Alternate Planets, Suns, Stars, and Solar Systems Thread

They emit enough radiation to provide a high-enough temperature to make water liquid but not high enough for solar radiation. (This would mean no auroras, but it also means no genes would be damaged by UV exposure.)

K class stars still produce a stellar wind and UV radiation, just noticeably less than Sol does.

Despite having 45-80% of a G-type star's mass, they can still be just as bright.

Um, no. They are definitely less bright. This is the mass-luminosity relationship. Less mass means less gravity means less pressure at the core means a slower rate of fusion at the core. To get the same amount of radiation, the Earth would need to orbit a K class star closer in.

How far would the second star orbit the first star to keep the solar system stable?

Do you want the outer planets like Jupiter on out to remain in stable orbits? If so, you're probably talking about the two stars being at least a light year apart. If you just want to keep things stable from Mars on in, then the two stars can be closer, but they'd still take years for even nuclear powered rockets to travel between them.

if you want the two stars to orbit each-other inside the orbit or Mercury and still want Mercury and Venus to retain stable orbits where they are, I'm not sure how close they'd need to be, but I do know it would need to be extremely close.

  • In the equator, how would the stars be positioned at dawn, noon and dusk?
  • In relation to #3, what would dawn, noon and dusk look like in the spring, summer, autumn and winter months of the middle and high latitudes?

It depends on what the orbital tilt of the two stars is and exactly how close together they are to each-other.

Say we moved it to 0.91, that would still be closer, cooler than we are here but still in the zone, and with a 'year' of 0.776 years or roughly 284 days.

Remember that the Earth would need a higher orbital velocity at any given distance out since the mass of the two stars together would be greater than 1 sol mass and with them orbiting so close, we can treat them as a single star.

any value between 0.15 and 0.4 should suffice. This puts the barycentre at an average distance (technically semimajor axis distance) of 0.07 AU from star A and 0.13 AU from star B.

This, interestingly, would produce noticeable tides and temperature swings on Earth as the two stars spun around their barycentre.

fasquardon
 
<snip>
Remember that the Earth would need a higher orbital velocity at any given distance out since the mass of the two stars together would be greater than 1 sol mass and with them orbiting so close, we can treat them as a single star.

I used Newton's general formula for a two-body problem, derived from Kepler's third law, taking combined star masses, planet's mass and semi-major axis of planet's orbit into consideration, so treating massA + massB as the 'star' mass and their barycentre as the focus from which semi-major axis was stated.

<snip>
This, interestingly, would produce noticeable tides and temperature swings on Earth as the two stars spun around their barycentre.
See, this is one of the reasons I love this site, it's easy to find folk who actually understand all the subjects I don't :) (and also don't need "alternate history" explaining before you can get to the heart of the question!) Would this be the case for any planet orbiting within the habitable zone of a close binary pair, do you think? Is it the kind of thing you could simulate at very rough rule-of-level in a spreadsheet, or would it need real programming and number crunching to model?
 
Would this be the case for any planet orbiting within the habitable zone of a close binary pair, do you think? Is it the kind of thing you could simulate at very rough rule-of-level in a spreadsheet, or would it need real programming and number crunching to model?

Well, to do a very rough approximation you could probably figure this out with a pocket calculator and a sheet of paper. To get a somewhat closer approximation, one would need a good chunk of mainframe time to run lots and lots and lots of two body problems.

To get the real answer is impossible, since we just don't know how to properly solve anything besides the 2 body problem (which doesn't matter if you are figuring out what orbits are stable over 10s of millions of years or figuring out how to send space ships from planet A to planet B, but really bites when working on time scales of billions of years - which matters when you want to figure out where the Earth will be in a billion years or whether a planet will stay in a friendly orbit long enough for life to evolve).

So a spreadsheet can give you an answer good enough for writing plausible hard science fiction, but... We don't even know how stable the real solar system is over long time scales, besides knowing that Earth must have stayed in a specific general area for the fossil record to make any sense. I think as we get more people and probes on other bodies to take samples and drill cores, this is one of the areas that will be really interesting, since pinning down each body's locations over the last 5 billion years could give us a much better understanding of how complex gravitational interactions actually work.

I used Newton's general formula for a two-body problem, derived from Kepler's third law, taking combined star masses, planet's mass and semi-major axis of planet's orbit into consideration, so treating massA + massB as the 'star' mass and their barycentre as the focus from which semi-major axis was stated.

Ah, OK, I missed that.

fasquardon
 
If you are referring to this:
Moreover, they change very little in brightness compared to sun-like stars. Our own sun has brightened by about 30% since the solar system began, and will likely make Earth too hot for life in about 1 billion years, even though the sun will still have about 5 billion years of fuel left to burn.
That is talking about the stars' evolution off the Zero Age Main Sequence (ZAMS). G-type stars have a faster evolution away from ZAMS, which manifests itself as a brightening of the star during its 10 billion year lifetime. Our sun has brightened something like 30% since it formed. K-type stars live longer and, hence, take more time to evolve off the ZAMS. Thus, "they change very little in brightness compared to sun-like stars[.]" K-type stars might also have a smaller change over their 20 billion year lives than the change experienced by a G-type's 10 billion year life, but the jury is still out on that. We're still not great at measuring ages of stars, unfortunately.

Anyway, K-type main sequence stars are much dimmer than G-type main sequence stars unless something weird is going on.
 

Vuu

Banned
I'm thinking about Planetocopia's Seapole and how it can be improved, it was made a long, long time ago and made many exceptions.

The basic idea is:

-same premise as Seapole (n. pole between africa and s. america, s. pole in pacific)
-average sea level rise 80m (to account weight of the water and such)
-taking lack of land ice into account (Scandinavia up to about 400m higher, Greenland a peninsula probably, Baltic reduced to a lake (or a few) or even is absent completely forming another great european river, note that areas adjacent to the rising areas are actually falling as the land balances out)
-taking the different river erosion into account (fewer ridiculously long estuaries since river mouth locations would be shifted already pre-erosion)

But my map skills are bad. - doing one for Mars and Venus as well is even harder (for a maximum wank ISOT TL i'm planning), or should i just throw the rotational change so far back that the Earth is completely unrecognizable and just describe the new locations
 
or should i just throw the rotational change so far back that the Earth is completely unrecognizable and just describe the new locations

Well, Earth's rotation undoubtedly has some role in shaping the convection currents that drive continental drift. So if you want to make up completely new continents for Earth, you have ample excuse to do so.


As rexnerdorum has already said, this article is talking about the star's change of luminosity over its life. Which may or may not prove true. We'll see in about 20 billion years.

fasquardon
 
I'm still working the details out but I am almost ready to post my new system. Comments are welcome and looked forward to. The inspiration for this system is a modification of the Titus-Bode Law. For those who did not take astronomy in college, the Titus-Bode Law was a theory in the 18th century about the spacing of planets in our solar system. Without going through all the details it accurately predicted the orbits of the known planets with less than a 5% error. The discovery of Uranus further gave proof to this idea because it was where a planet outside the orbit of Saturn would be in there was another planet. The problem that astronomers of the time had with this idea was it predicted a planet between Mars and Jupiter. This lead to the search for this missing planet and in it's location Ceres was found. The discovery of Neptune in the mid-19th century ended this idea. My new system keeps the idea of the Titus-Bode Law but with Mercury at about 0.7 AU instead of 0.4 AU. Each planet would be about 0.3 AU further out than in our solar system. This would allow me to have two Earth size planets in the habitable zone. Mars being further from the Sun might have a more substantial atmosphere. With these changes I plan to keep most of the substance of our solar system the same. Planet #3 will still have a average diameter of 7,918 miles but there will be some other changes. As an example planet #3 will have a 24 hour day instead of an 24 hour day that Earth currently has. Some changes will be do to me trying to make the system more livable or imaginative. An example will be planet #2 having maybe a 30 hour day instead of the 116 day that Venus currently has. The names of my planets are;

Helios [the Sun]

Hermes
Aphrodite
Gaia
Ares
Demeter
Zeus
Cronus.
 

Vuu

Banned
So I'm doing a lil worldbuilding project but i can't figure out the climate and stuff, anyone wanna help out? I devised an extremely rough (read: continents are random blobs done in a minute literally) prototype and I need to flesh out the climate and stuff
 

Attachments

  • prototype.png
    prototype.png
    19 KB · Views: 765
View attachment 374728

a WIP, with planets and distances to scale (not the star, mind you) of an extrasolar system being colonized in the (rather far) future. Don't let the names fool you; the Captain may be Jamaican and the navigator Coptic (and trust me, it took a lot of yelling before they split the difference), but both are very firmly committed to the People's Holarchy of Mars.

The New Montega Bay system doesn't exactly have a lot of planets in the habitable zone, mind you, or gas giants with bizarrely large moons (funny, how that always seems to happen) - but a Water/Oxygen biosphere is firmly established on one world - Meshir. A bit less than half as massive as Earth, substantially colder and wetter, and stuck in a spin-orbit resonance that gives charming 6,000 hour long days. It's also inhabited.

The natives look a bit like a cross between a lion-fish and a cactus, but are nice enough (well, most of the tribes, anyway) once you get used to that "constantly moving" thing. But the Martians are still huddled in a temporary habit on Tobi, feeling rather terrified. There are grooves, eons old and miles deep, crisscrossing the surface of Ivanhoe. For a while they thought it was just geology; striations from some strange, molten past left across the entirety of the dark, cold moon.

It's writing.
Follow-up to



CASE SUMMARY

NEW MONTEGA BAY.XII.5 - "IVANHOE"
MASS - 0.0039 M⊕ or 25.99 M⚳


IVANHOE is the largest satellite of MESORI, itself the twelfth major satellite of the star NEW MONTEGA BAY. MESORI is an ice-ball with few convenient resources and accordingly the Martian People's Council did not assign it or its satellites a high priority for exploration or investigation. This chain of reasoning seems demonstrably flawed in hindsight. First close approach was in 2656, when ice trawler DIGORY KIRKE sent transmission noting "unusual topography, especially pronounced in highlands - not necessarily of natural origin"

DIGORY KIRKE subsequently exchanged series of messages with nearby ship UNSS TULSIDAS - last message received was "have begun to sketch" followed by comms silence. UNSS TULSIDAS arrived on scene to find scattered debris, subsequently identified as DIGORY KIRKE. Wreckage demonstrated signs of tremendous shear force and abnormal deformation to head and hands of remaining crewmen, suggesting kernel drive of DIGORY KIRKE had engaged in non-uniform way.

UNSS TULSIDAS completed forensics report and transmitted in its entirety, along with topographic map, to nearest Martian settlement, NEW PALEMBANG. One hour later sent codicil to report. Codicil stated "IT IS THE KEY. WE ARE THE DOOR." UNSS TULSIDAS engaged kernel drive at 15 min after final transmission. Did not reappear.

All crew presumed dead.


DO NOT TRANSCRIBE THE SYMBOLS REPEAT DO NOT TRANSCRIBE THE SYMBOLS

View attachment 384792
Cross posting here because it fits the subject. Awesome maps @Zaffre
 
Apologies for the double post, but since I have the height map, I may as well do something with it.

I bring you: A K7 projection Mars, to scale with QBAM. With topography. And in 2 different sea levels.

I know it's a bit much to ask, but is there any chance you could also do a topographic map in Robinson projection to be more consistent with the Earth QBAM?

If you can't or don't want to I'll just use then brilliant original, though if you wouldn't mind making it it would be very helpful.
 
I know it's a bit much to ask, but is there any chance you could also do a topographic map in Robinson projection to be more consistent with the Earth QBAM?

If you can't or don't want to I'll just use then brilliant original, though if you wouldn't mind making it it would be very helpful.
QBAM is in K7.

...Well, fucked up K7, probably.
 
Does anyone know of a map of a tidally locked world where the habitable zone would be a twilight zone between a frozen night side and a sun scorched day side?
 

Hapsburg

Banned
The galaxy, with rough boundaries as-claimed, in the year 2505. A considerable increase over claimed and inhabited colonial regions and zones of control just fifty years prior, indicating an acceleration in the breadth of space colonization by all of the major interstellar powers.
2505.png
 
Here's a little something I made a few months ago and never finished or posted. I took the basemap from a post that, for the life of me, I can't find. But the credit for a lot of this goes to whoever made that. I also took some bits from other maps, mostly just sea level rise ones. Anyway, this is from my own science fiction universe where humans have mastered the art of terraforming thanks to an alien race gifting us all of their technology in the early 22nd century. This is a near-clone of Earth, with plenty of modifications.

One of the concepts in this universe is groups of people wanting to settle planets similar to their own homeland. For example, Polynesian colonists got Polynesia Prime, a world covered almost completely in water, with lots of little archipelagos and few large landmasses. That planet has a weather control system even more strict than Earth, to prevent catastrophic hurricanes.

Keeping that in mind, this planet was created at the request of several distinct groups to imitate their homelands but with a significant twist. I'll try and hit just the highlights here.

The Middle East: A new pan-Abrahamic religious movement that borrows heavily from Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Sufism. A little weird, but harmless and very friendly.

Green North Atlantic: An amalgamation of neo-Celtic and neo-Pagan groups from various planets. Both identities saw a huge revival as people went out into space and began to forge their own identities, some new, some very old. We probably wouldn't recognize a lot of the things they consider "Celtic" in the same way our images of Vikings as horn-helmeted red-haired berserkers isn't very Viking at all.

Light Blue Europe: People from various parts of the old North Atlantic Federation of Earth. They like to think they're very cosmopolitan and sophisticated. To be fair, they kind of are.

Olive Green North America/Atlantis: People from old New England. They wanted to forge a new identity, one based on the traditions of the coastal Northeast but even more centered on the ocean. This planet's oceans are teeming with marine life, so their diet is even more fish-based than 21st century New England.

Gray-Blue North America/Atlantis/Mexico: settlers from the American side of the North Atlantic Federation. Enough of them had cultural ties to the Valley of Mexico that their portion of the planet includes it. Many of them wanted to recreate a pre-Collapse version of the Old United States, one that would seem, to us, ridiculously anachronistic. They've created a cultural aesthetic from an amalgamation of 1909, the 1920s, the 50s, the early 60s, the 80s, and the 90s.

Yellow Southeast North America/Central America: I don't remember what I planned for this one. Their color is the one I use for any pan-Caribbean federation, so I think most of them were originally from there. All those barrier islands are for protection from hurricanes, since that would make an expensive weather control system pretty much unnecessary. They only need a cheaper one.

Teal-Blue in North America: Former residents of the Pacific States or their descendants. Lots more Hawaiian and SoCal than anything else. They wanted to see what life would be like if the Channel and Hawaiian Islands could support much larger populations. They also got those big islands close to Japan because why the hell not.

Yugoslavia: My guess would be people from the Balkans/Dalmatia who still want to live in their ancestral homeland. They could hang out in Sarajevo II or on the Croatian coast but have it be truly their own, not part of anything larger except the Republic.

Japan/Korea: Okay this one is fun. This is the first true homeland of the Yamato, a bizarre cultural phenomenon combining anime/otaku culture, vaporwave, Meiji-era nostalgia, samurai nerds, and the descendants of the current J-pop/K-pop fad. They're super weird.

Australia: They finally got that inland sea they always wanted.

Aotearoa: The Maori, given a lot of land and resources. With a few Anglo Zealanders thrown in. Not a completely accurate recreation, since that would be nearly impossible for ships to navigate. Most people travel by air/space in this era, but the Maori are still fans of boats.

Why Atlantis: It's awesome, and it's a great excuse to say "I live on ATLANTIS!" It also helps make up for all those extra lakes/seas

Lake Chad: Easier access to freshwater and fish for people in the Sahara/Sudan

North American Lakes: No idea, really. They just look really cool. Having more water would probably help moderate temperatures in the South, since their weather control system won't do much except keep hurricanes below Cat 3.

Spratly Island: Looks cool, more land, neato place to live.

Japanese Islands: Helps the whole non-Earth, anime-feel.

Salton Bay/Lake Fresno: Oh man, if the Central Valley had a big lake? Come on. And a big bay is better than a stinking salty pond full of dead fish. So is just about anything.

Galapagos: Bigger to fit more potential settlers.

Bermuda: Same.

Please tell me what you think, even if you think this is dumb. I hope you like it.
 

Attachments

  • Blank Worlda Map- All That Stuff From My Version of the Oneshot Civil War.png
    Blank Worlda Map- All That Stuff From My Version of the Oneshot Civil War.png
    88.8 KB · Views: 1,291
Top