Newcomer / Intro Why some stars are displayed orbiting like planets?

I was wondering why some stars are displayed in system map like planets, orbiting the main star, while others are displayed on this vertical line?

Here is an example of stars all being displayed on this vertical line:

eoch-bli-ij-f-d12-2818-20220109-212231-jpg.288934


Could someone perhaps educate me about the way things are displayed and the meaning of it? I never really gave it any thought...

Thank you!
 
I was wondering why some stars are displayed in system map like planets, orbiting the main star, while others are displayed on this vertical line?

Here is an example of stars all being displayed on this vertical line:

eoch-bli-ij-f-d12-2818-20220109-212231-jpg.288934


Could someone perhaps educate me about the way things are displayed and the meaning of it? I never really gave it any thought...

Thank you!
In the system map, on the right left side, select Orrery view and all will should become clear...er...

Edit: Apparently I need to go back to kindergarten to learn right from left again... :)
 
I was wondering why some stars are displayed in system map like planets, orbiting the main star, while others are displayed on this vertical line?

Here is an example of stars all being displayed on this vertical line:

eoch-bli-ij-f-d12-2818-20220109-212231-jpg.288934


Could someone perhaps educate me about the way things are displayed and the meaning of it? I never really gave it any thought...

Thank you!
Probably because how Stellar Forge treats the mass discrepancy.
If one body is massive (and big) enough to have the common barycenter inside it, Stellar Forge treats the other body as orbiting it and not being one of a binary pair.
 
The system map is a 2 dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional area, so it has some limitations in how it can present the information. If you want to see a full 3d representation, use the Orrery view.
 
In the system map, on the right left side, select Orrery view and all will should become clear...er...

Edit: Apparently I need to go back to kindergarten to learn right from left again... :)

The system map is a 2 dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional area, so it has some limitations in how it can present the information. If you want to see a full 3d representation, use the Orrery view.

Thank you, commanders! I have used orrery before, but it never actually helped me to understand the reasons why certain stars are displayed on planetary orbit and some others are displayed as regular stars on that vertical line...

Would you care to elaborate more? :)

EDIT: @nemolomen I like your avatar. My favorite show, where they've got the physics right...
 
Thank you, commanders! I have used orrery before, but it never actually helped me to understand the reasons why certain stars are displayed on planetary orbit and some others are displayed as regular stars on that vertical line...

Would you care to elaborate more? :)

EDIT: @nemolomen I like your avatar. My favorite show, where they've got the physics right...
@Zieman Has it right with his animations but to try and put it in words.

When a body orbits another they actually orbit around their common centre of mass (barycentre) if that point is always inside the more massive body the smaller one seems to orbit the larger one if not they both seem to orbit about a point in space between them.
The system map shows the first case by having the bodies linked by a line through their centres like most of the planets in a simple system, in the second case the map shows that by having a small line coming out from each body which is linked, you can see this in your image of the stars in the map.

The map shows the stars vertically and the planets horizontally as a convenient way of fitting as much into the screen as it can, the stars that are light enough to exert no significant movement on the main star are shown in with the planets because apart from being hotter they are little different to a large gas giant.

Edit to add.

The System map isn't really a map it is a diagram like a circuit diagram or the London Underground map the information is displayed for clarity of information, the Orrery view is the true map with everything to scale and in its right place which due to the scale of a star system makes it very difficult to use at a glance.
 
Last edited:
@Zieman Has it right with his animations but to try and put it in words.

When a body orbits another they actually orbit around their common centre of mass (barycentre) if that point is always inside the more massive body the smaller one seems to orbit the larger one if not they both seem to orbit about a point in space between them.
The system map shows the first case by having the bodies linked by a line through their centres like most of the planets in a simple system, in the second case the map shows that by having a small line coming out from each body which is linked, you can see this in your image of the stars in the map.

The map shows the stars vertically and the planets horizontally as a convenient way of fitting as much into the screen as it can, the stars that are light enough to exert no significant movement on the main star are shown in with the planets because apart from being hotter they are little different to a large gas giant.

Edit to add.

The System map isn't really a map it is a diagram like a circuit diagram or the London Underground map the information is displayed for clarity of information, the Orrery view is the true map with everything to scale and in its right place which due to the scale of a star system makes it very difficult to use at a glance.
Thank you, that sums it up nicely!
 
Thank you, commanders! I have used orrery before, but it never actually helped me to understand the reasons why certain stars are displayed on planetary orbit and some others are displayed as regular stars on that vertical line...

Would you care to elaborate more? :)

EDIT: @nemolomen I like your avatar. My favorite show, where they've got the physics right...
Hi Sleepy,

I was only pointing out that in the Orrery vs flat System Map one can see the actual spatial relationship of all of the bodies within the system, though not at the same time due to the distances involved.

So they made the flat system map with the line(s) on the left side to also show the same relationships as you can more easily see in the orrery.

In your case, it looks like the A Star is co-orbiting with 3 pairs of stars, in which the stars in each pair are co-orbiting each other.

If I was not at work, I could provide some in game images to help clarify.
 
Hi Sleepy,

I was only pointing out that in the Orrery vs flat System Map one can see the actual spatial relationship of all of the bodies within the system, though not at the same time due to the distances involved.

So they made the flat system map with the line(s) on the left side to also show the same relationships as you can more easily see in the orrery.

In your case, it looks like the A Star is co-orbiting with 3 pairs of stars, in which the stars in each pair are co-orbiting each other.

If I was not at work, I could provide some in game images to help clarify.

Thank you again, Commander nemolomen, no need to provide in game screenies, I do understand the difference between flat simplified representation of the System map versus orrery view. The problem for me was to understand why some stars are displayed on the left vertical line, while some other stars are displayed on the horizontal line, together with planets... Commander Zieman actually explained it to me and it was exactly what I was looking for - the reason for different treatment of different stars in System map... :)

I might be clumsy with my questions sometimes, also given the fact, that English is not my first language... I hope I did not distract you too much at work... :)
 
Thank you again, Commander nemolomen, no need to provide in game screenies, I do understand the difference between flat simplified representation of the System map versus orrery view. The problem for me was to understand why some stars are displayed on the left vertical line, while some other stars are displayed on the horizontal line, together with planets... Commander Zieman actually explained it to me and it was exactly what I was looking for - the reason for different treatment of different stars in System map... :)

I might be clumsy with my questions sometimes, also given the fact, that English is not my first language... I hope I did not distract you too much at work... :)
No Worries! Distractions at work are greatly appreciated :)
 
If the primary star of the system is sufficiently heavy, then "planets" of stellar mass can be generated. Stars can even be generated as "moons" of a planetary-orbiting star, if the primary star and planetary star are both big enough to support generating a star-sized object as a moon.

Star systems in ED are capped at eight "full-blown stars", but stars in planetary orbits are not included in this cap. Which is why a super-large star can have dozens of smaller stars orbiting it, all in planetary orbits.

A star generated in a planetary orbit has the same odds of being given a ring system as any other planet; this is the only way that "ringed stars" are generated, as "full blown stars" are never given rings.

Another key distinction between "planetary stars" and "full blown stars" is that only the full-blown ones are reported in the galaxy map for Unexplored systems; you don't get to see the planetary stars listed on the system info tab on the galaxy map until after you've honked the system.

Note that, while stars can be generated in planetary orbits, planets are never generated in the co-orbital or "full blown star" positions; the smallest object in that latter category is a Y-class dwarf (which is still technically a "star"). A large planet co-orbiting a small star is technically possible in the real-life galaxy, but you will not find such a configuration in ED (unless the star is in a planetary orbit).
 
If the primary star of the system is sufficiently heavy, then "planets" of stellar mass can be generated. Stars can even be generated as "moons" of a planetary-orbiting star, if the primary star and planetary star are both big enough to support generating a star-sized object as a moon.

Star systems in ED are capped at eight "full-blown stars", but stars in planetary orbits are not included in this cap. Which is why a super-large star can have dozens of smaller stars orbiting it, all in planetary orbits.

A star generated in a planetary orbit has the same odds of being given a ring system as any other planet; this is the only way that "ringed stars" are generated, as "full blown stars" are never given rings.

Another key distinction between "planetary stars" and "full blown stars" is that only the full-blown ones are reported in the galaxy map for Unexplored systems; you don't get to see the planetary stars listed on the system info tab on the galaxy map until after you've honked the system.

Note that, while stars can be generated in planetary orbits, planets are never generated in the co-orbital or "full blown star" positions; the smallest object in that latter category is a Y-class dwarf (which is still technically a "star"). A large planet co-orbiting a small star is technically possible in the real-life galaxy, but you will not find such a configuration in ED (unless the star is in a planetary orbit).

Great info, thank you very much!

A couple of questions:
  • has there ever been a system discovered, where the star on a planetary orbit would be anything else than a dwarf?
  • has the system with 8 full-blown stars been discovered yet?
  • what is the maximum of stars found in a system so far?
Thank you once again, really great explanation!
 
has there ever been a system discovered, where the star on a planetary orbit would be anything else than a dwarf?
I think the heaviest known star in a planetary orbit is a Glass G (the same star type/mass as Earth's Sun); though still technically a "dwarf" (as opposed to a "giant") from an astrometric point of view, it's a pretty big dwarf. Of course, to get a class G planet, you need a very large primary star, so you're only going to find them around giant stars or black holes.

I think some of the procedurally-generated supergiant stars have regular giant stars in planetary orbits; these are bigger than Earth's sun, but not necessarily heavier.

has the system with 8 full-blown stars been discovered yet?
Numerous of them, I believe. @Orvidius can probably give you more up-to-date stats on the total count. I'm pretty sure I've found a couple, though haven't taken pics since it's not really all that pic-worthy (and it's a little hard to get all eight family members in the same screenshot). If you google "Elite Dangerous ABCDEFGH", you will find people talking about finding planets that orbit all eight stars in eight-star sytems. The NGC 6067 Sector ZU-Y d31 system, for example, has eight full-blown stars, plus a ninth star that orbits the lot of them in a planetary orbit, with a single landable moon of that ninth star. EDSM entry. Or the Priemoe KA-G c11-11 system, with eight stars, one gas giant orbiting a triple-star set, and a single planet out orbiting the whole lot. EDSM entry.

what is the maximum of stars found in a system so far?
There might be a new record-holder these days, but a few years ago, 4 Cygni was still the record-holder, at 24 stars; I'm not sure if the record has been broken by a proc-genned system yet; I seem to recall a forum thread with a new record in the 30s, but can't find the evidence. EDSM entry for 4 Cygni. It's got three main stars: a blue-white supergiant, a regular B class star and a Herbig AeBe. The remaining 21 stars are all T Tauri protostars in planetary orbits, mostly around the Herbig and around the AB binary. Proc-genned Herbigs tend to have lots of planetary-orbiting protostars.
 
I was wondering why some stars are displayed in system map like planets, orbiting the main star, while others are displayed on this vertical line? Here is an example of stars all being displayed on this vertical line:Could someone perhaps educate me about the way things are displayed and the meaning of it? I never really gave it any thought...Thank you!
Everything orbits something. The moon orbits Terra, which orbits Sol, which orbits the center of the Milky Way. Our entire galaxy is orbiting something else within the universe. Some stars orbit other stars. Some pairs of stars orbit an empty, common point in space.
 
I think the heaviest known star in a planetary orbit is a Glass G (the same star type/mass as Earth's Sun); though still technically a "dwarf" (as opposed to a "giant") from an astrometric point of view, it's a pretty big dwarf. Of course, to get a class G planet, you need a very large primary star, so you're only going to find them around giant stars or black holes.

I think some of the procedurally-generated supergiant stars have regular giant stars in planetary orbits; these are bigger than Earth's sun, but not necessarily heavier.


Numerous of them, I believe. @Orvidius can probably give you more up-to-date stats on the total count. I'm pretty sure I've found a couple, though haven't taken pics since it's not really all that pic-worthy (and it's a little hard to get all eight family members in the same screenshot). If you google "Elite Dangerous ABCDEFGH", you will find people talking about finding planets that orbit all eight stars in eight-star sytems. The NGC 6067 Sector ZU-Y d31 system, for example, has eight full-blown stars, plus a ninth star that orbits the lot of them in a planetary orbit, with a single landable moon of that ninth star. EDSM entry. Or the Priemoe KA-G c11-11 system, with eight stars, one gas giant orbiting a triple-star set, and a single planet out orbiting the whole lot. EDSM entry.


There might be a new record-holder these days, but a few years ago, 4 Cygni was still the record-holder, at 24 stars; I'm not sure if the record has been broken by a proc-genned system yet; I seem to recall a forum thread with a new record in the 30s, but can't find the evidence. EDSM entry for 4 Cygni. It's got three main stars: a blue-white supergiant, a regular B class star and a Herbig AeBe. The remaining 21 stars are all T Tauri protostars in planetary orbits, mostly around the Herbig and around the AB binary. Proc-genned Herbigs tend to have lots of planetary-orbiting protostars.
I truly appreciate your comprehensive and very informative response, Commandeer Sapyx! 👍🖖
 
What about the universe

Due to the limit of the observable universe we have insufficient data to establish if there is actually any structure beyond the filaments making up the "cosmic web" and this is called the "End of Greatness". https://www.universetoday.com/81813/astronomy-without-a-telescope-the-edge-of-greatness/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe#End_of_Greatness

So we don't know if our universe is a: the only one and b: if it orbits anything.


P.S. Yes I am suffering from insomnia so spout drivel at the slightest excuse.
 
Back
Top Bottom