GJ 436
AXA Light Curves

Links internal to this web page
    Comments
    Basic data
    Table summary of transit observations
    Parameter plots
    Professional transit LCs
    Amateur transit LCs
    OOT LCs
    Finder image
    All-sky photometry
    References

Comments on Transit LCs

Most of the recent LCs are "late." This trend might argue for perturbation effects of the 5-Earth mass planet conjectured to exist in an outer orbit (Ribas, Font-Ribera and Beaulieu, arXiv, 2008 Jan 21). Ribas et al suggest that a 5-Earth mass planet is perturbing the Neptune-sized transiting planet in way that makes transits come and go (several year time scales), and change transit properties such as timing, depth and length (month time scales). In the plots below there is evidence that a loneger period is required to account for the recent late mid-transit timings, but there is no evidence for other anomalies. Amateurs should nevertheless concentrate on observing GJ 436 to look for changes in transit depth, length and timing. Note that when a tranist is close to grazing, as this one is, transit depth will depend on filter band, with greater depths occuring at longer wavelengths. This makes it difficult to compare depth without knowing the star's exact limb darkening function.

If depth decreases (due to a decrease in inclination) then we should see length decrease also. So far the case for these trends is not present. The only anomaly to be accounted for is a consensu for late arrivals during the current "observing season" and this can be explained by simply invoking a slightly longer period than the one used by the ephemeris. We therefore do not have evidence to support the hypothetical second planet as proposed by Ribas et al, 2008.

The star is red and all nearby reference stars are bluer, so all LCs will have a large "air mass curvature" systematic error (such that the star appears brighter at higher air mass). This will be especially pronounced wfor unfiltered observations. It's best to avoid observing when air mass >1.5. V-band should reduce this effect, R-band will be slightly worse (but will have better SNR), and both unfiltered and BB-band (blue-blocking) will have a large systematic effect. Since the depth is small the amateur observations will be "noisy." If the systematics are uncorrelated then it's legitimate to average (or median combine) the LC parameters derived from the amateur measurements. "Eyeball" averages can be done using the plots, below. Eventually chi-squared solutions may be justified.
 
Basic Data
    RA = 11:42:11.1, DE = +26:42:24
    Season = Mar 15
    V = 10.68
, B-V = 1.5 2 (very red)
    My estimates (based on one night's all-sky photometry, 2008.02.12): B = 12.28 ± 0.04, V = 10.64 ± 0.03, R = 9.69 ± 0.03, I = 8.26 ± 0.03
Discovery Paper (Gillon et al, 2007):
   
HJDo = 4222.616
    P = 2.64385 (9) day
    Depth = ~6.5 ± 1.0 mmag (V)
    Length = not published (my measurement of the published LC yields 0.94
± 0.06 hr)
AXA-based (V,R,I,BB,C):
    HJDo = 4222.6158
    P = 2.643910 day (informal suggestion)
    Depth = 8.0 ± 0.5 mmag (average of V, R, BB, C)
    Length = 0.94
± 0.02 hr (average of V, R, BB, C)
Infrared (8 micron, SST obsns by Gillon et al, 2007; 2-planet analysis by Ribas et al, 2008):
    HJDo = 1551.78 (5) which must be a typographical error!
    P = 2.64384 (5) days
    Depth = 7.4
± 0.2 mmag
    Length = not published (my measurement of the published LC yields 0.977
± 0.005 hr )

Table Summary of Transit Observations


Date
Filter
Observer
Depth [mmag]
Length [hr]
UT mid
JD mid
HJD mid
HJD ephem
dt [min]











34
2008.05.06
V
Roe
7.1 ± 1.2'
1.01 ± 0.12'
06.144 ± 0.044'

4592.7587 ± 0.0010
4592.7550
+5.2 ± 2.6
33
2008.04.30
R
Mendez
8.9 ± 1.0'
0.98 ± 0.04'
23.377 ± 0.019'

4587.4771 ± 0.0010
4587.4675
+13.8 ± 1.1
32
2008.04.28
BB
Gary
7.6 ± 0.5'
0.96 ± 0.05'
07.873 ± 0.025'
4584.8274 ± 0.0014
4584.8307
4584.8235
+11.4 ± 1.5
31
2008.04.23
R
Naves
8.2 ± 0.8'
0.96 ± 0.09'
00.880 ± 0.043'
4579.5367 ± 0.0018
4579.5403
4579.5358
+6.6 ± 2.6
30
2008.04.15
R
Rodriguez
8.5 ± 1.0
0.94 ± 0.13
02.551 ± 0.066
4571.6063 ± 0.0027
4571.6105
4571.6042
+9.0 ± 3.9
29
2008.04.15
B
Roe
8.6 ± 0.7'
1.22 ± 0.30'
02.931 ± 0.152'
4571.6221 ± 0.0063
4571.6263
4571.6042
+31.8 ± 9.1
28
20080401
R
Mendez
6.7 ± 1.1'
1.00 ± 0.11'
21.304 ± 0.057'
4558.3877 ± 0.0024
4558.3925
4558.3850
+10.8 ± 3.4
27
2008.03.25
R
Naves
7.4 ± 0.8
0.74 ± 0.06
22.883 ± 0.032
4550.4535 ± 0.0013
4550.4585
4550.4534
+7.3  1.9
26
2008.03.22
I
Gary
8.9 ± 1.0
0.94 ± 0.07
07.444 ± 0.034
4547.8102 ± 0.0014
4547.8153
4547.8096
+8.3 ± 2.0
25
2008.03.18
R
Naves
6.0 ± 0.8
1.08 ± 0.07
00.519 ± 0.035
4542.5216 ± 0.0014
4542.5269
4542.5219
+7.2 ± 2.1
24
2008.03.06
V
Schwartz
7.1 ± 0.7
0.80 ± 0.08
10.705 ± 0.041
4531.9461 ± 0.0018
4531.9513
4531.9465
+7.0 ± 2.4
23
2008.03.01
V
Gregorio
6.1 ± 0.8
1.19 ± 0.14
03.799 ± 0.071
4526.6583 ± 0.0030
4526.6635
4526.6588
+6.9 ± 4.2
22
2008.03.01
I
Roe
8.8 ± 0.9
0.80 ± 0.04
03.854 ± 0.020
4526.6608 ± 0.0008
4526.6660
4526.6588
+10.2 ± 1.2
21
2008.03.01
C
Muler
8.1 ± 1.1
0.94 ± 0.13
03.874 ± 0.064
4526.6610 ± 0.0027
4526.6663
4526.6588
+10.8 ± 3.8
20
2008.03.01
I
Naves
8.4 ± 1.7
1.16 ± 0.18
03.884 ± 0.091
4526.6618 ± 0.0038
4526.6671
4526.6588
+12.0 ± 5.4
19
2008.03.01
V
Gary
10.8 ± 2.3
0.90 ± 0.14
03.754 ± 0.070
4526.6564 ± 0.0030 4526.6617
4526.6588
4.2 ± 4.2
18
2008.02.24
R
Srdoc
8.5 ± 1.5
1.30 ± 0.10
21000 ± 0.071
4521.3750 ± 0.0030
4521.3802
4521.3711
+13.2 ± 4.2
17
2008.02.22
R
Gary
7.8 ± 1.9
0.81 ± 0.11
05.534 ± 0.057
4518.7306 ± 0.0024
4518.7357
4518.7272
+12.3 ± 3.4
16
2008.02.16
V
Dufoer
7.3 ± 1.0
0.94 ± 0.09
22.510 ± 0.061
4513.4379 ± 0.0025
4513.4430
4513.4395
+5.0 ± 3.6
15
2008.02.16
R
Marchini et al 8.6 ± 1.4
1.20 ± 0.15
22.537 ± 0.076
4513.4390 ± 0.0033
4513.4441
4513.4395
+6.6 ± 4.6
14
2008.02.16
R
Vanmunster
7.5 ± 1.0
0.83 ± 0.09
22.535 ± 0.044
4513.4390 ± 0.0018
4513.4440
4513.4395
+6.5 ± 2.7
13
2008.02.16
R
Srdoc
6.6 ± 1.0 0.97 ± 0.09 22.415 ± 0.044 4513.4340 ± 0.0018 4513.4390
4513.4395
-0.7 ± 2.7
12
2008.02.14
V
Schwartz
8.1 ± 0.9
0.91 ± 0.10
07.129 ± 0.050
4510.7970 ± 0.0021
4510.8020
4510.7957
+9.1 ± 3.0
11
2008.02.14
V
Walter
10.7 ± 1.0
0.97 ± 0.09
07.152 ± 0.046
4510.7980 ± 0.0019
4510.8029
4510.7957
+10.5 ± 2.8
10
2008.02.09
R
Mendez
8.8 ± 1.0
1.08 ± 0.10
00.260 ± 0.052
4505.5108 ± 0.0022
4505.5156
4505.5080
+11.0 ± 3.1
9
2008.02.09
R
Marchini et al
10.0 ± 1.5
1.45 ± 0.13
00.225 ± 0.067
4505.5094 ± 0.0028
4505.5142
4505.5080
+8.9 ± 4.0
8
2008.02.09
R
Gregorio
8 ± 3
n/a
00.290 ± 0.083
4505.5121 ± 0.0035
4505.5169
4505.5080
+12.8 ± 5.0
7
2008.02.09
C
Staels
7.5 ± 1.0 0.87 ± 0.07 00.235 ± 0.037 4505.5098 ± 0.0015 4505.5146
4505.5080
+9.5 ± 2.2
6
2008.02.06
R
Gary
5.4 ± 1.0
0.99 ± 0.07
08.785 ± 0.035
4502.8660 ± 0.0015
4502.8707
4502.8641
+9.5 ± 2.1
5
2008.02.01
R
Naves
6.5 ± 1.0 0.92 ± 0.12 01.790 ± 0.060 4497.5746 ± 0.0025 4497.5790
4497.5764
+3.8 ± 3.6
4
2008.01.24
R
Srdoc
11.5 ± 1.0
0.75 ± 0.07
03.655 ± 0.036
4489.6523 ± 0.0015
4489.6563
4489.9449
+16.5 ± 2.1
3
2007.12.31
BB
Gary
8.0 ± 1.5 0.80 ± 0.09 08.355 ± 0.048 4465.8479 ± 0.0020 4465.8498
4465.8502
-0.3 ± 2.6
2
2007.05.31
R
Gary
8.5 ± 1.0 0.95 ± 0.07 04.775
4251.6990
4251.6993
4251.6984
+1.7
1
2007.05.17
V
Vanmunster
8.4 ± 1.0 0.90 ± 0.05 23.46
4238.4775
4238.47926
4238.47910
+0.2

' indicates that chi-sqr solution involved a priori values for model parameters depth, length, fp (fraction of transit that's partial) and d2 (relative depth at contact 2). Liberal SEs are adopted.

Parameter Plots

The following plots are not updated after every new LC addition. Sorry, but I'm just an unpaid volunteer.

       
The horizontal light blue line corresponds to the transit discovery paper's ephemeris (Gillon et al, 2007). The sloped dotted green line is an alternative interpretation of the data based on a slightly different period and HJDo.

The chi-squared for the sloped line model requires that the light curve mid-transit time measurements are either wrong or their SEs are greater than estimated. If future observations follow the sloped line then it would have to be concluded that the Dec 31 observation was an outlier. Clearly, more transit light curve measurements are needed to resolve this matter.

     
There is now evidence for depth changes based on this data. Median depth = 8.1 mmag.

   
So far there's no evidence for a dependence of transit depth on filter band (which surprises me, given that this is a grazing transit).

     
Transit length is constant, so far. Median length = 0.94 hour.

Amateur Transit Light Curves



Cloudy near end.




 
Windy most of the session.



First submission by Miguel Rodriguez, using a 6-inch Newtonian tlescope. Good agreement with consensus though a little noisy at high air mass end of observations.




 

 
We're puzzled by the late arrival of this LC. Jim says the clock was checked and there were no saturation issues. This is the only B-band LC for GJ 436 on the AXA.

 
 


 



 









First submission; congratulations! Great job with an 8-inch aperture.





Apologies for including this noisy egress only LC.






First submission by this observer. Note the quality and 8-inch aperture.










First-time submission; congraulations! LC shape and timine are consistent with the consensus.


Amazingly good quality LC, especially for an 8-inch and first-time contributor.




The early data had too long exposure times that saturated stars; when exposure was shortened behavior improved. Note that the egress was "late" by approximately the same amount as indicated by the Staels observations of the same transit.


This LC "confirms" the recent trend to "lateness" - which is important evidence for a perturbing exoplanet proposed by Ribas et al, 2008. The high dependence upon air mass is due to observations being unfiltered and GJ 436 being very red and all reference stars being bluer.


Frequent uses of a hair dryer to remove frost from the corrector plate; temp = 28 F, Dew Pt = 22 F (RH = 78%). WWV check of time tags.




The clock was checked & found to be accurate.


Air mass curvature is high due to use of a BB-filter and high air mass at the beginning.


Mid-transit = 4251.6992 (JD) = 4251.6997 (HJD). Depth = 8.5 mmag (R). Length = 0.78 hr.


Good quality.


Out-of-Transit Light Curves










These observations were a test of a new optical configuration which accounts for the short duration. Nevertheless, there seems to be mild evidence for 1 mmag variations on an hourly timescale.






Professional Transit Light Curves


Gillon et al (2007) SST observations at 8 micron wavelength, reproduced from Ribas et al (2008). Lowest panel shoes effect of a hypothetical 0.1 degree inclination change that could be produced by perturbations from a 5-Earth mass
outer orbit planet in a 2:1 resonant orbit.


V-band, Observatory of Geneva 1.2-meter Euler telescope at La Silla Observatory, Chile
(Gillon et al, 2007). Mid-transit at 2007 May 02, 02:41 UT. My measurements of this LC yield depth ~6.5 ± 1.0 mag, length = 0.943 ± 0.064 hr.

Finder Image


 Figure F1. Finder image with identifier star numbers (above) and J-K colors (times 100, below) selected stars. GJ 436 has V = 10.68 and Rc = 9.66.

.
 Figure F2. This image has FOV = 16 x 11 'arc and FWHM ~2.5 "arc. Tentative magnitudes for these stars is summarized in the table below.

ALL-SKY PHOTOMETRY

On the night of 2008.02.12 UT I conducted all-sky photometry measurements of the GJ 436 region. I used the Landolt star field at RA/DE 06:52/-00:27, which also has an extensive list of Henden all-sky observational results for many more stars than in the Landolt list. The Landolt field was observed before and after GJ 436, all at the same air mass. My recent experience with landolt stars is that some of them have changed over the decades, and not enough of them have masgnitudes for all four bands. Further, my culled list of Henden magnitudes (=> 4 observations per star) shows better internal consistency than the Landolt magnitudes. So for this all-sky analysis I adopted only Henden magnitudes for calibrating my telescope system and transferring this calibration to the GJ 436 star field. A fuller discussion of my all-sky photometry observing and analysis procedures are available at a web page (still under construction): http://brucegary.net/ASX/x.htm

The following table is based on 18 Henden stars (as many as 53 readings per band) for this one night's observations:

 
 Figure A1. Results of the all-sky photometry measurements of 2008.02.12. Star numbers correspond to the labels in Fig. F2. 

Normally I don't present all-sky photometry results without completing a second observing session and analysis and verify compatibility between the two results. In this case I have no plans for doing this since I doubt that anyone will use any of these results.

My favorite "reality check" for detecting the presence of a systematic error for one or more bands after performing an all-sky photometry session is to plot color/color scatter diagrams.

 

Figure A2 and A3. Color/color scatter diagram showing the location of GJ 436 (red square) and the 9 nearby stars (gray squares) in relation to 1259 landolt stars.

If the solution for one filter band had a systematic error it would show up in these plots as a group offset in the color/color scatter diagrams involving that filter. For example, if all B-magnitudes were high by 0.05 magnitude then the goup of gray squares and the red square would be offset to the right by 0.05 magnitude. It's possible that such an offset is present in Fig. A2, but it's clear that greater vaues fo such an offset are very unlikely. An alternative for explaining the rightward shift of Fig. A2 gray squares is for there to be instead a downward shift, or values for V that are to negative by about the same 0.05 magnitude amount. This is unlikely after inspecting Fig. A3, where there is no evidence of shifts. Presumably, all 3 bands (V, R and I) are free of calibration error offsets (unless by some unlikely circumstance there are offset errors in all 3 bands that excatly compensate to produce color/color agreement with the Landolot stars). If it is true that V, R and I are free of calibration offset errors greater than ~0.03 magnitude, then what should be make of the funny location for GJ 436 in Fig. A3? I claim that it is inescapable that GJ 436 has a much greater V-I color than the Landolt stars. Since V appears to be normal (e.g., Fig. A2), we must conclude that I is anomalous. In other words, these color/color scatter diagrams show that GJ 436 has an I-magnitude that is brighter than normal by ~0.5 magnitude! I'll leave it to others to explain how this could be the case.

Note: It won't matter what magnitude you assume for reference stars for the purpose of obtaining quality light curves. These estimated values are presented for the purpose of identifying star colors that "match" GJ 436's color which can be useful in minimizing extinction related systematic errors (i.e, LC curvature that's correlated with air mass). In this table the column for R-band will be the most accurate since it is based on observations. The other magnitudes for Stars 1 through 6 are based on JK magnitudes. For GJ 436 the B and I magnitudes are based on color/color correlations for main sequence stars. All stars in the table are compatible with main sequence color/color relationships.

References

Gillon et al, 2007, Astron, & Astrophys., "Detection of Transits of the Nearby Hot Neptune GJ 436" http://babbage.sissa.it/abs/0705.2219
Butler et al, 2004, Astrophys. J. Lett.,"A Neptune-Mass Planet Orbiting the Nearby M Dwarf GJ 436" http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...617..580B
Ribas et al, 2008, Astrophys. J. Lett., "A ~5_earth Super Earth Orbiting GJ 436?: The Poser of Near-Grazing Transits"  http://fr.arxiv.org/abs/0801.3230


Return to calling web page AXA

WebMaster: Bruce L. Gary. Nothing on this web page is copyrighted. This site opened:  July 04, 2007 Last Update:  May 09, 2008 (UT)