![]() ![]() Current models show the protoplanetary disk may have beeneffected enough to prevent planeary formation in the habitable zone. Not to mention that it does not account for the formation of the solar system, which is far more complex. The Hill Sphere is misleading, since the SOIs can overlap. Ow just noticed you are mixing two different concepts the habitable zone, the region where you can find liquid water on a planets surface, that green region of kepler 47.Īnd the region of orbital stability (hill sphere) of a body where satellites could orbit without interference from another body. The region of stability is defined by the hill sphere ( ) around each star, you can calculate that yourself, but here is an image to help you view this.īlack = orbit of B as seen from the surface of A.ĭotted region is the hill sphere of each star, distances are in AU. I was creating my own simulation using another software recently and used alfa centauri as control for my model. thousands of AU), I don't see any reason why each one of them couldn't have a fairly normal solar system of its own.įirst off, Universe sandbox 2 is fairly inaccurate over longer periods of time and I really wish it wasn't. ![]() If you had a different binary system, where the stars are very far apart from each other (e.g. That's quite aside from the problem of forming the planet from a protoplanetary disk in the first place, as points out. I don't know how big it would be, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's smaller than the inner radius of the habitable zone- in other words, it may be that for a planet to have a stable orbit around Alpha Centauri A or B, it might have to be orbiting so close to its star that it would be too hot to be habitable. The problem with the Alpha Centauri A/B system is that the stars are relatively close together, which means that the "stability zone" around each star would be fairly small. The closer the two stars are, the tighter the orbit of a planet would have to be around one of them in order to have a long-term stable orbit. ![]() if the stars are far enough apart from each other. There's no reason a planet couldn't be stable in a binary star system. Geeze you pay 25$ for a program and it can't even do an elliptical binary, rip. There is stability and choas.īecause the stars are so similar in size you have to examine then in the double elliptical. Now, I would've simulated it longer, but I need to go somewhere soon, so I can't, anyway, about binary's in general, how stable would various binary systems be?Īlso, here's an example of a real life Tatoonie )The view would be much cooler as there's not only 2 stars, but there's also a gas giant in the sky!)īut for life, which adapt to the circumstances in which they live, the question is how stable are the surface temperatures. So, I was screwing around in Universe Sandbox 2, after a couple of people were discussing the stability of habitable zones around planets around Alpha Centauri, so I placed down Alpha Centauri A/B, and separated them at a distance of 11.2 AU )I couldn't get the 11.2 by 35 something AU thing), and over the course of almost 2,000 years I stimulated Alpha Centauri Bb around both stars, around Alpha Cen B, the planet was flung out, but around Alpha Cen A, it was pretty stable, then I decided to put a planet 4 AU from both stars, Alpha Cen B had its planet slung out, but around Alpha Cen A, again, it was stable. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |