Starship Asterisk*

BDanielMayfield wrote:

neuter wrote:
I wonder if a syzygy of 3 consecutive moons ever happens(...or is that dynamically unstable).

Er, what are you asking Art? Consecutive how, exactly? And did you mean to moon us here? I thought we were discussing planets.

neufer wrote:

BDanielMayfield wrote:
To answer Art's question, the three planet overlapping transit was of the b, c and g planets. Edit: Please apend 'I think' to the previous sentence. However, I just found the source of the three overlapping transit graphic! It is one of the hidden figures located on page 23 of the above pdf. This poorly labed graphic is called "Extended Data Figure 1: Light curve of a tripple transit of planets c-e-f" on page 19.

So I think there may have actually been two tripple plays scored so far: b-c-g and c-e-f!

Thanks, Bruce.

I wonder if a syzygy of 3 consecutive moons ever happens(...or is that dynamically unstable).

neuter wrote:I wonder if a syzygy of 3 consecutive moons ever happens(...or is that dynamically unstable).

BDanielMayfield wrote:
To answer Art's question, the three planet overlapping transit was of the b, c and g planets. Edit: Please apend 'I think' to the previous sentence. However, I just found the source of the three overlapping transit graphic! It is one of the hidden figures located on page 23 of the above pdf. This poorly labed graphic is called "Extended Data Figure 1: Light curve of a tripple transit of planets c-e-f" on page 19.

So I think there may have actually been two tripple plays scored so far: b-c-g and c-e-f!

neufer wrote:

BDanielMayfield wrote:At least three of these TRAPPIST-1 planets have already been observed in transit at the same time.

Which three were those

Chris Peterson wrote:
While "Z" may not exist in traditional Welsh, it is used. In fact, the common Welsh translation of "syzygy" appears to be... "syzygy" (to the extent that there is no actual Welsh word for that, hence the default being to utilize a borrow word from English... which would be acceptable in friendly Scrabble play).

• Well...the whole point was to avoid having to use a blank
  
  SY_YGY : 8 points in Welsh
  SYZ_GY : 19 points in English
  SYZYGIES : 50 bonus + 24 points in English.

neufer wrote:

Chris Peterson wrote:

BDanielMayfield wrote:
Syzygy, a great word to know when playing scrabble.

It could be... but you'll need a non-scoring blank tile to pull it off, since there are only two "Y" tiles in a normal English game set.

• And the Welsh-language set has no Z :!:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrabble_letter_distributions#Welsh wrote: Since there are specific tiles for the digraphs that are considered to be separate letters in Welsh orthography (such as DD), it is not permissible to use the individual letters to spell these out. Diacritics on letters are ignored. The digraph PH also exists in Welsh, but is omitted because it is used almost exclusively in mutated words, which the rules disallow. K, Q, V, X and Z also do not exist in Welsh. J does not exist in traditional Welsh either, but it is included as it is used in some borrowed words.>>

Chris Peterson wrote:

BDanielMayfield wrote:
Syzygy, a great word to know when playing scrabble.

It could be... but you'll need a non-scoring blank tile to pull it off, since there are only two "Y" tiles in a normal English game set.

• And the Welsh-language set has no Z

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrabble_letter_distributions#Welsh wrote:

[b][color=#0000FF]The box for Welsh-language Scrabble sets.[/color][/b]

---

Welsh-language Scrabble sets use these 105 tiles:

2 blank tiles (scoring 0 points)
1 point: A ×10, E ×8, N ×8, I ×7, R ×7, Y ×7, D ×6, O ×6, W ×5, DD ×4
2 points: F ×3, G ×3, L ×3, U ×3
3 points: S ×3, B ×2, M ×2, T ×2
4 points: C ×2, FF ×2, H ×2, TH ×2
5 points: CH ×1, LL ×1, P ×1
8 points: J ×1
10 points: NG ×1, RH ×1

Since there are specific tiles for the digraphs that are considered to be separate letters in Welsh orthography (such as DD), it is not permissible to use the individual letters to spell these out. Diacritics on letters are ignored. The digraph PH also exists in Welsh, but is omitted because it is used almost exclusively in mutated words, which the rules disallow. K, Q, V, X and Z also do not exist in Welsh. J does not exist in traditional Welsh either, but it is included as it is used in some borrowed words.>>

BDanielMayfield wrote:

neufer wrote:

[b][size=175][color=#0000FF]The von TRAPP system in syzygy[/color][/size][/b]

---

If these planets ever do line up then:

• 1) every 36.15 days the planets realign
  
  2) every 41st realignment (i.e., 1482.15 days)
  the planets are back to their original positions:
  ---------------------------------------------
  41 x 36.15 days = 1482.15 days
  ......................................
  980.991 orbits of b (Gretl)
  611.998 orbits of c (Marta)
  365.998 orbits of d (Brigitta)
  242.991 orbits of e (Kurt)
  160.986 orbits of f (Louisa)
  119.984 orbits of g (Friedrich)
  
  (More or Less)

More, because you've left out h.

BDanielMayfield wrote:
Syzygy, a great word to know when playing scrabble. At least three of these TRAPPIST-1 planets have already been observed in transit at the same time. So TRAPPIST-1, three of its ducklings, and the Earth all got in a row.

BDanielMayfield wrote:Syzygy, a great word to know when playing scrabble.

neufer wrote:

[b][size=175][color=#0000FF]The von TRAPP system in syzygy[/color][/size][/b]

---

If these planets ever do line up then:

• 1) every 36.15 days the planets realign
  
  2) every 41st realignment (i.e., 1482.15 days)
  the planets are back to their original positions:
  ---------------------------------------------
  41 x 36.15 days = 1482.15 days
  ......................................
  990.991 orbits of b (Gretl)
  611.998 orbits of c (Marta)
  365.998 orbits of d (Brigitta)
  242.991 orbits of e (Kurt)
  160.986 orbits of f (Louisa)
  119.984 orbits of g (Friedrich)
  
  (More or Less)

• 1) every 36.15 days the planets realign
  
  2) every 41st realignment (i.e., 1482.15 days)
  the planets are back to their original positions:
  ---------------------------------------------
  41 x 36.15 days = 1482.15 days
  ......................................
  980.991 orbits of b (Gretl)
  611.998 orbits of c (Marta)
  365.998 orbits of d (Brigitta)
  242.991 orbits of e (Kurt)
  160.986 orbits of f (Louisa)
  119.984 orbits of g (Friedrich)
  
  (More or Less)

alter-ego wrote:

geckzilla wrote:Same, even with numbers fail fixed. (Guess it's bedtime.) You can see it in the dope sheet. They don't line up again.

What assumptions does Blender make?
The orbits have inclination differences and eccentricities. Also, Trappist-1 subtends an angle ranging from 5.5° to 1.4°for planets b thru g.
Regarding angular size alone, if you are not accounting for an extended stellar size, than you could easily be missing a multi-transit event (i.e. the diamonds don't exactly have to line up).

geckzilla wrote:Same, even with numbers fail fixed. (Guess it's bedtime.) You can see it in the dope sheet. They don't line up again.

geckzilla wrote:
1. Almost, but not quite. The dope sheet might interest you. Each diamond is a return to original position / 1 revolution. 100 frames = 1 day so 3615 is where the system stands after 36.15 days.

• What about 36.15 days?

geckzilla wrote:
I've been toying around with a reasonably accurate simulation I've got set up in Blender, and all I know is that each planet seems to be in the wrong place to make the observation each time two of the others form in syzygy with the star. My simulation is unfortunately keyframe animated and I doubt its accuracy after copy and pasting each orbit over and over. Rounding errors build up. It only runs for 100 Earth days currently.

• 1) Do the planet's initial relative positions return after 36.15 days?
  
  2) How do you set the planet's initial relative positions?
  
  3) How do you set Blender?
  (grate, blend, shred, grind, mash, liquefy, frappe, stir, beat, puree, chop, whip, pulse, ice crush?)

geckzilla wrote:
Anyone know if orbital resonance prevents things like double stellar transits happening from the vantage point of, say, the third or fourth planets? I'm guessing the chance goes up by the fifth, six, and seventh, but I'm not sure.

• c observes 9 transits of b
  d observes 6 transits of c
  e observes 3 transits of d
  f observes 2 transits of e
  g observes 1 transit of f

• 1) that planets e through g regularly observe double stellar transits
  2) or that things are so aligned that none of the planets ever observes a double stellar transit.