Timeline for Is it correct to say that only binary and solitary star systems are stable?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 2021 at 19:06 | answer | added | M. A. Golding | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 23, 2021 at 18:01 | answer | added | Connor Garcia♦ | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 23, 2021 at 17:09 | comment | added | S. McGrew | I think a lot of commenters may have missed "long run" and "most". Agreed, "stable" is a slightly fuzzy concept, so maybe "relatively stable" would serve better? The question is really directed at long-term evolution of multiple stellar systems. | |
| Feb 23, 2021 at 15:54 | comment | added | WarpPrime | The one and two body problems are stable, but the universe does not have only 2 bodies. A three body problem can be stable if some of the masses of bodies differ from others (i.e. a blue giant orbited by a binary of two red dwarfs) | |
| Feb 23, 2021 at 15:53 | comment | added | planetmaker | see also adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2001ASPC..229...77A | |
| Feb 23, 2021 at 15:35 | comment | added | planetmaker | No. As the existing multiple star systems tell. But what is long? What is stable? | |
| Feb 23, 2021 at 15:30 | comment | added | eps | Define stable . | |
| Feb 23, 2021 at 15:26 | comment | added | antlersoft | I would imagine that some trinary star systems (as well as binary) can be stable for a very long timescale compared to their expected close encounter with other star systems (depending on where they are in the galaxy) so not sure it is meaningful to talk of a "long run" as though all star systems evolved in isolation. | |
| Feb 23, 2021 at 15:18 | history | asked | S. McGrew | CC BY-SA 4.0 |