Welcome, Guest

Author Topic: Tidal lock?  (Read 3360 times)

Deathzilla7

  • ****
  • Posts: 44
Tidal lock?
« on: June 26, 2011, 08:37:51 PM »
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...?

atomic7732

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • caught in the river turning blue
    • Paladin of Storms
Re: Tidal lock?
« Reply #1 on: June 27, 2011, 08:41:48 AM »
US doesn't simulate tidal decay of orbits...

Deathzilla7

  • ****
  • Posts: 44
Re: Tidal lock?
« Reply #2 on: June 27, 2011, 11:39:50 PM »
So, WOULD there be a tidal decay? And, which example would best negate this?