Wikidata:Property proposal/time of periastron passage
time of periapsis (originally: time of periastron passage)[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Natural science
Description | the time at which the orbit of an object in space, typically a planet or a satellite, goes through its periapsis |
---|---|
Data type | Quantity |
Template parameter | time_periastron in en:Template:Infobox planet |
Domain | instances of subclasses of secondary body (Q15731960) |
Allowed values | > 0 |
Allowed units | Julian day (Q14267) |
Example 1 | Earth (Q2) → 2459218.90577274 JD |
Example 2 | 45P/Honda–Mrkos–Pajdušáková (Q2288880) → 2457753.766445 JD |
Example 3 | 11 Comae Berenices b (Q15694531) → 2452899.6 (± 1.6) JD |
Planned use | load data from Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia (Q1385430) |
See also | periapsis date (DEPRECATED) (P2285), orbital period (P2146), argument of periapsis (P2248) |
Single-value constraint | yes |
Wikidata project | Wikidata:WikiProject Astronomy |
Motivation[edit]
We have periapsis date (DEPRECATED) (P2285) that has pretty similar semantics, but captured as a date/time. In popular astronomy it is common to display this as a nearest date in the future (see "Time of perihelion" in the infobox of en:Halley's Comet). But the problem is that data sources (e.g. Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia (Q1385430)) use scientific notation, which is normally done in Julian day (Q14267). I believe this is the primary reason why we have only a few dozens statements based on P2285.
So I propose:
- introduce a new quantity-type property (BTW quantity allows us to specify ± tolerance from the source, which is impossible in P2285)
- convert existing P2285 data (I can do it myself manually)
- deprecate and eventually delete P2285
For those, who want to display time of periastron in the corresponding infoboxes, converting it to the nearest gregorian date in the future (using value of orbital period (P2146)) is a trivial arithmetic task, that can be done in Lua module. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ghuron (talk • contribs) at 12:34, August 10, 2022 (UTC).
Discussion[edit]
- Comment Would this be expected to be updated after each periastron date passes, to the next value? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:31, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- I lack systematic astronomical education, but I don't think so. Maybe we might want to specify epoch (Q2703) (e.g. via epoch (P6259) as qualifier) Ghuron (talk) 05:31, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
- Conditional support Since you intend to replace P2285, I think this property should receive a more generic name, what about "time of periapsis"? There is no reason to exclude the objects in our own solar system. Infrastruktur (talk) 06:12, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
- Absolutely agree, no reason to exclude solar system. Feel free to make proposed changes. Ghuron (talk) 16:12, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
- Notified participants of WikiProject Astronomy This proposal has been up for 8 months so it could need a push. Infrastruktur (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support Good idea. This property can be used non only for extrasolar planet, but also for Solar System planets, asteroids, comets, and so on, double or multiple star systems. Usually in astronomic catalogues time of periapsis is associated to a precise epoch (Q2703), so I suggest to add a constraint that verify the presence of epoch (P6259) as qualifier. Unfortunately the value of this property can change to every periphrasis passage, but now the check can be made automatically using the astronomical databases on-line --Paperoastro (talk) 13:52, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support and +1 for the epoch (Q2703) constraint. Romuald 2 (talk) 16:47, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support since the sources create issues with the previous property. I'm also in favor of the +1 for the epoch (Q2703) constraint. J. N. Squire (talk) 16:43, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
- Done @Ghuron, Paperoastro, Romuald 2, J. N. Squire: Created as time of periapsis (P11796). As a result the old periapsis date (DEPRECATED) (P2285) property will now be marked for deprecation. Infrastruktur (talk) 16:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)