Build your own Anti-Tatooine (S-type Planetary Systems)

[@Ceereeal]

1:51 I’m pretty sure both stars must have the same eccentricity, or at least similar. Could be wrong, though. Also this video is 9 years old and I know artifexian has improved a whole lot since then lol

[@gaelicpatriot3604]

He’s implying the eccentricity of each of the stars with respect to the barycentre, so the stars can have different eccentricities in their orbits

[@Brodie39]

Hello Artifexian! I found you through BiDiPi, and love your work. As a physics grad I could probably derive all the equations you're using, but never thought to apply them to building a fictional solar system. Unfortunately, I have to inform you that you are, once again, wrong on the internet (see 2:00). In this video you picked an average separation of 383 AU, but then used that number as R in the equations (1+e)*R and (1-e)*R. You should have used each star's separation from the barycentre, as you correctly did in the P-type video. The big tip-off here was that the minimum separation you calculated was larger than the average separation! The real minimum separation should be 207.9 AU. Luckily, this gives an inner limit on the forbidden zone of 69.3 AU, which still leaves your system habitable! Alternatively, you could give up on being sexy and set the average separation to 776 AU. This would return the minimum separation to 421.3 AU (but change the maximum slightly to 1,130.9 AU). Keep up the great work! I look forward to working my way through the rest of your videos.

[@Artifexian]

Dang it! You are right. This totally slipped through the net. May I refer to your comment in a future corrections video, need to make sure people are aware of this. Thanks a million for pointing this out. And Brodie9, I shall never give up being sexy...NEVER :P

[@Brodie39]

Yeah, you can refer to my comment. I'd also suggest that you put put something in the description above the links - either move your edits there or give a note that you have edits lower down. Ideally so that at least part of it would show up in the "show less" version of the description. I say this because when I see a couple lines of text followed by a block of links, I usually ignore the rest of the description (unless I go in to specifically click one of the links).

[@martijnbouman8874]

+Brodie9 Hello Brodie9. Since you are a physics grad, I thought you might know the following (:P): The planets orbiting a star usually roughly lie in a disk. In binary systems, do the stars also tend to lie in the same disk? And is there a difference between P- and S-type planetary systems here? Thanks in advance. It will be important for how inhabitants of planets will perceive the other star.

[@CarterBartram]

+Martijn Bouman As a physics undergrad, my intuition is that the orbits of all of the bodies in the system will tend towards a single disk. I cannot think of any S-type binaries that were discovered with planets out of plane with the orbit of their stars. That said, it is certainly possible for a system like that to capture a rogue planet or two that could then orbit out of the plane... you would just have to worry about interplanetary collisions then. Sorry for the rambling, hope this helps.

[@martijnbouman8874]

Carter Bartram Thank you for your answer. I am a physics undergrad, too, but my intuition was that the orbits in an S-system wouldn't necessarily lie in the same plane. :p I thought that because I felt there were not enough collisions between both star systems in the S-system to have gained the same orientation for their orbits. Of course, I was not sure, and that's why I asked. ''I cannot think of any S-type binaries that were discovered with planets out of plane with the orbit of their stars.'' If this is true, then my intuition is wrong, of course. You sound like you know a few S-systems and their orbits. How do you know them?

[@Ceereeal]

Also I love the concept of an S-type star system. Having an entire second solar system to explore super close (relatively) to the main habitable planet is a fun thought, and with sufficient enough technology spacecraft could be sent over to do research in as little as a few decades or even years.

[@Firelucid]

How much time do these s-type systems take to complete a cycle? Would the planets orbiting the first star have problems relating tidal waves, heat, etc?

[@ysgramornorris2452]

0:35 It seems the inequality symbol is drawn backwards. It contradicts with what you're saying: that the secondary star must be less massive than the primary. Anyway, this configuration for a star system is quite inspiring. Could the secondary star be visible in the night sky of a planet orbiting the primary? By "visible", I mean comparatively brighter than Earth's full moon. What do you think, would it be plausible?

[@yurikateivass]

I think that in at least 1/3 of the year, the planets between both stars have a 24/7 day. Being illuminated from both sides

[@xtraviation]

99% World building 1% "i like to get sexy"

[@catsjacinto]

Hello, Edgar, how are you? Firstly, I must tell you that English is not my first language (I'm Portuguese), so I'm sorry for any mistakes that you may find in here. Secondly, I would like to thank you, as a wannabe science-fantasy writer, for this channel. It helps quite a LOT! So, yeah... thanks. That said, I have a question for you (it's ok if you can't answer them, I'll still love your work): - Are you thinking of doing a video about planets that host two moons? What would the "consequences" of such a system be, in terms of the nights/moonlight, calendar issues, tides, etc? Would it be a habitable planet? How would tidal locking influence this kind of system? Thank you for your time and patience. (there used to be Tatooine related questions in here, but I gave up on that idea)

[@StilvurBee]

like Nirn? you'll probably get cat-people worshipping them

[@АндрейОнищенко-з8х]

I LOVE your way of presentation! I love the graphics, I love the info, I love the humor! Those series are golden! Thank you very much for your great work! You are very talented!

[@Vincenturious]

I've been wondering whether or not the incoming light of the A star would alter the habitable zone around the B star, but then I searched the semi major axis of Pluto, which is about 39 AU, and on Pluto the Sun is little more than one of the faint stars, even though it is the brightest, that's changes the luminosity over the year the most. Having a star like that, would be about the main difference the people living on these planets would experience looking on the night sky compared to ours. Well, given they're not in some nebulae or what not. Interesting vid! :)

[@user-roninwolf1981]

+Vincenturious They've theorized this sort of night sky on a hypothetical inhabited world on either Rigil Kentaurus A or B. On a hypothetical Alpha Centauri A habitable planet, Alpha Centauri B would be a very bright star in the night sky, given the fact that Alpha Centauri A is more massive and more luminous than Alpha Centauri B. A hypothetical inhabited planet on Alpha Centauri B, the planet would be just a tad bit closer to its parent star (Alpha Centauri B is a K type slightly smaller than the sun while Alpha Centauri A is a G type with a slight bit more mass than the sun). Alpha Centauri A would be an insanely bright star in the night sky that the light would be comparable to that of a total solar eclipse.

[@kie927]

If this is true i need to start coming up with equations and fast

[@christosgiannopoulos828]

Can you have a binary star system with planets orbiting each star and planets orbiting both of them ?

[@airmanon7213]

-So how does one calculate the Forbidden Zone(s) if we're aiming for something that combines the P-type and S-Type systems?- Edit: nevermind, there's a video on it.

[@kalez238]

You continue to be awesome, sir! Keep it up!

[@Hellcleaner13]

How did you get the separation limits? They should be based on the stats mass and luminosity.

[@LuizCarlosRiosAbreu]

Given that the distance between both habitable zones is measurable in light days rather than light years, it seems that it would be possible for 2 type 1 civilizations that each evolved in one of the home planets and both just a little more advanced than our own to come in contact.

[@PixelOverload]

Wouldn't there not actually be real habitable or frost zones do to the close proximity to another star mucking with day/night cycles and the luminosity in the outer reaches?

[@QazwerDave]

How long between the times when the stars are at minimum distance apart and till this happens again ?! How would one calculate that ?!

[@thefatecontrol]

Well I know this is an older video but it was very helpful to me. I was trying to find a way to have a solar system with two habital planets. I needed to do an s-type solar system. So in effect its two solar systems orbiting each other, one of magic the other of science. And I was thinking that I could just have two planets orbiting the sun in the same zone but across from each other, the other option was two with in the habital zone. But the duplicated solar system is an even better idea, as one sun can be effected more strongly by magic, the other by science.

[@546djv]

Awesome viideo!! I was reading somewhere that a planet can be stable if it orbits (either star) less than 1/5 the distance between the two stars. How awesome it would be that for half the year, there is no real nights.

[@marcosmarolato5760]

I didn't get how you reached the 421.3 and 1110.7 numbers... i feel stupid lol (like, i thought the 383 number was the distance between the stars!)

[@daniel_rossy_explica]

Me neither, and I don't know what I'm doing wrong.

[@tarkyrakalpyren37]

This was really helpful! Thank you for all your great work :)

[@water594]

What if you were to have a system where the forbidden zone enters the planetary system? Would this create effects like whacky seasons or could you even set it up so a planet was tossed between both stars?

[@landonrivers]

I'd like to do this, but I feel like this model only works if the suns keep some min distance between each other and orbit at the same speed

[@ImperialDrylander]

the minimum seperation is greater than the average, therefore, 383 is not the average

[@Zeuseus6609]

I think he used the average separation instead of the max distance from each star to the barycentre (which is what he used in the previous video)

[@ImperialDrylander]

@@Zeuseus6609 Fair Point

[@deltainfinium869]

Is it possible to have a very small star orbiting a much more massive star/stars as if its a planet? IE, A M-type star orbiting an A type star at a distance where it is in or near the habitable zone? If this isn't possible, could it be made possible by replacing the A type star with a P-type binary of 2 A type stars (to push the habitable zone farther out without ruining the stars lifetime)? What would you suggest the minimum mass for this central star/binary stars to sum too in order to make this a plausible arrangement?

[@siyacer]

Yes, but it would be more of a binary system.

[@TlalocTemporal]

Both of those things are possible. I don't know how plausible an M-Dwarf orbiting a B+ star is (the M-Dwarf would be all-but-invisible, so we've never seen it), but large stars often form complex star clusters. For example, the Pleiades are a cluster of 13 B-Type stars (and a thousand smaller objects) that formed 100 million years ago, and will probably disperse in 250 million years more. About 57% of these objects are already binary pairs, so any pairing from B to a brown dwarf is possible as a binary pair, just in one of our closest star clusters. As for the stability of orbits around the stars, I did some math for a binary system of a 3.3Msol B8 blue star with a 0.35Msol M2 Star orbiting it in a circular orbit at 10AU. The M star is still a full tenth of the mass of the B star, so we can't just treat it like another planet. I find the barycentre to be 0.95AU from the B star, Makes sense so far. The Habitable Zone for the B star is 9.1-13.7AU, right where I placed the M star. The Habitable Zone for the M star is just 0.11-0.13AU, barely noticeable. The Inner Stability Limit for the system is 40AU; no habitable planets orbiting both stars. The Outer Stability Limit is 2AU; too close for a B orbit, but just cozy for an M orbit. I find this slap-dash system to be plausible. To double check I went to ( astro.twam.info/hz/ minus the space) and plugged in my numbers. It doesn't seem to like temperatures over 11,000K, so I'm substituting 10,000K for our B star, and leaving everything else. The plot tells me my stability assumptions were correct (even though it puts the inner limit at only 20AU, perhaps because the secondary star is so small), and the habitability is very nice with the entirety of the M star's orbit in the centre of the habitable zone, *if* we use Kasting et al. 1993 like Artifexian uses. If we use a more modern habitability model (Kopparapu et al. 2014), we see 10AU is a little close. (I personally think the habitable zone extends much closer, as a few papers have suggested, especially with desert planets, but use whatever numbers you want.) **TL;DR,** You can plausibly set up just about any combo of objects in a binary configuration you want, and can do habitable planets in P-type or S-Type configurations, though not at the same time.

[@zorcor]

One the Tatooine video i asked what it would be like for a tri-star system in the style. Well is it possible in this type of system? It might be a epic concept to explore.

[@enkiimuto1041]

Anyone here wondering if you can make a binary system (perhaps not of stars, but planets) where a small object swaps its orbit in between them? (yes I know it is implausible but I'm pretty sure it is not impossible).

[@martijnbouman8874]

+Enkii Muto It's possible, but the orbit is unfortunately not stable.

[@scoutofthe107th]

in my system i have two stars of the same mass on the same perfectly circular orbit on exactly opposite sides of the orbit at all times with an eternal separation of 380 AU. just so you know i'm worldbuilding for a fantasy so thats why i decided on such a thing.

[@DeyaViews]

But how will this affect the planet's land formations, seasons, weather and climate?

[@DreamerofDreams144]

He never explains that. thats what i wanna know

[@TheMemoman]

This Tatooine. Anti-Tatooine series has been fantastic! What software do you use to draw the complete orbit and limits of a system?

[@Artifexian]

Thanks for your comment TheMemoman. I use photoshop for all the non hand drawn bits in Artifexian.

[@dionemoolman]

Could you have a system where the stars orbit far apart, but a planet orbits their Barycentre, making it look like the stars are orbiting the planet?

[@9if032]

I'm playing universe sandbox, and I made my own 8 planet solar system, but I don't want any planets or moons to loose mass, but 1 of the moons looses mass, even though it's magnetic field and the planet's magnetic field are over it. Dunno how to fix it. Great channel!

[@psammiad]

Terty-too! It's a shame you didn't say terty-tree ;)

[@BUGONYOURTEETH]

"i like to get sexy" LOL

[@nettlesandsnakes9138]

Someone should make an compilation of every time he’s gotten sexy.

[@BUGONYOURTEETH]

@@nettlesandsnakes9138 "man these aliens make me sexy OH SHIT I THINK A ALIEN JUST INJECTED ME-"

[@nettlesandsnakes9138]

@@BUGONYOURTEETH I was thinking of the time he mentioned Pluto‘s orgy of moons.

[@Benzl9]

Excellent video!

[@Lucas72928]

1:51 I'm pretty sure that two stars can't orbit in opposite directions.

[@ryuko4478]

LucasFlecoRepe they can't, at least it would be extremely unstable

[@realprotonn]

They can... but they would only last for about 1000- 10000 years

[@parthiancapitalist2733]

What about two kinds of these systems orbiting each other?

[@NuclearTrinket]

what about figure-8 systems?

[@LordMayorOfDairyBell]

Could Twinsun from Little Big Adventure exist? In the 1994 computer game Little Big Adventure, you play on a planet between two suns. One notable feature is that Twinsun has an ice belt instead of ice caps. Another feature that throws the calculations out of wank is the fact that one side is green and tropical while the other is desert.

[@TlalocTemporal]

If the suns were in a very low eccentricity orbit, and far enough apart to not cook the little planet, then sitting between two stars is gravitationally stable. This is called a Lagrange point, specifically the L1 point. The L1, L2, and L3 points do tend to slid into unstable orbits however, so there would need to be something keeping the planet centred. If it's tidally locked (always faces the same direction), either this is a small system with dim stars, or something has stopped the planet from spinning, perhaps the same thing that's keeping the orbit stable.

[@LordMayorOfDairyBell]

@@TlalocTemporal As far as I can tell Twinsun revolves in place and the suns orbit around it.

[@TlalocTemporal]

@@LordMayorOfDairyBell -- At the lagrange point in the center of two co-orbiting suns, it would look like that.

[@darianchristie3260]

Can you please comment on what to do if your minimum distance to barycentre turns out to be a negative number?

[@darianchristie3260]

I figured out what happened... I had the cell for max separation plugged into the eccentricity due to an incorrect formula copy

[@meangreenbean3582]

Can I still have my forbidden zone in part of my planetary system? I want an excuse to put less planets in my system so I don't have to use up as much creative designs.

[@meangreenbean3582]

Thanks in advance (edit: it's a double binary system.)

[@oh.youknow2280]

Your videos are so cool!!

[@Day69Tripper]

Could a planet exist in the middle of these two stars?

[@CarterBartram]

+Story Teller That would not be a stable configuration.

[@aajjeee]

wouldnt it be at least as stable as langangean points?

[@CarterBartram]

aajjeee It would be analogous to the L1 Lagrangian point, which is unstable.

[@KushinLos]

Is the Minimum Separation measured from the barycentre?

[@Artifexian]

Yes when dealing with individual stars. Ex. If I say Star A has a minimum separation of 2 AU that means the closest Star A gets to the barycentre is 2 AU. But when I talk about OVERALL maximum/minimum separation of the entire system. I'm talking about the minimum separation between the 2 Stars. Ex. Min separation of Star A and B is 10 AU; this means that the closest Stars A and B will be to each other will be 10 AU. To get the minimum separation of the stars simply add up both minimum separations (from barycentre) To get the maximum separation of the stars simply add up both maximum separations (again from the barycentre)

[@KushinLos]

Artifexian thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I realized that I hadn't asked the question I intended to though. When it comes to the inner forbidden zone, it's from the barycentre right? Otherwise my attempt at a build would have no planets.

[@Artifexian]

Unfortunately building a system that has no planets is a real possibility here. I reworked the system I used in this video a number of times because I kept coming up with desert systems. The forbidden zone extends from the centre of each star not from the barycentre. Think of it like a big donut centred on each star. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news here. Binary systems and up can be a bit of a pain :(

[@KushinLos]

Artifexian no worries, just wanted to be sure of what I had. Thanks for the reply

[@jerry3790]

It would be cool if u replicated these systems on a gravity simulator

[@NorwayTracking]

1:28

[@RossMcDowall94]

What would the effect of the nearby light and heat of the other star in the system for planets climate and day/night cycle?

[@CarterBartram]

+Ross McDowall The apparent brightness of a star goes as the inverse square of the distance to it. For example, the Sun viewed at 30AU away would appear about as bright as a full moon. Depending on your system's relative distances and luminosities, your mileage may vary, but in general the second star would not have much of an effect

[@TheFeralPagan]

@@CarterBartramThank you! I've been trying to look up and see how things would look from the planet in this sort of system for my writing, but I wasn't getting anywhere.

[@brainzpvz2592]

​@@TheFeralPagan I found a useful calculator that works out the apparent magnitude of a star, this might be what you are looking for www.omnicalculator.com/physics/luminosity (Just incase you don't know magnitude is a rating to determine brightness, the lower the magnitude the brighter, and each up magnitude is roughly 2.52 times dimmer than the last. A magnitude 0 star will be exactly 100 times brighter than a magnitude 5 star. For reference, here are some very rough apparent magnitudes of a few popular celestial objects as viewed from brightest to dimmest: Sun: Magnitude -26 Full moon: Magnitude -12 Venus: -5 Dimmest magnitude visible during the day: -4 Jupiter: -3 Mars: -2.5 Mercury: -1.9 Sirius (Brightest star apart from the sun): -1.5 Alpha Centauri: -0.5 Vega: +0 Saturn: +0.5 Large Magellanic Cloud: +0.9 Pleiades Cluster: +1.6 Polaris: +2 Small Magellanic Cloud: +2.7 Andromeda Galaxy: +3.4 Vesta: +5.1 Uranus: +5.3 Dimmest magnitude visible to naked eye: +6 Ceres: +7 Neptune: +7.6 Proxima Centauri: +11 Pluto: +14

[@tanoshiofm3852]

@@brainzpvz2592 I did that and my other star has a magnitude of -15.16. Is that visible during the day, like a tiny second sun in the sky?

[@brainzpvz2592]

@@tanoshiofm3852 Yeah that would be easily be visible during the day and look like a (much dimmer but still very bright) second sun.

[@Callmeishmael89]

Artifexian, would that set up be applicable to a trinary system as well?

[@Artifexian]

The next few videos will be dealing with multiple stars systems. i.e. 3 + stars. But in short the best configuration for a trinary star system would be a close binary pair orbited by a distant single companion. In this scenario the whole trinary system function like a giant anti-tatooine system. So yes it would be applicable. Thanks for the question and thanks for watching. Much appreciated!

[@Youcancallmeishmaell]

Artifexian it's still me some, misurdstanding on my part lead me to making another google account name. Thanks for confermation, because what I was builind for my worlds. was the same type of system described in the video only with three stars instead of two,and yes i will be watching.

[@minecraftermad]

I want the stars to swap 1 planet... how can I time it perfectly?

[@deltainfinium869]

simple. you don't. such a system is simply way too complicated. Though if you want to handwave physics and realism entirely you can do whatever really.

[@minecraftermad]

@@deltainfinium869 alot of chaos and trying to brute force a solution would work but probably way too much computation considering the three body problem has yet to be solved.

[@faileduploader6366]

Can Be A Habitble Planet In 5 Divided By Pi

[@liora.5003]

I didn't get why 383 is a cool number, someone please explain

[@bryanwan6169]

+lior and tal gaming palindrome!

[@liora.5003]

Cryp Tic oh, I thought like specificly 383, I did notice it is a palindrome but like, it is not the only palindrome :P, but thx

[@genius11433]

+lior and tal gaming Cryp Tic is way off. "Sexy primes" are pairs of primes that differ by six. 383 and 389 are sexy primes because 383 is a prime, 389 is prime, and 383 + 6 = 389. The name "sexy prime" comes from Latin, as _sex_ is Latin for "six".

[@liora.5003]

genius11433 oh, so like 503 and 509 are sexy primes aswell?

[@genius11433]

+lior and tal gaming Exactly.

[@JoakimfromAnka]

120-600 AU... that would make the other star just another dot in the sky. :L

[@TheStoneAxe23Animation]

Mother of god, I own that calculator for math.

[@nkanyezihlatshwayo3601]

found it.

[@amehak1922]

I have a solar system like this

[@nukl3argam3r38]

I Origionally Wanted to make a Tatooine-Style System, but my Stars SImply Were so Low Mass and Luminosity, that the Forbidden Zone took up So much Space (and I didn't want to change my stars) So I just gave up and Started Changing it to and Anti- Tatooine System.

[@khuanjittakama8471]

This is intresting

[@dandyspacedandy]

what

[@Hwelhos]

my average separation is 517 B)

[@twentytwentyoneishvkmemory7430]

hi! I'm a subscriber, and pls mention me

[@NathanTAK]

So... Could I make an S-Type, but replace one of the stars (probably the primary) with a P-Type? >:)

[@moemuxhagi]

I'm thinkin' about doing that