Solar Systems and Galaxies Ideas and Map Thread

[m2thet5678]

Well, I didn't see a thread like this, so I decided to make one!

Just to brainstorm map ideas and post them and check for plausibility.

I'll start. In a twin sun system, are both starts "stationary" (relative to each other), or is one rotating around the other (or does it depend on size)?

Also, does it make sense to have a large disparity in mass, like a blue and a red star? Or would one fall in to the other?

 

[Emperor Qianlong]

To answer your questions:

1. both rotate around each other.
2. it is depended on the mass of each other where the barycenter of the two is located, wether it's closer to one star or about in the center.
3. normally when binary systems form, both components have the same age. However if they have a different mass, the more massive one will live through it's life sequence faster and may become a red giant earlier, or even a white dwarf (take as an example the Procyon and Sirius systems, they're excellent.
4. Also, take a detailed look at the Russel-Hertzsprung diagram.

 

[Thande]

What EQ said.

 

[m2thet5678]

Thanks. I guess its off to the Paint(.NET)ing...

 

[euio]

I feel like posting my old Solar System map.

 

[Thande]

Good solar system map. I'll have to try making some.

 

[m2thet5678]

Yeah, it was euio's map that inspired my foray into solar-mapping, though I haven't copied his techniques yet.

I'm putting up a twin sun system base for anyone who wants to use it. PM me if you want it without glow.

The white dot is the barycenter.

 

[The Militant One]

Yeah, it was euio's map that inspired my foray into solar-mapping, though I haven't copied his techniques yet.

I'm putting up a twin sun system base for anyone who wants to use it. PM me if you want it without glow.

The white dot is the barycenter.

Wouldn't the two suns eventually collide since their orbits cross paths?

 

[m2thet5678]

They both orbit counterclockwise. Red moves a lot faster than yellow. As a result, they never meet up, and are always opposite from each other. The size on my diagram was exaggerated. Wikipedia has a good animation of this. The barycenter is staggered because of the size difference.

 

[Locke]

I feel like posting my old Solar System map.

Hey euio, thats a cool map; do you have a blank one?

 

[m2thet5678]

Check page 68 of the Blank Map Thread.

 

[Wyrmshadow]

I feel like posting my old Solar System map.

I'm very interested in knowing what program you used to create that.

 

[The Militant One]

They both orbit counterclockwise. Red moves a lot faster than yellow. As a result, they never meet up, and are always opposite from each other. The size on my diagram was exaggerated. Wikipedia has a good animation of this. The barycenter is staggered because of the size difference.

So this is what you're referring to. I think in your map, both stars should have orbiting planets around them and moons around them, a la "Firefly"

Hell, you could even have a star in the center and have planets orbit it.

 

[RCAF Brat]

So this is what you're referring to. I think in your map, both stars should have orbiting planets around them and moons around them, a la "Firefly"

That would depend on how close the two stars are to each other, as their gravity will disrupt the orbits of any planet that gets to close to one of the stars.

So if the planet is close enough to one of the stars, and the seperation between the two stars is sufficient, then the planet will exist in a stable orbit. If the two stars are close together, or if the planet has a long orbital period, then then only stable orbits will be those around the barycenter of the system, going around both stars.

The "Firefly" star system is an example of this, possibly containing both type of orbits.

 

[euio]

I'm very interested in knowing what program you used to create that.

Paint.NET.

 

[Legolas]

A minor nitpick - usually, red stars are giants (late evolutionary stage, red giant branch of the H-R diagram, somehwere in the top right of it) and are much larger than yellow ones (main sequence, such as our Sun). There are certain cases of red dwarfs, but these are much less common.

The two stars will not collide because they rotate so that the line connecting their centres will always go through the barycentre of the system.

Just as RCAF explained, two kinds of planetary orbits might exist. I would hazard a guess that the second type (planet far enough to orbit both stars rather than one of them) should be much more common.

There is a problem for potential appearance of life: the habitability zone of such a star system (i.e. the region of space where temperatures are moderate enough for liquid water to form) would be fluctuating rapidly due the orbital motion of both stars. In other words, if one star comes close to the planet in question, it will burn the planet, while when both stars are roughly the same distance away, the planet will freeze.

As for age of stars - it is true that usually they both are of similar age, however sometimes one star may "catch" another in its orbit, so it is possible, although unlikely, to have stars of significantly different ages in one system.

 

[Wyrmshadow]

Paint.NET.

Oh, so it's all hand drawn then? I thought you had some neato program that had templates like that.

 

[euio]

Oh, so it's all hand drawn then? I thought you had some neato program that had templates like that.

It's all hand drawn. You can see where I messed up the 3d look around Uranus.

 

[Guilherme Loureiro]

So if the planet is close enough to one of the stars, and the seperation between the two stars is sufficient, then the planet will exist in a stable orbit. If the two stars are close together, or if the planet has a long orbital period, then then only stable orbits will be those around the barycenter of the system, going around both stars.

IIRC, furthest stable orbit possible for celestial objects around a single star in a binary system is one-fifth of smallest distance between stars. Thus, in Alpha Centauri(smallest distance 11 AU) you can expect stable planetary orbits up to around 2 AU from each star.

 

[m2thet5678]

A minor nitpick - usually, red stars are giants (late evolutionary stage, red giant branch of the H-R diagram, somehwere in the top right of it) and are much larger than yellow ones (main sequence, such as our Sun). There are certain cases of red dwarfs, but these are much less common.

The two stars will not collide because they rotate so that the line connecting their centres will always go through the barycentre of the system.

Just as RCAF explained, two kinds of planetary orbits might exist. I would hazard a guess that the second type (planet far enough to orbit both stars rather than one of them) should be much more common.

There is a problem for potential appearance of life: the habitability zone of such a star system (i.e. the region of space where temperatures are moderate enough for liquid water to form) would be fluctuating rapidly due the orbital motion of both stars. In other words, if one star comes close to the planet in question, it will burn the planet, while when both stars are roughly the same distance away, the planet will freeze.

As for age of stars - it is true that usually they both are of similar age, however sometimes one star may "catch" another in its orbit, so it is possible, although unlikely, to have stars of significantly different ages in one system.

Hey: The yellow star is like our sun, the red one is superman's star: the one Krypton goes around.