Paper detail

Densities and Eccentricities of 139 Kepler Planets from Transit Time Variations

We extract densities and eccentricities of 139 sub-Jovian planets by analyzing transit time variations (TTVs) obtained by the Kepler mission through Quarter 12. We partially circumvent the degeneracies that plague TTV inversion with the help of an analytical formula for the TTV. From the observed TTV phases, we find that most of these planets have eccentricities of order a few percent. More precisely, the r.m.s. eccentricity is 0.018^{+0.005}_{-0.004}, and planets smaller than 2.5R_\earth are around twice as eccentric as those bigger than 2.5R_\earth. We also find a best-fit density-radius relationship ρ~3 g/cm^3 \times (R/3R_\earth)^{-2.3} for the 56 planets that likely have small eccentricity and hence small statistical correction to their masses. Many planets larger than 2.5R_\earth are less dense than water, implying that their radii are largely set by a massive hydrogen atmosphere.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.