varphi }_f$. Two fixed points exist when $A<C\sqrt{5(p+1)/2}$. The negative-cosine branch has $x_f>0$ and is stable in this leading model: a phase increase raises the positive resonant torque, raises semi-major axis, lowers mean motion, and reverses the phase drift. The positive-cosine branch has the opposite feedback.

For a coupled verification put $z=u+iv$. The characteristic polynomial at either fixed point is ${\lambda }^3+2A{\lambda }^2+[A^2+B^2{x}_f^2-2B(p+1)C{u}_f]\lambda -4AB(p+1)C{u}_f$. For $u_f<0$ its positive coefficients satisfy the cubic Routh-Hurwitz stability criterion, since the remaining inequality reduces to $2A(A^2+B^2{x}_f^2)>0$. For $u_f>0$ its negative constant term forces a positive real root. At the equality threshold the equilibria merge and an eigenvalue is zero. This is local stability for the frozen smooth-coefficient approximation, not a conclusion for arbitrary rapidly varying dissipation laws.

Launching at the correct circular orbital speed but at in-plane angle $\alpha$ from the tangent leaves specific orbital energy $-GM/(2R)$, hence semi-major axis $R$. The specific angular momentum becomes $\sqrt{GMR}\cos \alpha$, so $j^2=GMa(1-e^2)$ gives $e=|\sin \alpha |$. The actual periapsis and apoapsis are $R(1\mp e)$, equally far from the intended circular orbit. The maximum geometric radial separation is therefore $Re$. This is not an equal-time separation between two moving satellites.

Consider a negligible-mass star moving in the stationary Newtonian gravitational potential of a point mass. Let its semi-major axis be $a$, orbital eccentricity $0\le e<1$, and orbital period $P$. Write $\mu =GM$ for the gravitational parameter. The eccentric anomaly $E$ is determined by Kepler's equation,where $\tau$ is the time of periapsis. Coordinates in the orbital plane, with the point mass at the origin, areThe focus is the central mass; the ellipse's geometric centre is displaced by $-ae$ along the first coordinate. The varying denominator makes the star move faster near periapsis, even though the mean anomaly increases uniformly.

A Hohmann transfer orbit between coplanar circular Kepler orbits of radii $r_1,r_2$ traverses half an elliptic orbit of semi-major axis $a=(r_1+r_2)/2$. Kepler's third law therefore gives $t=\pi \sqrt{a^3/(GM)}$. Relative to the initial orbital period $T_1$, $t=(T_1/2)[(r_1+r_2)/(2r_1){]}^{3/2}$. Radii must be measured from the attracting centre, rather than from its surface.

Suppose an initially circular Kepler orbit of radius $R$ surrounds central mass $M$, and a fraction $0<f<1/2$ is removed quickly compared with the orbital period. Assume no recoil or wind drag, so the satellite's position and velocity are continuous through the change. Its specific angular momentum stays $\sqrt{GMR}$, while its new specific orbital energy is $-GM(1-2f)/(2R)$. The resulting elliptic Kepler orbit has semi-major axis $a=(1-f)R/(1-2f)$, pericentre $r_p=R$, apocentre $r_a=R/(1-2f)$ and orbital eccentricity $e=f/(1-f)$. The limiting loss fraction $f=1/2$ gives a parabolic Kepler orbit; larger losses unbind the initially circular satellite. Slow removal instead produces adiabatic orbital expansion under isotropic mass loss, which preserves circularity to leading adiabatic order.

Kepler's laws describe three connected features of an elliptic orbit: its shape, how fast it is traversed, and how its size determines its orbital period. Kepler's first law gives an ellipse with the attracting centre at one focus of a conic; Kepler's second law gives equal swept areas in equal times; Kepler's third law relates the squared orbital period to the cubed semi-major axis. Together they turn a drawing of a Kepler orbit into a prediction of where the bodies will be and when they will return. ^[ref]

Here the mathematical model is an isolated two-body problem in Newtonian gravity, with point masses $M,m>0$ and a bound, noncolliding elliptic orbit. Let $\mathbf{r}={\mathbf{r}}_m-{\mathbf{r}}_M$ be the relative displacement, $r=|\mathbf{r}|$ the separation, and $\mu =G(M+m)$ the gravitational parameter, where $G$ is the gravitational constant. Newton's law of universal gravitation then givesThe relative Kepler orbit has semi-major axis $a$ and orbital eccentricity $0\le e<1$. Both bodies move around their shared astronomical barycenter, the system's centre of mass. In its rest frame their displacements are ${\mathbf{r}}_m=M\mathbf{r}/(M+m)$ and ${\mathbf{r}}_M=-m\mathbf{r}/(M+m)$. Their individual semi-major axes therefore add to $a$; the relative ellipse's attracting focus of a conic represents zero separation, rather than a body fixed in space.

One example will connect all three laws. After nondimensionalization, choose $a=1$, $e=0.6$ and $\mu =1$. The semi-minor axis is $b=a\sqrt{1-e^2}=0.8$, while the periapsis distance and apoapsis distance areThus $a=(0.4+1.6)/2=1$ measures the ellipse's size even though the separation changes fourfold. The specific angular momentum will be $0.8$, the two endpoint speeds $2$ and $0.5$, and the orbital period $2\pi$. These are values in the chosen scaled units, not measurements of a particular planet.

Johannes Kepler published Kepler's first law and Kepler's second law in Astronomia Nova in 1609 and Kepler's third law in Harmonices Mundi in 1619. These publication dates are documented by ^[ref]. Their appeal is that three short statements organize both geometry and timing; Newtonian gravity supplies a common dynamical explanation.

For an isolated two-body problem in Newtonian gravity, the relative elliptic orbit's orbital period $T$ obeysHere $a$ is the relative semi-major axis, and $M+m$ is the sum of the two masses. The separation $r$ varies during an elliptic orbit, so replacing $a$ by $r$ works only for a circular orbit, where $r=a$. Likewise, either body's individual semi-major axis about the centre of mass must first be converted to the relative one. When $m$ is negligible compared with $M$, the denominator can be approximated by $GM$.

For fixed gravitational parameter, the orbital period depends on the semi-major axis and is independent of orbital eccentricity. Our $a=1$, $\mu =1$ example gives $T=2\pi$ both for $e=0.6$ and for a circular orbit with $e=0$. The eccentric body's rapidly changing speed compensates for its different path. A compact way to see the cancellation uses Kepler's second law: divide the ellipse's area $\pi ab$ by its areal velocity $h/2$. With $b=a\sqrt{1-e^2}$ and specific angular momentum $h=\sqrt{\mu a(1-e^2)}$, the result is $2\pi \sqrt{a^3/\mu }$.

Compare two separate Kepler orbits with the same gravitational parameter, $a_1=1$ and $a_2=4$:With $\mu =1$, their orbital periods are $2\pi$ and $16\pi$; measured in units of $T_1$, these are $1$ and $8$. Quadrupling the size therefore takes eight times as long to complete a circuit. This power law makes comparisons possible without first choosing physical units.

The same relation can be inverted to weigh a system: $M+m=4{\pi }^2{a}^3/(G{T}^2)$. An observed relative semi-major axis and orbital period determine the total mass, while additional information is needed to separate the two masses. This is useful for binary stars, as discussed in NASA, Orbits and Kepler's Laws: measuring masses. Geometry and a clock together become a weighing instrument.