Build your own Battlestar Galactica System
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 сер 2014
- In which I show you how to build a multiple-star system along the lines of "The 12 Colonies of Kobol" from BSG. Its a pretty meta build, as most of the info has already been covered in other videos. So, if anyone needs help/clarification leave a comment below. I'll do my best to get back to you.
Artifexian on the Interweb:
Facebook: / artifexian
Twitter: / artifexian
Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE at / artifexian
Links:
- What is a Multiple-Star System: goo.gl/XIYGMA
- How to Build a Star: goo.gl/sl64iV
- Classical Planetary System Build: goo.gl/MRONt3
- Close Binary (Tatooine) Build: goo.gl/tplpRb
- Distant Binary (Anti-Tatooine) Build: goo.gl/uKytWB
- Barycentre: goo.gl/dq8Id9
- Eccentricity: goo.gl/JtBjUu
- Max/Min Separation: goo.gl/K4bb8O - Розваги
Primo - I'm in love with your drawing style.
Secundo - I'm coding a galaxy generator in Java for fun, and your videos are going to help me out with all the calculations, so thanks a lot.
Tertio - Subbed and waiting for the next lesson! ;)
How's your progress?
I wanna see your generator
couldn't star C be greater in mass than star B so long as A+B>C+D?
This is very true!
it'd be cool if scientists discover a binary system orbiting a giant that goes supernova.
In a double binary system, it is not called A, B, C and D, it is called Aa, Ab, Ba and Bb.
True. You can see that in the Castor system
I thought the small letter was for planets in multiple star systems(so Bb would describe a planet orbiting star B of a multiple star system) and the large letter was for the star itself(so like Alpha Centauri A is a star whereas Alpha Centauri Bb is a planet).
that's what the numbers are for
Stars are A B C D etc. Planets are Ab Bb Cb etc
Another fascinating video, as usual. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for your kind words. Means a lot. Stay tuned more coming as soon as possible. :)
Awesome! I was wondering how combining P-TYPE and S-TYPE worked, so I'm really happy to see this video! 😃
Question: Would systems discovered in Space Engine count as kosher precedents?
Yes
Top notch video once again, keep it up!
Thank you, sir! Cheers for watching
I'd really like to see a visualization of how this kind of system would work, with the orbits of the various bodies and how near/far they get to one another
This is fantastic!! Amazing video good job Edgar!
Could AD < BC, and A > B > C > D at the same time?
To clear up for fellow worldbuilders.
I wanted to ask the same question
Yes, he confirmed this
Great work, this helped me build my triple star system
In a 5 star system where does the extra star go? is there multiple levels of pairings- so [[[A-B]-[C-D]] - E] ? Would this mean E basically orbits all 4? Would a 7 star system orbit like this: [[[A-B]-[C-D]] - [[E-F]-G]] ?
Yes.
Look at the Alpha Centauri system: Its a Trinary Star System where the third star (Proxima Centauri) orbiting the binary pair.
..wonder how the Lylat system from Starfox works. It seems to be a mess.
My main question is whether this could even occur in the real world, or if it would be stable long enough for life to appear on any habitable planets. I mean, at the very least such a system would be astronomically unlikely. Awesome video by the way :)
Ye so the more stars you have to less likely the system is. Although we have found planets around single stars, binary stars, 3 and 4 star systems. So ye unlikely but not impossible
+HisRoyalCarlness Plus we've only been finding exoplanets for the last half a decade or so and we've have some restrictions of how big a planet we can find so far, so in a few decades we'll be much better be able to answer the question of which configuration of stars are likely to have planets and their likely hood of habitability for Earth life.
Quick question: I am unsure if this would warrant a video in and of itself, or if it has already been mentioned in a video. As you mentioned, for a star to be habitable, it must be between 0.6 and 1.4 solar masses. If I were to want to create a three star system in which a binary system was caught in the orbit of a supergiant star (along the lines of a Red Giant), how far away would these stars have to be to remain habitable?
1:53 But then if all stars in the system are more massive than 2 solar masses, the whole system will be uninhabitable, even the habitable zone might be in the baricenter making the planet switch stars and fall back into one/escape the system
Are you talking the classic BattleStar Galactica system or the new Battlestar Galactica system? In both series, though it was never stated explicitly in the older series, all the Colonial ships had some form of hyperdrive system (jump drive in the new series), so I'm assuming this would mean the planetary systems were fairly spaced apart on the order of 4 - 5 AU distant.
what if I wanted to build a 4 star system that hosts a habitable planet but I wanted ALL 4 stars visible during the day?
I don't think that's possible
@@wynautwobbuffet956 having watched some of his other videos it's possible just HIGHLY unlikely and the world itself would be a bit strange due to the necessary albedo and green house effect to keep a comfortable and livable temperature range on the planet.
I'm guessing two stars similar to our sun would orbit each other, and the third and fouth would orbit those stars closer than your habitable planet. If that would ever work. Also, the stars orbiting would probably have to be quite small in mass ie. red dwarf or similar(?).
How to build a planetary belt around the star in a classical star system? How far away the planets from the major planets?
Is there a book a buy with all the formulas and information you include in your videos in it?
I know this is old, but stars smaller than 0.6 solar masses can probably host habitable worlds. TRAPPIST-1 is 0.0898 solar masses and yet its planets are of interest in the search for extraterrestrial life.
Hey I was wondering if you could create a supermassive star kind of like R136a1?
Question:
If you added a FIFTH star to the system, would it have an a Circumbinary orbit of the entire 4 star system, or would it act in a different manner?
ty
That's cool, but what about an AB+C+D star system? I want to be able to use this system and have my habitable planet around star D.
Could it be possible to have a planet in all 4 of the stars habitable zones? And could that system stay stable?
Hi there! Might I ask how did you come up with the acceptable range of solar mass for a star to have habitable planets? I want to read on that more.
agree. F types like Procyon are too short-lived and UV-rich to be reasonably habitable. while, in theory, red dwarves 0,3-0,6 and 0,1-0,2 solar masses could be habitable, just not good for having day - night cycles.
I would make a 7 star system with another, very distant 7 star x 7 system if there is no limitations. I would get
Can my planer orbit C? Look like Venus on the outside but life on the inside
Artifexian. I’ve been watching both yours and WASD20’s world building and mapping videos. Would be willing to critique a trinary star system I want to put my world in?
My UA-cam was showing me vids to vids about Universe Sandbox. It would be cool if someone went and made Artifexian's systems in Universe Sandbox.
Sorry, I'm not doing it. (doesn't have Universe Sandbox.)
Isn't that separation too wide? I mean,aren't they too far from each other,so the gravity of the galaxy disrupt their orbits?
Awesome as always, sir! What treat do we get next?!
I can't wait to use these in the near future.
Hey *****, glad you liked. Hmmm not sure its either going to be a video on how to apply the content of my videos in a fantasy context. Or a video on Lagrange points and how to max out a solar system. Both will happy its just a question of order.
Then I'm going to do a weekly challenge video and then we're onto building planets. :)
And im sure I'll drop in one or to vlogs along the way.
Sound good?
Sounds awesome ;)
Artifexian Can you give me a rough number on how many episodes till Exobiology
RoboKing77 Unfortunately not :( I can however say with certainty that Im going to need to be down on the terrestrial level before Exo-biology comes into it.
If your really itching to hear about exobiology and can't wait for the episode to come out. PM me on twitter/facebook or reddit and we can discuss the subject.
Twitter: twitter.com/artifexian
FB: facebook.com/artifexian
Reddit: www.reddit.com/user/artifexian
I can prob wait nice vid btw
thinking on this, i'm curious about something. so if you have binary star systems AB and CD making up a quaternary system, why can't C be greater than B as long as C is still less than A, and CD is less than AB?
you can
Does he still reply all these years later? If so, why no music in recent videos?
but how the planet orbit works in a multiple star system?
Man good job but its only completed whe you add the 12 planets and orbits. Thanks
I have trouble with placing my stars in the Universe Sandbox :(
What would happen if a two stars or two subsystems where equal in size?
+Shehab Omran This would be very unlikely to occur naturally, but it would simplify the math a bit because of the symmetry.
Question:
At the distances you have gone for between the systems, how long would an Orbit take, both of the binarry stars against each other, and of both binary systems around each other?
Look up an orbital period calculator, and for each component in the binary system use their mass and distance and for the binary components orbit of each other use the combined mass of each component and their distance.
I want to do a seven star system, but I'm having trouble figuring the 2, 2, 2, 1 layout. Can I get away with 3, 3, 1 by setting three of the stars at the barycenters and doing an "H" layout?
no, putting a star there would not be dynamically stable. in short it would only take a small nudge to break the system, same reason you don't get a planetary orbit shaped like a figure 8.
I remember drawing all kinds of star systems and I used nomenclature that first took 1 binary pair and compared the third star to the binary and then the fourth star to the ternary, etc. and it was like this:
Ternary systems:
P/P: All stars are close to each other
P/S: Like Alpha Centauri, a P type binary with the third star far away from the binary but still in orbit
S/S: All stars far apart
Quarternary systems:
P/P/P: All stars close to each other
P/P/S: a P/P ternary with the fourth star far away
P/S/P: Close double binary, this is a little different in the nomenclature than comparing the fourth star to a the ternary system. This double binary that I am talking about is what you are referring to when you say to divide stars into groups of 1-2 stars
P/S/S: a P type binary with the other 2 stars far apart. Again this is most likely a double binary with a P type binary and an S type binary but the 2 stars could not be in a binary
S/S/S All stars far apart. Either 4 individual stars, 2 individual stars and 1 S type binary or a 100% S type double binary.
etc.
I would love to know more about the less stable other kind of star systems (like one small star orbiting a much bigger star or two stars orbiting each other with a smaller star in the center), I know they're extremely unstable but that's the fun in it
That is our nearest niebhor
Sireesha Eluri What do you mean?
Give the Firefly series a try, NO FTL but had lots of habital planets in a good spread
Firefly system is extremely unstable and probably impossible
I know this video is old, but a very pressing question occurred to me. A three star system in which twin stars (A & B) sit in the center and a smaller (though not by much) star (C) orbits them.
With this hypothetical configuration, would a habitable planet orbiting star C be possible? Likely I can take or leave, and a gas giant with habitable moons is also acceptable. I just really like the idea of a system within a system.
I know this comment is old but, what you just described is our nearest neighbour, Alpha Centauri. Alpha Centauri A and B orbit eachother, while Alpha Centauri C (commonly known as Proxima Centauri) orbits them, and as I remember a planet was found orbiting Proxima Centauri within its habitable zone, so its very possible. Though the C star shouldn't be too small, preferably a K or G type star. Since Proxima Centauri is pretty small (an M type red dwarf), the planet orbits the star with one side of it facing the star at all times, which is pretty bad for habitability.
Would it be possible to have a planet that is tossed back and forth be tween the two systems?
You would have a REALLY unstable orbit due to the constantly changing gravitational forces between the orbiting stars. Eventually--barring any miracle of orbital resonance, the planet would either finally find a stable orbit around one or both stars (depending on how far away they are), wind up slamming into a star (or perhaps another planet), or most likely get tossed out of the system altogether.
thx
could you create a habitable world beyond the frost line
+Patty Davidson yeah, Europa might be habitable and thats in our solar system
+Jackson “KunomiGamer” Walters Add Titan to that list.
Volcanic activity is a useful tool for that.
likely need Alot of green house gases and internal heat.
3 of the 5 habitable worlds that is not Earth is beyond the frost line.
Would it be possible to have a stable pentuple system including a close binary system AB, a distant binary system CD and a fifth, distant single star system orbiting the double binary system in a large, minimally elliptical orbit, with systems AB, C, D and E all being habitable, and would it be possible (in any system whatsoever, not necessarily one of these) to have multiple habitable planets per system, or even a habitable Earth- to Mars-sized moon orbiting a large rocky planet or semi-hot gas giant? Or am I being a bit too ambitious here? I haven't started working out the maths yet but I just want to know if there's any point in me trying. Also 7 is the logical upper limit to the number of stars you should use in a system as it's the highest multiplicity that we know exists, and we only know of 2 of them.
It depends on the math
Would a system with three stars be possible? Two stars more or less the size of our sun orbiting very close to each other with a small red dwarf orbiting the two main stars as close as possible. Then make a jupiter class planet in the habitable zone with habitable moons!
Wouldn't the habitable zone be wider and further away than ours?
yup. the luminosities kind of add up, just not completely lumin. A + lumin. B = lumin. AB, but maybe lumin. AB - 10-30%
Ok, so I didn't understand this at all.
It would be helpful it you went through what the Battlestar Galactica system WAS before hand. I've googled it and it was quite confusing, but as I understand all four stars have their own systems? It's confusing.
It would also be quite helpful if you could go through the habitable planets of each system; I've seen the other vids and what I mean is visually showing a map of YOUR system and the BG system, so we can see the habitabliity of each one.
Love your vids though sorry not being critical!
Not really related to BSG, but how plausible does this trinary system sound?
The center of the system has two orange dwarves. On the outskirts of the system, there is a *red dwarf. A tidaly-locked habitable planet orbits the red dwarf (14-day revolutions), with one side being unbearably hot and the other being habitable due to being warmed by the combined heat of the orange dwarves. The average temperature on that side is a bit colder than earth, maybe about the temperature of ice Age south America.
*For the pourposes of this question, ignore the fact that the solar wind would strip away a planet's atmosphere. I'm trying to find a way around that.
I don't think the red dwarf could orbit the pair at such a small distance if you want the pair's luminosity to have that effect, or the system wouldn't last very long
what makes a star primary and secondary?
The mass. The primary is always more massive than the secondary star
I mean in a system with two stars he says to make sure the primary star has more or equal mass compared to the secondary star. but logically, this is always the case one star is always more massive than the other or equal to it. I meant is there any OTHER difference?
The Scienceverse no
I kept thinking he named the system after Bhutan, because I can’t hear the aspiration in the real name, but then I read “Booton” and I was disappointed.
Couldn't you just have one supermassive Star in the middle with the other three orbiting it like planets?
not if you want long-lived system with life, reason: Big guys don't like bacteria on themselves, and commit suicide after a few million years. BANG! end of big star's life, and end of system.
what about a firefly style multiple star system.
The firefly system is ridiculously implausible. There's just way to much happening in it to be realistic. That said people have tried to make sense of it...
vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/firefly/images/0/0e/The_verse_in_numbers_v11.pdf/revision/latest?cb=20110526062742
thank you
You're welcome son of Norbert! :)
Artifexian
My understanding is that they justify the Firefly verse working because their technology allows for a high degree of control over gravity, so they can manipulate planetary and solar bodies and fine tune them. Yeah, it's quite a stretch, but I like the simplicity of requiring the suspension of disbelief in only one piece of technology that explains their terraforming, ship drives, shielding, artificial gravity, etc.
In any case, an excellent video.
I did not know that! It's a massive stretch but i suppose the end can sometimes justify the means. Thanks for watching Gothnog glad you enjoyed. :)
I need all those formulas in paper
this guy: let's not make things happen that are too unlikely
also this guy: makes four-star system with four goldilocks planets with four habitable planets.
Awesome. Could you do a video about the planets within the BSG system?
Some of these worlds orbit on the L4 and L5 lagrange of a gas giant.
There are also bynari planets and moons with rings.
galactica.fandom.com/wiki/Cyrannus_star_system?file=Epic-map-of-battlestar-galactica-8217-s-12-colonies_1.jpg
What about a group of stars orbiting a black hole? :O
That's fine... just treat it like a massive inhospitable star.
+Smoates Interstellar did that. Or rather, they had at least one planet orbit a supermassive black hole directly (it received light from the black hole's accretion disc), and two other planets whose parent bodies weren't specified. It's pretty awesome, but there are a few challenges to consider.
Was your star always a companion of the black hole, or is it a captured body? If they're siblings, there's a good chance your planet would have been sterilized by the supernova that created the black hole; if it was captured, it will likely have a highly eccentric and/or inclined orbit, which may or may not be a problem depending on what else is in the system.
If the black hole is old and massive enough, it will likely have lots of other objects also in orbit around it, some with wild orbits, increasing the potential risk of collision or ejection.
The accretion disc in Interstellar allowed the black hole to act like a nice surrogate Sun, but in reality the accretion discs around black holes also glow brightly in X-rays, potentially posing a radiation hazard.
how big are white stars
White DWARF stars are about the size of earth while White MAIN-SEQUENCE stars are bigger than the sun
White dwarfs: 3-0.75 Earth radii. A stars: 2.25-1.3 Sun radii. F stars: 1.3-1.05 Sun radii.
+Thomas stampe Brock Oh thx, I wanted a better aproximate than mine 😅👍
+Thomas stampe Brock not dwarfs! the really big ones
+seamus finnerty White supergiants? 250 - 500 Sun radii I think.
I hate to tell you this Battlestar Galactica only had one star in its primary system and it had 12 planets orbiting it all 12 of which were habitable each one named after a different Zoological sign
Unless you're referring to that Abomination that came out in the 2000s
Please tell me I can have a planet, just one, in a quintuple star system!
Also, how will the math work if it is a quintuple system?
Like explained in the video, no? With two pairs and a loner star. Do you mean one habitable planet or one planet period? I guess you could do the later if you fill the orbits with planetoids and a few belts
Where the fuck is the Edgar
You could have named it the Bootyton system.
So many nots!! Why can't you just be straightforward and tell us what to actually do instead of what we shouldn't...
i dont think the planets will have life