Page 72 of 118

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 19 Aug 2018 02:42
SpaceEngineer is probably the most capable of answering this, if he has the time.

For my own part I don't really know.  I would guess that since SpaceEngineer largely developed his own code, and references more recent publications and data on exoplanets and solar system formation, that they would be fairly dissimilar.

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 27 Aug 2018 13:47
He answered my PM. He said that he is aware of Dole`s work, agreed that it is outdated, but interesting and that SE uses something akin to statistic random sampling for its algorithms.

It was cool to talk to him.

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 30 Aug 2018 13:50
I have a question :
A planet or a moon can have permanent day (never night) in all surface ?
I test with a system with 4 stars (2 binaries) and put around the star BA.
Barycenter A and B is related with Period_A = Period_B/2
Period_AA = Period_AB = Period_BA = Period_BB = 0.375*Period_B
But isn’t succes.
Also if is realist/possible because we don’t find all the Universe so maybe a very small probability ?
Edit : The system in question.
Permanent Day.pak

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 31 Aug 2018 02:17
Many super-Earth sized planets we have found outside of the Solar system are speculated to contain a lot of water. This implies a ~100 kilometers deep ocean bottomed by high pressure ice. I remember reading somewhere, that the ocean would be mineral-poor, lowering the chance of life arising there.

Question, assuming that the planet has already cooled down, internally differentiated and formed the pressured ice layer(s): Would meteorites, comets and asteroids provide enough organic and other necessary elements to enrich the waters enough for life to evolve?

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 01 Sep 2018 02:12
An'shur wrote:
Question, assuming that the planet has already cooled down, internally differentiated and formed the pressured ice layer(s): Would meteorites, comets and asteroids provide enough organic and other necessary elements to enrich the waters enough for life to evolve?

Yes, assuming of course the principle source of water on planets is from comets and asteroids. There is some scientific contention around this idea, and although most theories are technically valid; with comets releasing some water as they collide with the surface, they do not do so in sufficient quantities to cover the surface as we see on, for example, Earth.  Might that happen in outer-solar-system type environments around other stars? Perhaps so. However, one of the main source of water on almost all terrestrial planets in our solar-system is from colliding with carbonaceous Asteroids and planetismals that formed roughly where our asteroid belt is. These had rich deposits of hydrogen isotopes deuterium and protium as well as Aluminum isotropes that can form water via decay. Volcanism and hydrate-mineral dehydration on Earth are also suspects for water-making.

The reason why I brought up the founding of water on Earth in answer to this question is because none of these processes as described above are lacking in organic materials, and unless the superterrestrial worlds have a serious tectonic activity deficiency (which is possible, there are many scientific papers debating the viability of tectonics and crust-dynamics on super-earths, as I trust you are aware, if not, this and this are good starts) or have oceans simply too deep (or a planetary mass too great for any viable boundary between liquid and gas), conditions conducive to abiogenesis should be prevalent sooner or later (bear in mind, life can be a slow process, although on Earth it seems to have gained a foothold quite fast).

That being said, you seem to specify in your question ice layers, which may be an issue, and their widespread formation might imply that the planet indeed has too great a mass and too deep of an ocean to have much tectonic activity and thus support abiogenesis. Panspermia by asteroid or dust might be an option, but of course we have no proof that such a method even works. It might if a smaller terrestrial planet further inside the solar-system already spawned life and some of it got up into the exosphere somehow, then transferred by debris to the ocean-world.

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 01 Sep 2018 10:33
Quarior wrote:
Source of the post I have a question :
A planet or a moon can have permanent day (never night) in all surface ?

I do not know if such a system is possible, but if both pairs of stars use the same barycenter, it would have to work.

One side is not so bright because the illuminating star is very far away.

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 01 Sep 2018 12:05
JackDole wrote:
Quarior wrote:
Source of the post I have a question :
A planet or a moon can have permanent day (never night) in all surface ?

I do not know if such a system is possible, but if both pairs of stars use the same barycenter, it would have to work.
scr00044.jpg
scr00043.jpg
One side is not so bright because the illuminating star is very far away.

Is difficult to say if is realist but for me, is strange so I put 2 barycenter orbit the mainly barycenter and also, do you accelerate the time because for me in first, is nice but when I go to the future (and I think also the past), you have a night side.
Also I don't specific if is a life, but is a bonus if you can .
Permyone system

Permyone BA 1

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 01 Sep 2018 15:46
JackDole wrote:
Source of the post I do not know if such a system is possible, but if both pairs of stars use the same barycenter, it would have to work.

This particular configuration would be highly unstable and not occur in nature.  Two close pairs of stars orbiting a common center like in Quarior's image could be stable, but fail to provide total illumination.

I can't think of a stable system which would guarantee 100% illumination all the time, but it could be more or less approachable by adding in more stars. This reminds me a lot of the premise for the novel Nightfall, where inhabitants of a world with many suns are so used to perpetual daylight, that they are terrified to encounter a moment when all the suns happen to set.

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 01 Sep 2018 16:33
Watsisname wrote:
I can't think of a stable system which would guarantee 100% illumination all the time,

I know you are talking about suns providing illumination here, but a large moon (or moons, or a nearby gas-giant) with a high albedo could provide quite a bit of light for a planet's nightside, at least on most nights. Also a large planetary ring could probably shine with enough intensity for partial illumination, as we can see on Saturn (although I think the light we see here may have more complex origins, like scattering):

Also, if this planet is in a region of the galaxy that has a high star density (in the core, in a globular-cluster or even in the midst of a open cluster), those nearby stars could shed quite a bit of light on the ground, at least equivalent to the full moon. Check out some planets in globular clusters in SE to see what I mean.

But yeah, multiple-star systems aren't terribly stable. I think there is some evidence for planets orbiting triple-star systems (but debated, remember HD 131399Ab?) but that may be the extent of long-term solar-system stability.

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 02 Sep 2018 01:21
Watsisname wrote:
Source of the post This reminds me a lot of the premise for the novel Nightfall, where inhabitants of a world with many suns are so used to perpetual daylight, that they are terrified to encounter a moment when all the suns happen to set.

There were six, if I'm not mistaken. But even with six stars, it's not always day on a planet.
Anyway, I do not succeed. By the way also not with my octuple system.

The only system that comes close is the system with the common barycenter. But even then, there is occasionally a brief moment when all four suns are below the horizon.

And if the planet has a moon, there are often solar eclipses.

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 02 Sep 2018 01:31
So for now the only solution I find is a irrealist system where the planet created near the center of barycenter where orbit 2 stars but is unstable.
And I also put a moon, for eclipse, I negliged but in the night side for the moment, is iluminated.
But I think isn't possible to put a moon orbit the planet with the same period of the planet period because is outside the sphere of influence.
Or maybe anothers moons ?

PS : If you find a solution, thank to share the system .

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 02 Sep 2018 01:58
Quarior, did you see my Pitch Black Addon? On the planet, it only gets dark when the two gas giants obscure the suns. Of course, the system is also completely unrealistic.

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 02 Sep 2018 02:11
JackDole wrote:
Quarior, did you see my Pitch Black Addon? On the planet, it only gets dark when the two gas giants obscure the suns. Of course, the system is also completely unrealistic.

Yes, I already look your system and download (also nice the gas giant with multiple ring) so I think is the only solution (if we delete gas giant).
Also, I test with 8 moons but without succes same with aldebo of 1 (unrealist I think ).
Permyone BA 1 and his moons

Permanent Day.pak
The system file

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 02 Sep 2018 09:45
JackDole wrote:
Source of the post Of course, the system is also completely unrealistic.

Yes, the double rings hint that.  But I actually liked the idea (perpetual day except for eclipses).

### Science and Astronomy Questions

Posted: 02 Sep 2018 15:26
midtskogen wrote:
Source of the post Yes, the double rings hint that.

The planet has three rings!