Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Marcio Aleksandravicius

Three-Body Problem. Newly discovered stable periodic orbits.

By Xiaoming LI and Shijun LIAO
Source: numericaltank.sjtu.edu.cn/thre

21 comments
Martin Vogel

@marcioaleks
So the fleet of the Trisolarians will not invade us?

Soh Kam Yung

@mardor

My answer is no, if we lived in a 2-D universe. 🙂

The original title says why: "Periodic orbits for Newtonian planar three-body problem". Note the use of the word "planar".

@marcioaleks

Hans

@marcioaleks Wake up, new turtle orbit just dropped.

stf

@marcioaleks the other models on that linked page are also hypnotic.

Dr. Brad Rosenheim

@stf @marcioaleks New challenge for someone who isn't me (because I would not be capable): Artistic rendering of what the sky would look like if one was in the frame of reference of a planet in the three star configurations of Figure 6.

Steffen Christensen

@marcioaleks This is incredible! Thanks so much for sharing!!!

Pooka🍸Boo 👁🫣🫵

@marcioaleks Interesting.... I think N-Body problems demonstrate the limits of our current understanding of the physical nature of the universe. The math treats gravity as a force, either Newtonian or Einsteinian. I submit gravity is not simply a force, nor measure of acceleration in a space-time constricted physical perception. My hypothesis is that there is an obvious 4th obvious spatial dimension. The N-Body equations are not accounting for the motion in that dimension....

Potung Thul

@lednaBM @marcioaleks

?? I don't understand your statement.
This is not a discovery that the physical universe is different from the math. This is a discovery that there are elegant mathematical solutions to the equations which describe a 3-body problem.

It's like if someone said, "The solution to the equation:
x^3 - 2x = 0
is the square root of two, but we'll never be able to compute root-2 exactly," and then someone else said, "Hey, zero is also another solution."

#ThreeBodyProblem

@lednaBM @marcioaleks

?? I don't understand your statement.
This is not a discovery that the physical universe is different from the math. This is a discovery that there are elegant mathematical solutions to the equations which describe a 3-body problem.

It's like if someone said, "The solution to the equation:
x^3 - 2x = 0
is the square root of two, but we'll never be able to compute root-2 exactly," and then someone else said, "Hey, zero is also another solution."

Pooka🍸Boo 👁🫣🫵

@potungthul @marcioaleks

Sorry... I get what you're saying. I didn't mean to hijack the thread... my bad.

spmatich :blobcoffee:

@marcioaleks it would be interesting to plot the motion of the centre of mass as well as the orbits.

Curioso 🍉 🇺🇦 (jgg)

@marcioaleks

Nice. The planet orbits must be really crazy in that kind of place.

The trisolarian version of Kepler laws must be really crazy.

King Calyo Delphi

@marcioaleks I love how the orbit of one of those bodies is a Lissajous curve. :)

cc @lilacperegrine

Tim Hanson

@marcioaleks Surprisingly / unsurprisingly, they discover many of these stable 3-body orbits with ... a neural network!

(Also, they had to invent a higher-resolution form of numerical integration to get this to work -- these orbits are stable but still sensitive.)

Natasha Taylor

@marcioaleks Can I ask what "stable" means in this context? Is it saying that, if placed exactly in those starting conditions, the system will last forever without one body being ejected? Or is it stable under (sufficiently small) perturbation?

Either way it's really cool!

Jigme Datse

@marcioaleks This doesn't surprise me that such would exist. I've not tried to run a simulation of it. Are these the same mass?

Paul Schoe

Scientists trying to solve the Three-Body problem create dozens of beautiful graphs depending on mass and rotation.

The challenge now is to predict the stable periods so that the Trisolarians won't invade us.

numericaltank.sjtu.edu.cn/thre

@marcioaleks
#threebodyproblem

Roger Crew✅❌☑🗸❎✖✓✔✗✘☒

@marcioaleks

so, where are the principle bodies locate in this ( [0,0] and [0,1] ) ?

Go Up