Light Curves of KAFO Candidates
Webmaster: Bruce Gary, Return to KAFO Home Page 

Recent Updates:

    Oct 29: K00377.01 by Gary; nothing (but none expected)
    Aug 10: K00410.01 by Mendez; non-detection (1.6 sigma)
    Jul 29: K00377.01 by Garlitz; no show!
    Jul 18: K00410.01 by Garlitz; late 25 +/- 3 min. Expected depth & length.
    Jul 11: K00377.01 by Salas; 3.4 hrs early (assuming a length with 0.2 hr a priori SE!
    Jul 11: K00774.01 by Garlitz; compatible w ephem

    Jul 05: K00620.01 by Mendez; data insufficient for assessing presence of transit
    Jun 05: K00774.01 by Salas; compatible w ephem
    May 22: K00190.01 by Garlitz; not enough pre-ingress to be useful
    Apr 22: K00806.02 by Benni. Partial ingress but can't be sure ingress was detected.
    Apr 19: K03506 by Benni. Ing only.
    Apr 14: K05722 by Benni. Ing & egr, no mid.
  
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________



Predicted ephemeris is "all over the place" so I just observed to see if anything who show up. Nothing did.


Non-detection. Star too faint, & depth too small, for this aperture.


A "no show" - implying big TTV, like the other LCs for this target.


Looks noisy, but statistics say to believe the solution.


3.4 hrs early!



Good quality; agrees with ephemeris. Too bad ingress couldn't be captured. I adopted a "liberal" a priori uncertainty for length (0.3 hr) for this Bayesian solution.


Nice try, but this event was just too difficult for a 11-inch aperture (~ 30 inches was needed).


Mid-transit time is compatible with the ephemeris. Depth is slightly smaller & length is the same.


Due to lack of pre-ingress OOT the mid-transit time is too uncertain to be useful. (Amplitude of TTV ~ 9 min according to Relles)


Valiant try, but dawn came too early. Won't include downloadable data file because this data shouldn't be used for TTV analysis; this LC is "suggestive"!


Nothing unexpected. No downloadable data file because this data shouldn't be used for TTV analyses.


Too bad about the clouds. I include this LC because of the long period & possible info on changes from Kepler observations. Depth is much greater & transit occurs ~ 43 min early. No downloadable data file because this data shouldn't be used for TTV analyses.


Missing ingress. Depth of ~ 7 mmag is similar to 5.5 mmag meas'd by Mendez last year, and both are less than Kepler's 21 mmag. No downloadable data file because this data shouldn't be used for TTV analyses.

=====================  END OF SEASON #1  ====================================


 data  Confirmation; no evidence for TTV.


 data  Probably a grazing EB, considering transit shape, long period, short length and deep depth. Lateness of mid-transit is statistically significant.
Howard Relles has compared this LC's timing with several Kepler timing observations in a search for TTV produced by additional planets: http://exoplanet-science.com/KOI-3685_kafo.html 


I observed this candidate one day late (misread my own listing!). The sinusoid fit is not statistically significant, but when this target is observed again I'll check for it.



 data  Two versions of same data. Mid-transit time is confirmed; no evidence for TTV. Note: There's an error in the mid-transit time information box: replace HJD with BJD. (Thanks, Howard, for noticing this.)


 data Great! This transit is observable just once a year from some favored longitude, and Joe got it!
I just learned (Sep 13) that this object was recently dispositioned by the Kepler team as a "false positive."


 data  Pretty good confirmation, though egress came early.


 data Confirmation of all aspects of Kepler ephemeris for this candidate.


 data  Confirmation of 871.01 in all aspects.


 data  On Jul 15 this observer observed a 5.0 1.2 mmag transit 16 6 min late. A 5 nnag transit transit should have been easily observed on this date.
May I suggest that this object deserves a TTV analysis.


 data  Looks real to me. Note: There's a 1-day error in the JD mid & BJD mid info boxes; they should read 6520.8778 & 6520.8809. (Thanks, Howard, for pointing this out.)


A "no show." Subsequent analysis predicted transit at BJD4 = 6516.6807 (or 2.0 days before the start of this observing session). This big discrepancy is due to this object being a 3-planet system: Kepler-9b, c and d. The KAFO target list that prompted Garlitz to observe at this time was based on a linear extrapolation of all Kepler "b" transits and didn't allow for celestial mechanic interactions. Dan Fabrycky (Kepler TTV team) has recently provided us (Aug 19) with a detailed analysis using all planets to predict that this event should have occurred 2.0 days earlier. Future predictions of transits for this object will use Fabryky's listing.


 data  Grazing LC. A lttile deeper than the Kepler listing; it came early (statistically significant) so it might be worth a TTV analysis.


 data  Similar depth & length, but mid-transit was late by significant amount. Maybe a TTV prospect.


K03608.01 Due to a spreadsheet error that affected some candidates this object was incorrectly listed for a transit during this observing session.
Instead, the transit is in October.
I apologize to Manuel for another of my "KAFO growing pains mistakes."


K01465.01 data  Confirming everything!


K00871.01 data  Deeper than expected, and "on time!" No trouble with this 15.2 mag star using a 11-inch telescope.



K00774.01 data  Two LC versions of same data: top one is what the professionals use, bottom one has more information.
 The noise is normal (better than previous night's due to not binning). The 3 main noise sources predict  ~18 mmag per image, and 17 mmag per image is measured,
 so there are no unaccounted-for noise sources (e.g., "pixel edge noise" - as occurred the previous night).
These LCs show that a 28 mmag transit is easily observed when the star has V-mag = 15.43 when using a 11-inch telescope.



K00728.01 data  Two LC versions of same data: top one is what the professionals use, bottom one has more information.
 The noise is higher than normal because seeing was too good; PSFs were 1.9 pixels sometimes, causing pixel edge noise. The 3 main noise sources predict 
 that scintillation is small, and Poisson and thermal are comparable; orthogonal sum is ~ 12 mmag per image whereas actual was ~ 40 mmag. These LCs show that a 19 mmag deep transit can be observed for a 15.5 mag star (V-mag) using a 11-inch telescope.


K03782.01 data  The sinusoidal variation is statistically significant (3.0-sigma); but is it real? 


K03782.01 Out-of-transit observation. No sinusoidal variation.


K00205.01 This LC was made for a different Kepler star than the one that was predicted to undergo transit, due to an error in the RA/DE coordinated listed in the
prediction table on the KAFO home page; in other words, it's my fault (Bruce Gary) that the wrong star was observed.



K03597.01 This LC was made for a different Kepler star than the one that was predicted to undergo transit, due to an error in the RA/DE coordinated listed in the
prediction table on the KAFO home page; in other words, it's my fault (Bruce Gary) that the wrong star was observed.



K03782.01 data  The variability is statistically significant (6.8-sigma), but has longer period than earlier measurements (2.9 vs 1.7 hr).


K03399.01 data  Depth of 123 mmag differs greatly from the catalog's 17 mmag. This one must be an EB. Indeed, it  was recently dispositioned as a "false positive."


K03782.01 data This LC and te one below overlap in time. They don't support each other in terms of variation phase or amplitude.


K03782.01 Attempting to confirm Joe's 1.7 hr, 2.2 0.6 mmag variation (Jul 21). This data is too noisy (clouds?), and observing session is too short, for comparison.


K00668.01 Confirming ingress time (This object is listed as a "false positive")


K03782.01 data  No evidence of that 2.2 0.6 mmag, 1.71-hr variation seen on Jul 21.


K01728.01 data  Egress is uncertain (due to possible cloud effects), so mid-transit time is also uncertain. Depth agrees with Kepler database (11.1 mmag).


K03782.01 data  Wow! We need to observe this one again! If the sinusoidal variation is constant (as it should be if it's due to a "Delta Scuti" type pulsation) we can expect to see a phase shift equivalent to ~ 33 seconds if the secondary is an exoplanet. If the secondary is another star (an EB system), the phase shifts will be much larger, and easily detected from amateur observations. This system therefore represents an opportunity for amateurs to confirm the exoplanet status of a candidate discovered by professional astronomers (perhaps for the first time). I urge advanced amateurs to observe this star intently during the next 3 months for the purpose of detecting any variation of the sinusoidal variation's phase. I can perform the phase stability analysis; just submit LC data to me. Anyone interested in a similar observing program by amateurs that relied upon an analysis of phase stability of a sinusoidal variation can read the paper at PDF link. (Thanks to Siegfried Vanaverbeke for suggesting these follow-through observations of K03782.)
 


K00287.01 data  Nice LC! All Kepler catalog parameters are confirmed! This sure looks like an exoplanet LC.


K00022.01 data   Confirms ephemeris & depth; length is slightly wider.


K01349.01 data   Kepler predicts depth = 27.0 mmag, mid-transit at 22.55 0.01 UT. This is a confirmation observation, with refinement of transit length.


K00405.01 data  This transit calls for a mid-transit time that is at least 3.4 hours early, suggesting a large TTV effect. This is not unreasonable given
that P = 37.614 days.
Indeed, an investigation by Dan Fabrycky predicted that this transit would occur at this very early time! This LC is the first
example of a KAFO observation
contributing something of scientific value, and it illustrates how a 11-inch amateur telescope can be used to study
Kepler candidate TTV.
(A meridian flip occurs at 25.3 UT and the meridian flip correction was solved for and found to be 0 mmag, which is typical
for this observer.)



K00410.01 data   First KAFO submission by veteran observer Joe Garlitz (GJP). Notice that a 12-inch aperture telescope is capable of characterizing transits of depth 5 mmag for a star with V-mag ~ 14.5. Kepler predicted depth = 4.3 mmag, mid-transit at 05.83 0.03 UT, length =1.93 hrs. This is a confirmation observation.

Return to KAFO home page

____________________________________________________________________

WebMaster: B. GaryNothing on this web page is copyrighted. This site opened:  July 15, 2013