5 ms·

> Gillon says that the six inner planets probably formed farther away from their star and then migrated inward. Now, they are so close to each other that their

> Gillon says that the six inner planets probably formed farther away from their star and then migrated inward. Now, they are so close to each other that their gravitational fields interact, nudging one another in ways that enabled the team to estimate each planet's mass. They range from around 0.4 to 1.4 times the mass of the Earth. Given that these planets are so close to each other, and interacting with each other gravitationally, how likely is it that their orbital arrangement is stable over geological time?

mturmon 10y ago
According to the Nature paper (last section of http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v542/n7642/full/nature21360.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v542/n7642/full/nature2...) -- We computed [via n-body and other simulations] that TRAPPIST-1 has a 25% chance of suffering an instability over 1 Myr, and an 8.1% chance of surviving for 1 billion years (Gyr), in line with our n-body integrations. And, further, However, [these lifetimes] do not take into account the proximity of the planets to their host star and the resulting strong tidal effects that might act to stabilize the system. ... The masses and exact eccentricities of the planets remain uncertain, and our results make it likely that only a very small number of orbital configurations lead to stable configurations. ... The system clearly exists, and it is unlikely that we are observing it just before its catastrophic disruption, so it is probably stable over a long timescale. These facts and the results of our dynamical simulations indicate that, given enough data, the very existence of the system should bring strong constraints on its components’ properties...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
goombastic 10y ago
If we could do large scale engineering we would engineer something like this I suppose to increase the habitable worlds in a system.

mturmon 10y ago

According to the Nature paper (last section of http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v542/n7642/full/nature21360.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v542/n7642/full/nature2...) -- We computed [via n-body and other simulations] that TRAPPIST-1 has a 25% chance of suffering an instability over 1 Myr, and an 8.1% chance of surviving for 1 billion years (Gyr), in line with our n-body integrations. And, further, However, [these lifetimes] do not take into account the proximity of the planets to their host star and the resulting strong tidal effects that might act to stabilize the system. ... The masses and exact eccentricities of the planets remain uncertain, and our results make it likely that only a very small number of orbital configurations lead to stable configurations. ... The system clearly exists, and it is unlikely that we are observing it just before its catastrophic disruption, so it is probably stable over a long timescale. These facts and the results of our dynamical simulations indicate that, given enough data, the very existence of the system should bring strong constraints on its components’ properties...

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

goombastic 10y ago

If we could do large scale engineering we would engineer something like this I suppose to increase the habitable worlds in a system.