Fictional Exoplanet creation

Linguofreak

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2008
Messages
4,203
Reaction score
83
Points
73
Location
Dallas, TX
Those would be most conveniently specified as 'at L4 (or L5)' and placed using a Lagrange point finder (surprise, I have one of those as well...)

I'm interested in things like the effect of librational dynamics on climate, so I'm interested in arbitrary orbits in the vicinity of the L4/L5 point (thus the word approximately in my previous post).

I've never heard that you can have planets developing there though... it seems kinda hard to accumulate enough mass, usually it's just debris that's been captured

The literature seems to be undecided on whether Trojan planets can actually form (highly sensitive to modeling assumptions and things like grid resolution, cartesian vs. cylindrical coordinates, etc) and fairly confident that they can remain stable over gigayear timescales once formed or captured. The possibility is taken seriously enough that empirical searches are being performed.

Meanwhile, the giant impactor that whacked Earth to form the moon is believed to have formed as a Trojan and been perturbed into a collision with Earth by Jupiter and/or Venus (in that case it wasn't stable for gigayears).

Those you already asked and I answered - they're interesting and can be done.

(In fact, you can cheat a bit and specify a 'star' with the temperature and luminosity of a gas giant, let that orbit your companion star and you get the results with the existing code and interface)

But temperature and luminosity for a gas giant are dependent on climate, and different on the day vs. night side. Depending on if and at what lattitudes water clouds form, albedo can be markedly different (if you're too warm for clouds, you end up with a dark blue color from Raleigh scattering). So being able to model them as planets will be useful.

I guess for me the point is - of course there's all sorts of weird situations where orbital dynamics is interesting. But most of these cases would be rare and exotic. Whereas what is a major influence and not rare at all is... atmosphere. So I'm actually more interested in spending my time with improving the atmosphere simulation and see whether one can tease some gross weather patterns out for instance (like the (non)-existence of a jet stream) than coding an interface for arbitrarily weird situations (also with extending the solver to 3d - the issue isn't so much the solver, 3d is easy there, the issue is interface and analysis tools, they become much more complicated and messy without providing much more insight - most systems would be near-planar problems..)

The jury is still out on Trojan configurations, and the fact that so many hot jupiters show up suggests that gas giants migrate aggressively, which means we can anticipate a fair number of terrestrial planets captured into resonances. Resonant configurations will tend to pump up eccentricity, which will affect climate, and the Kozai mechanism will then tend to drive up inclination and drive the longitude of periapsis to +/- 90 degrees, which will then be vital to keeping the resonance stable if eccentricity gets high enough for the orbit of the terrestrial planet to approach or cross that of the gas giant. Even in the Solar system, the 2/3 resonance with Neptune defines the Plutinos, and a significant fraction of them have significant eccentricities and inclinations.

And then there's all the red dwarfs with multi-planet resonance chains, and the solar system has the Galilean moons in their 1:2:4 chain, and not just any 1:2:4 arrangement will work, it depends on particular phase relationships for stability.

Point being, I'm not sure that interesting configurations that depend on orbital phases or non-planarity are as rare as you think. And even for the circular, non-resonant, near-planar case, inclinations of less than a degree are sufficient to cause significant seasonal changes in binary-star eclipses, and for moons, to give a worked example, the angular diameter of Jupiter is about 13 degrees at 2 light seconds (a bit less than the orbit of Europa). A coplanar eclipse in this configuration can be expected to last roughly 1/27th of the orbit, which works out to about an extra 2 hours and 30 minutes of darkness in a 70 hour day for the planet-facing side of the moon (assuming that the planet has the mass of Jupiter and the moon is tidally locked), or an hour of darkness in a 27-hour day, (for a more massive planet of the same radius*). In such a configuration, an inclination of five degrees to the ecliptic would be sufficient to cause significant variation in the length of eclipses with the seasons.

*We can assume that the radius is about equal to Jupiter because a planet twice as massive as Jupiter is only very slightly larger, and 2 Jupiter masses of hydrogen has the largest radius that any object can have without significant support from thermal pressure, so the smallest red dwarves are actually slightly smaller than Jupiter, and then get larger with more mass as heat from fusion puffs them up.
 

Thorsten

Active member
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
775
Reaction score
37
Points
28
Point being, I'm not sure that interesting configurations that depend on orbital phases or non-planarity are as rare as you think.

It's charming in a way, but...

Are you by any chance confusing my hobby with an NSF grant review?

I don't propose to provide a tool to simulate 'most' 'interesting' exoplanets (as for 'most', since finding them is significantly biased by the finding methods which prefer large and heavy objects, we don't really know how 'most' look like, as for 'interesting', different people are interested in different things - some may search for edge cases like Helliconia because the orbital dynamics/climate interaction is really interesting, others may find open water more interesting, yet others water under ice layers,...).

I'm not doing an academic project, I'm not getting academic funding or any academic credits for it, so what would be of relevance in academia doesn't really apply here. Apart from being a toy for me, I suppose this could be illustrative for school or study introductory projects and science-minded SciFi writers - certainly none of these groups needs an exhaustive treatment of Lagrange point objects and their climate or cares much in particular how common the different arrangements in the universe really are.

I've licensed it under GPL, which means that you get full access to the code and full rights to use it (sell the program even...) - if you're interested in a particular application that's not covered, you can add a particular set-up to the solver - that's usually less than 30 lines and run that.

A coplanar eclipse in this configuration can be expected to last roughly 1/27th of the orbit, which works out to about an extra 2 hours and 30 minutes of darkness in a 70 hour day for the planet-facing side of the moon (assuming that the planet has the mass of Jupiter and the moon is tidally locked), or an hour of darkness in a 27-hour day, (for a more massive planet of the same radius*). In such a configuration, an inclination of five degrees to the ecliptic would be sufficient to cause significant variation in the length of eclipses with the seasons.

Again, I think you're kidding yourself as to the relative importance of that when you compare to something as simple as cloud formation on the planet (that's currently not at all covered by the atmosphere code).

Clouds and atmosphere make the difference between a scaldingly-hot Venus and the high-albedo iceball that could be in the same orbit - but isn't.

The eclipse example is a bit forced (three of Jupiter's Galilean moons actually orbit slower than 70 hour orbit, and even a day-long stellar eclipse in the simulation isn't really felt 24 hours later any more), can be understood by comparing a run with and without eclipse finder without a 3d framework and basically is a correction to a situation without eclipss - an atmosphere usually is not a correction to the situation without atmosphere, it really is a lot different.
 
Last edited:

Thorsten

Active member
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
775
Reaction score
37
Points
28
I'm happy to announce the version 0.3 which now includes support for some of the issues we had discussed. In particular, it is now possible to set up the simulation of gas giant moons - here is an example of temperatures on Io

world10_io.png

This includes the (optional) effect of eclipses and reflected and IR radiation from the planet (which both are, as I predicted, pretty small).

Also there is now support for writing time series of observables and to avoid lengthy orbital computations, also for saving and resuming orbital states.

Here is an example of sun elevation angle on Mercury for different longitudes:

world12_mercury.png

Download and tutorials still here.
 
Top