Cited by 25History and Developments in AstronomyStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesRelativity and Gravitational Theory

Calculation of the Uncertainties in the Planetary Precessions with the Recent EPM2017 Ephemerides and their Use in Fundamental Physics and Beyond

Open access
Iorio, Lorenzo·2019·The Astronomical Journal

Abstract

I tentatively compile the formal uncertainties in the secular rates of change of the orbital elements a, e, I, Ω, and ϖ of the planets of the solar system from the recently released formal errors in a and the nonsingular elements h, k, p, and q estimated for the same bodies with the EPM2017 ephemerides by E. V. Pitjeva and N. P. Pitjev. The highest accuracies occur for the inner planets and Saturn in view of the extensive use of radiotechnical data collected over the last decades. For the inclination I, node Ω and perihelion ϖ of Mercury and Mars, I obtain accuracies , while for Saturn they are . As far as the semimajor axis a is concerned, its rates for the inner planets are accurate to the level, while for Saturn I obtain . In terms of the parameterized post-Newtonian (PPN) parameters β and γ, a formal error as little as for the Hermean apsidal rate corresponds to a ≃2 × 10−7 bias in the combination parameterizing the Schwarzschild-type periehlion precession of Mercury. The realistic uncertainties of the planetary precessions may be up to one order of magnitude larger. I discuss their potential multiple uses in fundamental physics, astronomy, and planetology.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3847/1538-3881/ab19bf

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • No secular variations Δκ different from zero at a statistically significant level have been determined to date.

    “Since no secular variations ∆ κ that are different from zero at a statistically significant level have been determined to date, it is possible to write |∆ κ| ≤ σ κ”

    From Has Kronos Devoured Planet Nine and Its Epigones? (2026) · cites this paper as [27]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • “From the definition of Θ µν and using equation (2), we have In other words, Θ µν will depend on the Lagrangian of matter, that is, this can refer to the case of the electromagnetic field, the massless scalar field, the case of the perfect fluid, among others.”
    Self-citation

Authors
Iorio, L.
Affiliations
Ministry of Education, Universities and Research (IT)
Corresponding author
Iorio, Lorenzo
Venue
The Astronomical Journal
Published
2019-05-07
Volume
157
Issue
6
Pages
220
ISSN
  • 0004-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-3881
OpenAlex
W2949891762
Cited by
25
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Astronomical Journal (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › History and Developments in Astronomy
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
Keywords
planetary precession, mercury, Mars, Saturn, apsidal precession, inner planets

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review