Someone posted in another thread I made how my binary planet system would be unstable and Techniphosia would have a rotation time equal to Molybdenoria's orbit. They also stated that my moons would be unstable and crash into the planets if they had un-shared moons. Included are a few examples. The closer orbit is the new one, but I may change it back.
Is there really anything wrong?
*Please note the sizes in each picture and the distances:
**Pic 1: Techniphosia- 30 Earth, Molybdenoria- 2.7 Earth, Luneri- 0.6 moon, Aurus- 1.43 moon, Lunis- 1.0 moon
***Orbits (approx [elliptical]): Molyb. orbits Techniphosia @ 800,000-1,000,000 km. Lunis -> Molyb. @ 30,000-45,000 km, Aurus -> Techni. @ 80,000-100,000 km, Luneri -> Techni. @ 30,000-45,000 km.
**Pic 2: Techni.- 30 Earth, Molyb.- 2.7 Earth, Lunis- 0.2 moon, Aurus- 0.7 moon, Luneri- 1.0 moon
***Approx orbits: Molyb. -> Techni. @ 175,000-185,000 km, Lunis -> Molyb. @ 18,000-25,000 km, Luneri -> Techni. @ 38,000-43,000 km, Aurus -> Techni. @ 800,000-1,400,000 km.
Which is more stable? I really think it'd be the first, but... I mean the game doesn't seem to be slowing Tecchniphosia's orbit...?
Topic: Tidal lock? (Read 3373 times)
