Jump to content

What If Jupiter Or Saturn Suddenly Gained Enough Mass To Become A Star?


Recommended Posts

That's like saying that aside from the effects of surface impact, jumping out of an airplane without parachute isn't really that lethal. Completely correct while ignoring the big white elephant in the room.

It's not the speed that kills you. It's the sudden stop. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
a perisol is an umbrella. i think you mean perihelion.

That's a parasol.

Correct!

Parasol, from italian parasol, with para- meaning "to shield" and -sole meaning "the sun"

Perisol is...technically meaningful, in that peri- prefix meaning "around" or "near" is used along with -sol meaning "sun". But the thing is, peri- is greek, while sol is latin. Can't really just stick them together. The correct term should be perihelion, as noted.

/offtopic

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have universe sandbox 2, so i can try this when I get home from school. If anyone wants I can record the results and post it on Youtube.

and the fact that its US2 I can also watch the climate simulation on earth, and the one on mars too since they added martian climate recently :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

so uh, yeah.

i first made Jupiter 105 times its mass so its a star, and the system was pretty much stable from that. and neither Mars or Saturn received any light from it.

however, i then made Saturn into a star of the same mass, and shortly afterwards, it launched Jupiter into the outer solar system, and Jupiter launched Saturn into what would be just outside the Asteroid Belt, if not inside it a bit, and that's when all hell broke loose.

first, Saturn launched Ceres to be caught by Jupiter for a time before escaping to orbit the Sun at around the Kuiper belt, then Saturn pulled Mars in. I accidentally turned the timewarp up too much and it fired Mars out of the solar system at high speed, but im assuming it wouldve collided with Saturn, Uranus soon suffered the same fate, but with Jupiter.

Saturn also launched Vesta out of the solar system, but I think Earth and the rest of the inner solar system is safe, the rest of the outer solar system will probably either crash into Jupiter or Saturn, or be ejected entirely eventually, but our planet should survive. however, there wont be much to explore other then Venus, Mercury, and two red dwarfs orbiting the Sun.

A dwarf planet or a few asteroids might be able to survive on the very outer edge of the Kuiper belt, but I cant say for sure.

this was without moons, if anyone wants to know. :P

Edit: ive let the simulation run for a bit longer, and Earth is deffinitly NOT fine, its being affected by Saturns gravity, its current PE is around Venus's orbit. and its Ap going out to Mars's former orbit.

and as im writing this its PE has gone down to Mercury's orbit.

The city lights are still there though, after passing PE at Mercury's orbit once, it didnt have enough time to heat up.

image of the solar system right now:

kaTLWvy.jpg

i think Earth will either crash into the sun or collide with Saturn eventually.

its only affected when it gets near Saturn while Saturn is at its PE

edit 2: the city lights on earth have disapeared.

o7 RIP Humanity

Edited by Deadpangod3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ran a couple of sims in Gravity Simulator. With Jupiter bumped up to 105 Jupiter masses, Saturn's orbit is perturbed. Eventually it gets pulled into a close approach with Jupiter and flung into the inner solar system, usually on an Earth crossing orbit though one sim gave it a perihelion way below Mercury. After a century or so of chaotic behavior with Jupiter repeatedly changing its orbit, Saturn gets ejected from the solar system. So far, I haven't seen anything exciting happen to the other planets besides Mars' orbit becoming a bit more eccentric.

Link to post
Share on other sites
so uh, yeah.

i first made Jupiter 105 times its mass so its a star, and the system was pretty much stable from that. and neither Mars or Saturn received any light from it.

however, i then made Saturn into a star of the same mass, and shortly afterwards, it launched Jupiter into the outer solar system, and Jupiter launched Saturn into what would be just outside the Asteroid Belt, if not inside it a bit, and that's when all hell broke loose.

first, Saturn launched Ceres to be caught by Jupiter for a time before escaping to orbit the Sun at around the Kuiper belt, then Saturn pulled Mars in. I accidentally turned the timewarp up too much and it fired Mars out of the solar system at high speed, but im assuming it wouldve collided with Saturn, Uranus soon suffered the same fate, but with Jupiter.

Saturn also launched Vesta out of the solar system, but I think Earth and the rest of the inner solar system is safe, the rest of the outer solar system will probably either crash into Jupiter or Saturn, or be ejected entirely eventually, but our planet should survive. however, there wont be much to explore other then Venus, Mercury, and two red dwarfs orbiting the Sun.

A dwarf planet or a few asteroids might be able to survive on the very outer edge of the Kuiper belt, but I cant say for sure.

this was without moons, if anyone wants to know. :P

Edit: ive let the simulation run for a bit longer, and Earth is deffinitly NOT fine, its being affected by Saturns gravity, its current PE is around Venus's orbit. and its Ap going out to Mars's former orbit.

and as im writing this its PE has gone down to Mercury's orbit.

The city lights are still there though, after passing PE at Mercury's orbit once, it didnt have enough time to heat up.

image of the solar system right now:

http://i.imgur.com/kaTLWvy.jpg

i think Earth will either crash into the sun or collide with Saturn eventually.

its only affected when it gets near Saturn while Saturn is at its PE

edit 2: the city lights on earth have disapeared.

o7 RIP Humanity

How does this simulate gravity? Because I find it hard to believe that 4 body gravity with a time scale short enough to send mars out of the solar system between the times of your post can be simulated to any reasonable accuracy on a home computer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How does this simulate gravity? Because I find it hard to believe that 4 body gravity with a time scale short enough to send mars out of the solar system between the times of your post can be simulated to any reasonable accuracy on a home computer.

It's doable all right. Home computers are more powerful than the computers NASA used to calculate trajectories for probes and the like.

The accuracy would probably only be off by a couple thousand kilometers...

But, one small change can lead to big ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone ever implemented one of the really fast yet very accurate version on a modern system¿ I only now some anecdotes about fortran based code that nobody ever updated or such...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jupiter almost (or even possibly does) has enough mass to become a black dwarf. That being a star who's fusion isn't powerful enough to be seen from any sort of distance (the sun's brightness would overpower it even.)

In fact, we know very little about the core of Jupiter, or the nature of black dwarfs (such as if they have an energized corona), so it very well could be a black dwarf. (There are energy emissions, but most scientists have written it off to various other known phenomenon that occur in all planets, especially large ones.)

Edited by Ruedii
adding info
Link to post
Share on other sites
It's doable all right. Home computers are more powerful than the computers NASA used to calculate trajectories for probes and the like.

The accuracy would probably only be off by a couple thousand kilometers...

But, one small change can lead to big ones.

Completely, completely different. They are very really anything more than one body simulations which takes many many orders of magnitude less computation. Infact, they don't take any computation at all, can be solved completely analytically.

Edited by BlueCosmology
Link to post
Share on other sites
How does this simulate gravity? Because I find it hard to believe that 4 body gravity with a time scale short enough to send mars out of the solar system between the times of your post can be simulated to any reasonable accuracy on a home computer.

You mean a modern PC? The ones that rival a 1980s Cray supercomputer in calculating power? Yeah, it's hard to believe they can do the calculations, that Newton did with pen and paper, fast enough...

Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean a modern PC? The ones that rival a 1980s Cray supercomputer in calculating power? Yeah, it's hard to believe they can do the calculations, that Newton did with pen and paper, fast enough...

Again, you're comparing completely and utterly different systems. To solve single body newtonian gravity in general to exact precision requires precisely 1 iteration to find the solution for absolutely any timescale with an analytic solution that is not difficult to figure out.

To solve n-body simulations (for anything other than very very special cases) to just reasonable precision requires billions of iterations, increasing linearly with timescale and factorially with n.

Newton didn't even solve the 2-body problem (something that actually is completely solvable on pen and paper), let alone 3-body or higher (which is not).

Edited by BlueCosmology
Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, you're comparing completely and utterly different systems. To solve single body newtonian gravity in general to exact precision requires precisely 1 iteration to find the solution for absolutely any timescale with an analytic solution that is not difficult to figure out.

To solve n-body simulations (for anything other than very very special cases) to just reasonable precision requires billions of iterations, increasing linearly with timescale and factorially with n.

Newton didn't even solve the 2-body problem (something that actually is completely solvable on pen and paper), let alone 3-body or higher (which is not).

The equations aren't as complicated as you're making it out.

Modern computers can use patched conics to get pretty good accuracy. Then, you could increase that further and further...

Link to post
Share on other sites
The equations aren't as complicated as you're making it out.

Modern computers can use patched conics to get pretty good accuracy. Then, you could increase that further and further...

No, patched conics are pretty bad; that's just what KSP does. This apporach couldn't even deal with Lagrange points, even less more convoluted things.

Additionally, we can do better since many years; NASA did, at least. You can reduce it to some integrations and as far as I remember there are pretty neat fast algorithms for doing that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The equations aren't as complicated as you're making it out.

Modern computers can use patched conics to get pretty good accuracy. Then, you could increase that further and further...

Patched conics give precisely zero accuracy at all for an n-body simulation as it does not model any gravitational interaction at all between the different bodies.

N-body gravitation is a very complicated, very computationally intense problem. 4 body simulation could potentially be done to a reasonable precision in a few hours on a home computer, but I find it doubtful (particularly in something that doesn't seem like it is made to be a proper simulation, and even more so that it seems like it's attempting to do a whole solar system simulation. That is not going to happen on a home computer to reasonable accuracy that fast.)

I'm not saying 4 body gravitation could not be done on a home computer that fast, with some good algorithms designed particularly for it it seems possible. However, it is certainly very doubtful in something that doesn't seem like it is particularly designed as such for high precision simulations, especially if it is attempting to do the same accuracy for all the particles in the simulation which it appears to be.

Edited by BlueCosmology
Link to post
Share on other sites

Patched Conics are an approximation. In fact, that's what it's called. The Patched Conic Approximation. It's a good tool to give a good estimate of what a trajectory trajectory will be. Then you add onto that better and better approximations (since NASA used the patched conic approximation in the 60s, we can definitely do better today) and all of a sudden your medium to high end desktops can do pretty well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Patched Conics are an approximation. In fact, that's what it's called. The Patched Conic Approximation. It's a good tool to give a good estimate of what a trajectory trajectory will be. Then you add onto that better and better approximations (since NASA used the patched conic approximation in the 60s, we can definitely do better today) and all of a sudden your medium to high end desktops can do pretty well.

Again, patched conics is NOT an n-body approximation for gravity.

Patched conics is an approximation for trajectories between multiple 2 bodies (infact it's generally used between multiple single bodies). It does not, at all, apply to this situation of having 3 bodies that all affect each other to a similar degree, because it completely ignores all interactions between them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

About Universe Sandbox, from what I understand, Universe Sandbox just calculates every possible pair of objects using Newton's law.

Here is a quote from Dan, the creator of the simulation:

Since each body compares itself to every other... The math should be:

5 bodies: 5x4 = 20 force calculations

20 bodies: 20x19 = 380 force calculations

100 bodies: 100x99 = 9900 force calculations

Here are the basic steps:

1 - Calculate the force between each body and every other.

2 - This force is converted into the corresponding X,Y,Z forces based on where the bodies are in space.

3 - The 3D acceleration is applied to each body resulting in a new velocity and position.

4 - There are also checks for collisions between every object.

5 - And the scene is redrawn.

Source: universesandbox.com/forum/index.php?topic=452.0

Link to post
Share on other sites
About Universe Sandbox, from what I understand, Universe Sandbox just calculates every possible pair of objects using Newton's law.

Here is a quote from Dan, the creator of the simulation:

Source: universesandbox.com/forum/index.php?topic=452.0

Then no, if it is literally just working out the new forces every timestep due to all gravitational interaction, there is no way at all that will run accurately for a chaotic system like this in such a short time on a home computer.

Not a chance at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How does this simulate gravity? Because I find it hard to believe that 4 body gravity with a time scale short enough to send mars out of the solar system between the times of your post can be simulated to any reasonable accuracy on a home computer.

I was letting the simulation run unpaused while i was writing it, also keep in mind that just the computer in your phone is more powerful then the computer NASA used to go to the Moon. :)

and the physics can get glitchy at times, like when a planet gets to a very low PE around a star at high time warp, and it sometimes launches it off at unrealistic speeds, like around 100 km/s or more, in the first universe sandbox they'd be launched off at speeds faster then light, so its deffinitly improved in US2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was letting the simulation run unpaused while i was writing it,

I don't think the minute or two it took you type that really makes any difference when the time between your comments was 5 hours.

If you're saying that the time it took you to write that comment was comparable to the time you ran the simulation for, then there is no way in hell that could be run on a home computer even with good algorithms (let alone the just calculating forces every timestamp that it does)

also keep in mind that just the computer in your phone is more powerful then the computer NASA used to go to the Moon. :)

Again, keep in mind that that has literally nothing, at all, to do with this. That is NOT an n-body simulation and requires absolutely no computational power, in comparison to an n-body problem that requires a lot even with well designed algorithms.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think the minute or two it took you type that really makes any difference when the time between your comments was 5 hours.

If you're saying that the time it took you to write that comment was comparable to the time you ran the simulation for, then there is no way in hell that could be run on a home computer even with good algorithms (let alone the just calculating forces every timestamp that it does)

Again, keep in mind that that has literally nothing, at all, to do with this. That is NOT an n-body simulation and requires absolutely no computational power, in comparison to an n-body problem that requires a lot even with well designed algorithms.

I'm confused, do you mean that my computer shouldn't be able to simulate this, or do you mean that it shouldn't be accurate at the time speed it was at?

Edited by Deadpangod3
GRAMMAR!!
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think the minute or two it took you type that really makes any difference when the time between your comments was 5 hours.

If you're saying that the time it took you to write that comment was comparable to the time you ran the simulation for, then there is no way in hell that could be run on a home computer even with good algorithms (let alone the just calculating forces every timestamp that it does)

Again, keep in mind that that has literally nothing, at all, to do with this. That is NOT an n-body simulation and requires absolutely no computational power, in comparison to an n-body problem that requires a lot even with well designed algorithms.

NBody really doesn't require that much. Honestly.

They used to run fine when we wrote them for a challenge, we were using 4*** series AMD cards at the time.

Going back a few more years and it still didn't require any more power than our Univeristy workstations (they were very expensive then, but pitiful today).

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...