I refer to my previous post. Following some comments from Alan Harris, I have re-drawn the relation H mag vs Tisserand with respect to a planet with generic semi-major axis ap taking into account ONLY those asteroids that have Tp < 3.
Amor - Method 1
Method based on Spearman correlation.
Having filtered only those asteroids that have Tp < 3, I have to restrict the range where the semimajor axis ap can vary:
0.35 AU <= ap <= 3 AU
For the purpose of the next plot, this is a table showing the orbital parameters of the planets:
- blue line - Mercury
- green line - Venus
- red line - Earth
- magenta line - Mars
I wonder whether the planets are truly responsible for the peaks that we see in this plot.
This is probably true for Earth, because the peak is located at ap = 1.0 AU
Not clear if we can claim that this is true for Mercury and Venus.
In the case of Mars, this is less convincing: the peak next to Mars is not located at ap=1.52 AU but slightly greater.
Boxplot for ap=0.3871 AU
we only have 79 asteroids, with tp < 3, belonging to these Tp quartiles.
[-0.299,2.34] (2.34,2.58] (2.58,2.89] (2.89,3]
20 20 19 20
Boxplot for ap=0.7233 AU
In this case we have 746 asteroids with T<3
[-0.198,2.68] (2.68,2.85] (2.85,2.94] (2.94,3]
187 186 187 186
In this case we have 3668 asteroids with T<3
[-0.15,2.82] (2.82,2.93] (2.93,2.97] (2.97,3]
917 917 917 917
It turns out that the peak next to Mars semimajor axis is located at about ap= 1.65 AU
In this case we have 5617 asteroids with T<3
[-0.0765,2.66] (2.66,2.75] (2.75,2.83] (2.83,3]
1405 1404 1404 1404
Finally, I would like to see if the method2 based on Chi-squared test gives a similar answer.
Amor - Method2
Method based on Chi-squared statistic (see previous post):
In this case the effect of Mercury (if real) can not be seen.
Much more clear, if real, the effect of Earth and Mars ... some doubts about Venus.