Slormp, if you're reading this you should probably make a pinned comment issuing a correction that Lagrange points are NOT where the gravity of two orbital bodies cancel out. Rather, it is where the sum of the vectors of the planets gravity exactly equal the centrifugal force needed to maintain an orbit around the larger orbital body. Other than that, nice video.
@@Shythalia The english written language relies mostly on a complex web of rules based on what's around the vowel letter, moreso than the vowel letter itself, so whether it's the letter A or not, in isolation, tells you very little about how to pronounce it from an english standpoint. Captain's description of Keh-rhun could be close enough, but it's vague so I cannot say for sure. (In fact, I could interpret it to be correct both for wiktionary's entry on the english word for the planet, /ˈkɛəɹɑn/, and the original ancient greek pronunciation of the god, /kʰá.rɔːn/, though both have more pronunciations listed for dialects/time period).
Cool space fact: the binary star system T Coronae Borealis is not only an example of this type of system, but it also is a recurrent nova! When the smaller dwarf absorbs enough material, it explodes all the excess into space with a very bright explosion. It's actually expected to happen again some time in the next few months, and for a few days it will be naked eye visible at night!
@@AbsoluteHuman i mean my point is If its cyclical Does i really matter if it happened thousand years ago? Imho it only matters if they are gone But even then My grand-grand children will prolly know its gone So in the end, does it really matter?
my own headcanon for why the sand alternates between the two planets was always that it had to do with the gravity of the sun, which is so close by. basically, the gravitational force of the other twin isn't normally enough to pull the sand by itself. but when the planets rotate around each other until they're lined up with the sun, the gravity from both the sun and the other twin are acting in the same direction, and it's just barely enough to pull the sand off the planet. of course if this was actually the explanation, you'd probably expect the sand to kind of smoothly rise like a tide, rather than just switching on like a faucet, but hey this is a solar system where a planet can have a black hole at its center, so who are we to judge!
@@ybouzl2191 i'm not sure if this is what you mean, but interestingly for this explanation to work, the twins would only need to be nearly tidally locked relative to the sun, not relative to each other. normally when we talk about tidal lock, we're referring to the ratio between a body's orbit around another body, and its "internal spin" (i have no idea what the right term would be). but in this case, both twins could _spin_ at whatever rate they want to, as long as the ratio between their orbits around _each other_ and their orbit around the sun are close enough to produce the right time scale.
@@dialog_box There is one technically possible but moderately disgusting solution to why the flow would need the Sun's gravity to kickstart it but seems mostly unaffected by the relative change in direction afterwards: the sand isn't just sand, but a gritty slurry. If the sand was all bound together by a self-siphoning fluid of some kind (something similar to the ethylene glycol in antifreeze, for example) then surface tension could keep it going once gravity gives it a push start. I suppose it could also be magnetic, but we never see it disturb any electronics (beyond crushing them into more sand, that is).
There's nothing inherently impossible about a planet having a black hole in the center, it would just have to be way, way smaller than what we see in the game, obviously
Hi! Since you talked about the gravity of the Hourglass Twins, have you ever noticed that it changes depending on the amount of sand on each planet? Since the Ash Twin is basically hollowed out, it goes from 0.8 to like a 0.4. Conversely, I'm pretty sure the extra mass from the sand makes the Ember Twin's gravity go above 1g. The physics of Outer Wilds are really cool.
What’s double cool is that OW physics are (sorta) real-life physics! So by getting a masterful grasp of the gravity/flight mechanics, you’re like, marginally closer to being an astronaut than your friends!
i wish more writers created this type of planetary duo for their fictional star systems i absolutely adore the idea of two planets that occasionally throw a vast amount of material from one to the other, can even get cool worldbuilding by just having it as decoration in a world's night sky but aside from things of my own creation i can literally think of 2 examples and i don't even know the second one's specifics the hourglass twins throwing their sand and a set that threw an ocean around from a disney cartoon i remember was on the tv for a little kid when i was visiting some family ages ago
@@dbam2814 It turns out I used to watch that show when I was younger and completely forgot about it, and I'm pretty sure that show was what gave me my love for space at a young age, and that eventually led me to outer wilds which led me to this comment, which made me rediscover the show. Everything comes full circle
i mean, it took me def no more than 5 tries of overshooting the sun until i realised i should just go into orbit and then match velocity. (after that i proceeded to not find an entrance and thinking you could only get inside somehow else, lol)
Something that you didn’t consider: the sand exchange starts when the planet with all the sand is at its furthest part of its local orbit from the sun (and accordingly the planet without the sand is at its nearest point) so perhaps the sun initializes the transfer at which point the sand accumulating on the receiving planet pushes the L1 point away creating a siphon like effect
Super cool video! I knew about mass transfer between stars but didn't realize that mass could be transferred back and forth in a cycle as the roche lobe changes size, so that was really interesting to learn
The main thing with these is that in reality you need extremely dense cores with an ephemeral mantle to support this situation for long periods. Pretty much all contact binary planets I've tried to create in simulations with realistic materials and size between that of the moon and Neptune collapse within hours.
Actually, one of nomai writings in game points out that teleporters point not to the center of objects, but center of their mass, with inclination of 5 degrees. Thats why ATP teleporter turns on when pointed at ember twin.
My personal theory is that the sand flow isn't caused by gravity, but by weather. Its basically a dust devil that happens to throw sand higher than their shared center of mass. Maybe there's just a solar flare that hits the (thin and unbreathable) atmosphere just the right way to get things spinning every once in a while. Who knows if it would actually be realistic, but at least it has a power source (the sun) so it's thermodynamically possible, and atmospheric dynamics are complicated enough that i can fool myself into thinking theres a way.
Subscribed. Your content is genuinely entertaining. It has a very classic jan misali/Vsauce type of vibe, and with the frequency you create these, I hope to see much more to come and look forward to watching you grow. :)
Great video and answers one of the questions I was thinking about when I played Outer Wilds. I've noticed that you have a pretty diverse content on your channel and so I don't know if there will be more content on Outer Wilds that I'm interested in. But if you do continue, I'll offer some ideas that could also be considered from a scientific perspective (contains spoilers): 1. Flying out into space and coming back in from Giant's Deep islands. Perhaps something similar exists with water geysers on icy planets (Titan, Enceladus, and Triton). 2. A planet that is constantly bombarded by its satellite, like Hollow's Lantern constantly bombarding Brittle Hollow. 3. The rupture of the core of the comet Interloper. We can understand that the core was blown apart by internal pressure and the matter moved (almost) instantaneously throughout the solar system. It's unlikely that it would work that way in reality, but what if it did?
Remember that inertia is a thing, so sand could move to the Lagrange point in the middle of the planet but inertia would keep it moving towards the red planet. And this is a chain reaction, because the more sand that moves towards the Lagrange point, the closer this point gets to the red planet eventually putting this point inside the planet and this sucking all the sand
The twins do not actually have roughly the same gravity. You can actually see the gravity counter decrease on the ash twin and increase on the ember twin over the course of the loop Great video tho
Here are some ingredients to something more plausable: - Stars and planets have magnetic fields, that could alternate from time to time. - Iron can become a big magnet itself, when it is in a magnetic field. - Ironoxide can still hold magnetic properties. Even when mixed with Siliciumoxide. - Magnetism can reach far when connected. And thus can be stronger than gravity. So, this is what happens, the star switches its poles. The planets are somehow affected in the field as well. The sand is now attracted to the other planet. Since the magnetic pull is stronger than the gravity. Once a connection has been made, it goes very rapidly. Once the star switches poles again. The proces reverts.
“I didn’t really believe the hourglass twins were possible, so I scoured the universe to find a real world example. And to my shock, I found hourglass twin stars”
7:14 that gravity indicator isnt the most reliable thing, though i suppose its a matter of perspective, it updates in real time, im pretty sure as the sand goes down you can see the gravity go down and if the ember twin is directly underneath you it will display higher because embers gravity is helping to pull you down. Im not completely sure about that last one, needs testing.
7:55 you could also just see if you fly off into space by simply standing on the surface before the transfer begins since you don't, a loose particle wouldn't fly off due to gravitational forces
Something like the hourglass binary planets is super rare because the pillar itself would consume a huge amount of the orbital energy from friction, it would not be something you could see for very long unless the planets involved were basically made of diamond and only a superficial amount of material forming the bridge existed.
Hi, the backing music to this is nice, do you have a tracklistm (or just a general idea of what was used, or was it all just random royalty free music)
One thing to note about this game is that all gravity, except the suns, is linear, unlike our more exponentially decaying gravity. This is so the planets can be so close without trying to murder each other.
Without watching the video I instantly thought of Pluto and its moon-satellite that gets frozen stuck to Pluto during methane spews sometimes. very neat stuff.
Tldr: you can stand next to the sand column in outerwilds nothing happens. You can even throw yourself off the ground in lockstep with the sand column and you'll end up thrown off course and not hit ember twin. Even if you got into the sand column if you turned off the friction the sand applies you would slip out of the path to ember twin. The physics just don't physic. A couple really big issues with this concepts: all the stuff that you talked about was for atmospheres. Gases have varrying internal speed (following the gauss distribution there are a lot at moderate speeds and smaller amount of particles as you go beyond the average-ish speed). If you put sand beyond the roche lobe of a planet... it wouldn't go anywhere because the gravity isn't strong enough to rip it off the surface only to provide the extra delta V the particle needs to reach the other body during the flight. That brings us to the second issue. If a planet was within the actual roche limit (the thing you would need to pull sand up) it would also rip off the entire atmosphere, oceans, and continents because the tidal forces are stronger than the planet's gravitational pull. Planets don't resist tidal pulls the way the interloper, space probes, and other objects held together by chemical bond. Instead they flex changing shape as the direction to the tide producing object changes. Planets may technically be held together by chemical bonds at the local level but it's basically never enough to resist the huge loads induced over anything larger than an asteroid. The real life size ash/ember twin would either shatter eachother into a minature planetary disk or one would rip the other apart into a new ring. That brings me to my final issue. Even if we make the rest of the planet have internal strength to resist bring torn apart (say some sort of constructed megastructure) and put that planet within the roche limit so the sand can be lifted off the planet. In fact the sand would form a ring around the planet it was orbiting with a buldge around the area of the megastructure the sand got pulled off of. The sand will never hit the other planet. This is why the in game sand column has a huge force of friction to force you to almost match its speed. If it didn't you'd just be thrown into orbit between the two planets when you got lifted up by the sabd column.
I allways liked that idea of merged 2 planets. Its one of most unique and interresting imagined obcject that im preety sure was never made into sf, and if thats true then i think its missed opportunity for great worldbuilding.
the first thing i thought of when seeing this was the roche limit and how one planet ripping another apart may resemble the hourglass twins, but that would be a 1 way transfer of mass
Thought of a possible solution while watching. They are the innermost planets of their system, and considering how even as far out as we are, the sun still has an influence on our tides, perhaps it could be reasonable for them to exchange matter, going from the planet furthest from the star at any moment in time to the one closest to the star at that moment in time, having the star's gravity assist with the mass transfer.
I heard that outer wilds doesn’t have the planets just move around a set path but that they are on an actual orbit, they move on physics moving them, they are actually orbiting the star.
So, while it doesn't function like the hourglass twins, I think you should take a look at Arrokoth. Its a Kyper Belt object that is comprised of two objects that have come close enough to touch. And while there isn't anything flowing between the two objects, there seems to be a tendency for some materials to gather where the two lobes touch. Might be a fun read.
herm acxually a planet's definition is "A celestial body that orbits the sun, has sufficient mass to assume nearly a round shape, clears out dust and debris from the neighborhood around its orbit, and is not a satellite of another planet" meaning any celestial body outside the solar system is not considered a planet additionaly any bynary system is by default excluded from the definition due to not having cleared its orbit neighborhood
Ah yes outer wilds, the game that impresses me so much and is my absolute favourite game of all time that also gives me deep feelings of existentialism and a constant reminder of the size and scale of the universe and it's horrifying void I remember after i beat the game i tried it out with the VR mod and holy shit.. it's terrifying
Pluto was demoted from a planet to a dwarf planet because it had not cleared its neighborhood of other objects (like Charon). So I think part of the reason it’s a dwarf planet is because it is a binary planet system. There might be other objects too though.
So isn’t the gravity reader based on Timber Hearths gravity? It may not line up with earths gravity and the metrics we use here, if the gravities of the twins were lower than you calculate would that make them more plausible?
yea but this is the real question.... how. the planet with more mass would be pulling sand from the one with less mass which would just make that denser planet even denser so how would the transfer back ever happen?
I might try make a model of this tbh. I think alternating sand could be done via orbit around a star. If the system has an eccentric orbit it Coyle possibly alternate which object has a stronger gravity Then again, in the outer wilds universe they have gravity manipulation which could be a factor in this tbh
I think if you get a gas giant near a smaller moon (such that the L1 is sub surface to the smaller Moon) [pretty much the definition of a roche limit] it'll end up shredding the smaller moon and you'll end up with a ring system eventually. I enjoy the moon 'Pan' of Saturn, because it's sitting in the ring system absorbing some of the ring itself.
been a while since i played but i assumed the sand transfer was due to the energy being gathered from the sun energy has mass and all that meaning that a large enough collection of energy would generate gravity as well
actually if the two planets are actually sending a large amount of energy from one to the other and back and the stored energy does generate gravity then that would explain it
Couldn't we also take into account the gravity of the sun pulling on the sand? If we assume that the planets orbit each other slow enough that one planet remains closer to the sun for long enough that the planet farther away transfers its sand to the smaller planet, then as they continue to orbit around the sun and each other, the now smaller planet ends up closer to the sun, and it pulls the sand back.
Have you considered that the gravitational constant in the outer wilds universe is likely much larger? A few km large star can maintain fusion for example
Always assumed that everything was merely scaled down for the player's convenience, and that the tiny planets and scale are, in-universe, much more believable. It would just be incredibly boring to make the distances any larger (I mean, if you went for perfect believability, the game would be completely literally unplayable).
I think that you could have this by having the planetcwith the sand spin on it's axis extremely fast. this would effectively lower the total gravity, allowign trhe other planet to pull the sand off of the spinning planet, and due to it's rotational speed, it loses momentum as sand is pulled off. the sand then adds very small amounts of momentum to the planet which the sand is going towards, which means that planet will end up spinning faster. this leads to the planet having enough rotational speed for this to occur again, and again, etc.
i think due to how fast everything is moving in the game it doesnt really make sense. i imagine the only way would be the orbit of the planets around each other would have to be super slow and which ever side was closer to the star might create like a gravity multiplier to shift the sand torward which ever planet was closer to it in the orbit?
Why can't I turn off the subtitles? Personally, they're distracting. Why not have them as part of the TH-cam subtitles system instead of part of the video?
Hello! Your immense inteligence does not tell you that the barycenter of the two objects possess an equalized gravity of both planets, meaning the gravitational force is zero between the two planets measured at the barycenter. This means by the time the pulled sand gets there, it might be able to pass the barycenter out of shear momentum, especialy if the barycenter's mass is closer to the other planet due to it pulling the sand in the first place. My other theory is that the sand is in a semi balanced state which can be pushed through by tidal effects, and in the moment the state breaks, the sand just launches towards the other planet due to for example magnetic sand maybe, i am no physicist. Also Earth in real life itself throws its atmosphere into the sky too, but i am not sure wether Moon falls into that immense jet sometimes, or not
Actually it can be either. When specifically referring to the moon Charon, it was named after its discoverers wife. Which just happened to be Sharon but spelled with a ch. so it can official be called with a hard or soft ch.
@@Slormpington Yes, well, white people have been taking names from other cultures and butchering them since forever. "Sharon spelled with a ch" is just a pre-butchered name. Since we tend to name celestial bodies after gods and other mythical figures, it follows that Charon should be pronounced "Khar-on." It's how it's pronounced in academic circles, anyways. Go into any field that deals with astrology/space and call it "Sharon" and you'll become the laughingstock of the week.
fwiw, the gravity in-game probably isn't the *best* thing to gauge off of, because when you jetpack it claims you're in 0-gravity immediately, which is obviously false since you just fall back to the surface. But it's probably good enough to use anyway for a goofy theory like this.
Slormp, if you're reading this you should probably make a pinned comment issuing a correction that Lagrange points are NOT where the gravity of two orbital bodies cancel out. Rather, it is where the sum of the vectors of the planets gravity exactly equal the centrifugal force needed to maintain an orbit around the larger orbital body.
Other than that, nice video.
I’ll just pin you
Also it's pronounced Charon [keh-rhun] not chair ron
@@captainironbat8193 keh? But it's an a.
@@Shythalia The english written language relies mostly on a complex web of rules based on what's around the vowel letter, moreso than the vowel letter itself, so whether it's the letter A or not, in isolation, tells you very little about how to pronounce it from an english standpoint. Captain's description of Keh-rhun could be close enough, but it's vague so I cannot say for sure. (In fact, I could interpret it to be correct both for wiktionary's entry on the english word for the planet, /ˈkɛəɹɑn/, and the original ancient greek pronunciation of the god, /kʰá.rɔːn/, though both have more pronunciations listed for dialects/time period).
@@captainironbat8193 ok, Karen then 😂
Cool space fact: the binary star system T Coronae Borealis is not only an example of this type of system, but it also is a recurrent nova! When the smaller dwarf absorbs enough material, it explodes all the excess into space with a very bright explosion. It's actually expected to happen again some time in the next few months, and for a few days it will be naked eye visible at night!
Cool
You mean it happened years or thousand years ago but we will be able to see it soon?
@@AbsoluteHuman yea but it happens in a cycle so we can predict when is the next time it will happen
@@Bleilock1 yeah, that's true, but OP said "visible by naked eye" so I assume it doesn't mean "visible several thousand years later" 😅
@@AbsoluteHuman i mean my point is
If its cyclical
Does i really matter if it happened thousand years ago?
Imho it only matters if they are gone
But even then
My grand-grand children will prolly know its gone
So in the end, does it really matter?
my own headcanon for why the sand alternates between the two planets was always that it had to do with the gravity of the sun, which is so close by. basically, the gravitational force of the other twin isn't normally enough to pull the sand by itself. but when the planets rotate around each other until they're lined up with the sun, the gravity from both the sun and the other twin are acting in the same direction, and it's just barely enough to pull the sand off the planet.
of course if this was actually the explanation, you'd probably expect the sand to kind of smoothly rise like a tide, rather than just switching on like a faucet, but hey this is a solar system where a planet can have a black hole at its center, so who are we to judge!
This is a great explanation, I wish that the planets were nearly tidally locked so that this is Canon
@@ybouzl2191 i'm not sure if this is what you mean, but interestingly for this explanation to work, the twins would only need to be nearly tidally locked relative to the sun, not relative to each other. normally when we talk about tidal lock, we're referring to the ratio between a body's orbit around another body, and its "internal spin" (i have no idea what the right term would be). but in this case, both twins could _spin_ at whatever rate they want to, as long as the ratio between their orbits around _each other_ and their orbit around the sun are close enough to produce the right time scale.
@@dialog_box There is one technically possible but moderately disgusting solution to why the flow would need the Sun's gravity to kickstart it but seems mostly unaffected by the relative change in direction afterwards: the sand isn't just sand, but a gritty slurry. If the sand was all bound together by a self-siphoning fluid of some kind (something similar to the ethylene glycol in antifreeze, for example) then surface tension could keep it going once gravity gives it a push start.
I suppose it could also be magnetic, but we never see it disturb any electronics (beyond crushing them into more sand, that is).
@@pretzelbomb6105 maybe there's a strong static charge on the sand?
There's nothing inherently impossible about a planet having a black hole in the center, it would just have to be way, way smaller than what we see in the game, obviously
Hi!
Since you talked about the gravity of the Hourglass Twins, have you ever noticed that it changes depending on the amount of sand on each planet? Since the Ash Twin is basically hollowed out, it goes from 0.8 to like a 0.4. Conversely, I'm pretty sure the extra mass from the sand makes the Ember Twin's gravity go above 1g.
The physics of Outer Wilds are really cool.
What’s double cool is that OW physics are (sorta) real-life physics! So by getting a masterful grasp of the gravity/flight mechanics, you’re like, marginally closer to being an astronaut than your friends!
The game uses real physics, the planets and things are not on a set path and they really are orbiting the star
mad respect for labeling the "Red Clickbait Arrow" on the thumbnail
I want to eat a super puff planet
Complex orbital mechanics and Outer Wilds, my two favorite things combined into one video! Incredibly cool vid!
i wish more writers created this type of planetary duo for their fictional star systems
i absolutely adore the idea of two planets that occasionally throw a vast amount of material from one to the other, can even get cool worldbuilding by just having it as decoration in a world's night sky
but aside from things of my own creation i can literally think of 2 examples and i don't even know the second one's specifics
the hourglass twins throwing their sand
and a set that threw an ocean around from a disney cartoon i remember was on the tv for a little kid when i was visiting some family ages ago
YEAH, Miles from Tomorrowland had that. My younger brother made me watch that all the time.
@@dbam2814 It turns out I used to watch that show when I was younger and completely forgot about it, and I'm pretty sure that show was what gave me my love for space at a young age, and that eventually led me to outer wilds which led me to this comment, which made me rediscover the show. Everything comes full circle
watching him do a sun station landing attempt was amazing, lets be honest, we all tried it atleast 20 times
Wanted to get b roll footage that wouldn’t spoil the game and thus I spent 2 hours slamming into the sun.
@@Slormpington mmmhmmm, I'm sure it was definitely only for the b roll footage and not at all because u wanted to see if you could do it
i mean, it took me def no more than 5 tries of overshooting the sun until i realised i should just go into orbit and then match velocity. (after that i proceeded to not find an entrance and thinking you could only get inside somehow else, lol)
There's an achievement for doing it btw! The easiest way is to turn your ship "sideways" and match the sun station's orbit.
Dude! This is actually awesome! Complete hidden gem.
Something that you didn’t consider: the sand exchange starts when the planet with all the sand is at its furthest part of its local orbit from the sun (and accordingly the planet without the sand is at its nearest point) so perhaps the sun initializes the transfer at which point the sand accumulating on the receiving planet pushes the L1 point away creating a siphon like effect
Super cool video! I knew about mass transfer between stars but didn't realize that mass could be transferred back and forth in a cycle as the roche lobe changes size, so that was really interesting to learn
I just kept thinking of a slide whistle when seeing the mass transfer animation.
The main thing with these is that in reality you need extremely dense cores with an ephemeral mantle to support this situation for long periods. Pretty much all contact binary planets I've tried to create in simulations with realistic materials and size between that of the moon and Neptune collapse within hours.
Actually, one of nomai writings in game points out that teleporters point not to the center of objects, but center of their mass, with inclination of 5 degrees. Thats why ATP teleporter turns on when pointed at ember twin.
The cutaway upon contacting the sun station followed by a cut back to vaporizing in the sun will never get old
My personal theory is that the sand flow isn't caused by gravity, but by weather. Its basically a dust devil that happens to throw sand higher than their shared center of mass. Maybe there's just a solar flare that hits the (thin and unbreathable) atmosphere just the right way to get things spinning every once in a while.
Who knows if it would actually be realistic, but at least it has a power source (the sun) so it's thermodynamically possible, and atmospheric dynamics are complicated enough that i can fool myself into thinking theres a way.
This is great, can tell you put a ton of effort in
Subscribed. Your content is genuinely entertaining. It has a very classic jan misali/Vsauce type of vibe, and with the frequency you create these, I hope to see much more to come and look forward to watching you grow. :)
Came for the red clickbait arrow, stayed for the planetary mechanics. A+
Great video and answers one of the questions I was thinking about when I played Outer Wilds. I've noticed that you have a pretty diverse content on your channel and so I don't know if there will be more content on Outer Wilds that I'm interested in. But if you do continue, I'll offer some ideas that could also be considered from a scientific perspective (contains spoilers):
1. Flying out into space and coming back in from Giant's Deep islands. Perhaps something similar exists with water geysers on icy planets (Titan, Enceladus, and Triton).
2. A planet that is constantly bombarded by its satellite, like Hollow's Lantern constantly bombarding Brittle Hollow.
3. The rupture of the core of the comet Interloper. We can understand that the core was blown apart by internal pressure and the matter moved (almost) instantaneously throughout the solar system. It's unlikely that it would work that way in reality, but what if it did?
More people need to watch this, very good
Now this is peak
Remember that inertia is a thing, so sand could move to the Lagrange point in the middle of the planet but inertia would keep it moving towards the red planet. And this is a chain reaction, because the more sand that moves towards the Lagrange point, the closer this point gets to the red planet eventually putting this point inside the planet and this sucking all the sand
*dope* vid, can tell you were up researching long past the need for sleep. thanks for teaching me about binary orbital mechanics!
7:24 interesting. so on Giant's Deep where the gravity intensity mattered mechanically, did you just go by feel?
Yup, tbh I don’t know how I managed.
Subscribing just because you actually put in the effort to subtitle your vid
I really like this video. I forgot how much I like nerdy gaming stuff. You deserve way more views and attention.
The twins do not actually have roughly the same gravity. You can actually see the gravity counter decrease on the ash twin and increase on the ember twin over the course of the loop
Great video tho
Here are some ingredients to something more plausable:
- Stars and planets have magnetic fields, that could alternate from time to time.
- Iron can become a big magnet itself, when it is in a magnetic field.
- Ironoxide can still hold magnetic properties. Even when mixed with Siliciumoxide.
- Magnetism can reach far when connected. And thus can be stronger than gravity.
So, this is what happens, the star switches its poles. The planets are somehow affected in the field as well.
The sand is now attracted to the other planet. Since the magnetic pull is stronger than the gravity.
Once a connection has been made, it goes very rapidly.
Once the star switches poles again. The proces reverts.
0:23
Ah i love the teem non-zero. It's always used for numbers like 0.0000000…1 so incredibly small that to humans it's basically zero.
“I didn’t really believe the hourglass twins were possible, so I scoured the universe to find a real world example. And to my shock, I found hourglass twin stars”
Bro’s asking the real questions.
thanks for pointing out the clickbait arrow i almost didnt see it
Man this game's soundtrack is absolutely perfect.
such a good and interesting video! i'd wondered this myself a few times. very fascinating to hear all the explanations :)
7:14 that gravity indicator isnt the most reliable thing, though i suppose its a matter of perspective, it updates in real time, im pretty sure as the sand goes down you can see the gravity go down and if the ember twin is directly underneath you it will display higher because embers gravity is helping to pull you down. Im not completely sure about that last one, needs testing.
7:55 you could also just see if you fly off into space by simply standing on the surface before the transfer begins
since you don't, a loose particle wouldn't fly off due to gravitational forces
Something like the hourglass binary planets is super rare because the pillar itself would consume a huge amount of the orbital energy from friction, it would not be something you could see for very long unless the planets involved were basically made of diamond and only a superficial amount of material forming the bridge existed.
Hi, the backing music to this is nice, do you have a tracklistm (or just a general idea of what was used, or was it all just random royalty free music)
It was all music from the outer wilds. The games soundtrack is quite nice.
ah so this was why one of your videos was recommended to me.
it was because you just made this outer wilds video.
One thing to note about this game is that all gravity, except the suns, is linear, unlike our more exponentially decaying gravity. This is so the planets can be so close without trying to murder each other.
Without watching the video I instantly thought of Pluto and its moon-satellite that gets frozen stuck to Pluto during methane spews sometimes. very neat stuff.
Do you mean Charon?
This is a very interesting physics problem, are you okay if I use your video as a source for an essay im writing on Astrophysics? @Slormp
Of course, though I’m not exactly a professional
Let me know how it turns out!
Tldr: you can stand next to the sand column in outerwilds nothing happens. You can even throw yourself off the ground in lockstep with the sand column and you'll end up thrown off course and not hit ember twin. Even if you got into the sand column if you turned off the friction the sand applies you would slip out of the path to ember twin. The physics just don't physic.
A couple really big issues with this concepts: all the stuff that you talked about was for atmospheres. Gases have varrying internal speed (following the gauss distribution there are a lot at moderate speeds and smaller amount of particles as you go beyond the average-ish speed). If you put sand beyond the roche lobe of a planet... it wouldn't go anywhere because the gravity isn't strong enough to rip it off the surface only to provide the extra delta V the particle needs to reach the other body during the flight.
That brings us to the second issue. If a planet was within the actual roche limit (the thing you would need to pull sand up) it would also rip off the entire atmosphere, oceans, and continents because the tidal forces are stronger than the planet's gravitational pull. Planets don't resist tidal pulls the way the interloper, space probes, and other objects held together by chemical bond. Instead they flex changing shape as the direction to the tide producing object changes. Planets may technically be held together by chemical bonds at the local level but it's basically never enough to resist the huge loads induced over anything larger than an asteroid. The real life size ash/ember twin would either shatter eachother into a minature planetary disk or one would rip the other apart into a new ring.
That brings me to my final issue. Even if we make the rest of the planet have internal strength to resist bring torn apart (say some sort of constructed megastructure) and put that planet within the roche limit so the sand can be lifted off the planet. In fact the sand would form a ring around the planet it was orbiting with a buldge around the area of the megastructure the sand got pulled off of. The sand will never hit the other planet. This is why the in game sand column has a huge force of friction to force you to almost match its speed. If it didn't you'd just be thrown into orbit between the two planets when you got lifted up by the sabd column.
I allways liked that idea of merged 2 planets. Its one of most unique and interresting imagined obcject that im preety sure was never made into sf, and if thats true then i think its missed opportunity for great worldbuilding.
the first thing i thought of when seeing this was the roche limit and how one planet ripping another apart may resemble the hourglass twins, but that would be a 1 way transfer of mass
Thought of a possible solution while watching. They are the innermost planets of their system, and considering how even as far out as we are, the sun still has an influence on our tides, perhaps it could be reasonable for them to exchange matter, going from the planet furthest from the star at any moment in time to the one closest to the star at that moment in time, having the star's gravity assist with the mass transfer.
I heard that outer wilds doesn’t have the planets just move around a set path but that they are on an actual orbit, they move on physics moving them, they are actually orbiting the star.
I didn't finish it, but Robert L. Forward wrote a novel about a similar double planet called "Rocheworld."
Red Clickbait Arrow is the best
Subbed around 6.16k
Im investing in this channel before it gets famous
In game lore says the sand swaps planets, so if the cycle lasted longer. We could see sand go the otherway
So, while it doesn't function like the hourglass twins, I think you should take a look at Arrokoth. Its a Kyper Belt object that is comprised of two objects that have come close enough to touch. And while there isn't anything flowing between the two objects, there seems to be a tendency for some materials to gather where the two lobes touch. Might be a fun read.
Anyone else JUST NOW learning that Pluto has a twin that is NEVER talked about?
herm acxually a planet's definition is "A celestial body that orbits the sun, has sufficient mass to assume nearly a round shape, clears out dust and debris from the neighborhood around its orbit, and is not a satellite of another planet" meaning any celestial body outside the solar system is not considered a planet additionaly any bynary system is by default excluded from the definition due to not having cleared its orbit neighborhood
Cool video man, I hope you get more exposure
There's a classic sci-fi book about something like this. It's called Rocheworld
Hey can you provide the references for this video. I mean the formulae for Roche limit and roche spheres
Ah yes outer wilds, the game that impresses me so much and is my absolute favourite game of all time that also gives me deep feelings of existentialism and a constant reminder of the size and scale of the universe and it's horrifying void
I remember after i beat the game i tried it out with the VR mod and holy shit.. it's terrifying
1:40
ouch
Pluto was demoted from a planet to a dwarf planet because it had not cleared its neighborhood of other objects (like Charon). So I think part of the reason it’s a dwarf planet is because it is a binary planet system.
There might be other objects too though.
Crazy how life in the universe and sand pillar planet have basically the same likelyhood
Remember that's not Earth's gravity. But you could calculate it in comparison to Earth's. 7:29
So isn’t the gravity reader based on Timber Hearths gravity? It may not line up with earths gravity and the metrics we use here, if the gravities of the twins were lower than you calculate would that make them more plausible?
The asteroid Arrokoth (aka Ultima Thule) is basically this, two smaller asteroids that slowly got closer and finally "kissed"
fun fact: the sand actually switches between the 2 twins in a cycle
yea but this is the real question.... how. the planet with more mass would be pulling sand from the one with less mass which would just make that denser planet even denser so how would the transfer back ever happen?
Magic
Slightly different laws of physics, similar to how black holes work very differently.
This was in the video
@@harmoen I didn't focus enough to hear it lol
I might try make a model of this tbh. I think alternating sand could be done via orbit around a star. If the system has an eccentric orbit it Coyle possibly alternate which object has a stronger gravity
Then again, in the outer wilds universe they have gravity manipulation which could be a factor in this tbh
wake up babe new peak just dropped
pluto is an honorary planet in my books.
As a Kirby fan, i am VERY familiar with the Roche Limit lol
ive never played outer wilds before but this is kool.
Sorry man, but the thumbnail doesn’t have enough red circle to draw my attention to the 2 planets
I think if you get a gas giant near a smaller moon (such that the L1 is sub surface to the smaller Moon) [pretty much the definition of a roche limit] it'll end up shredding the smaller moon and you'll end up with a ring system eventually.
I enjoy the moon 'Pan' of Saturn, because it's sitting in the ring system absorbing some of the ring itself.
been a while since i played but i assumed the sand transfer was due to the energy being gathered from the sun
energy has mass and all that
meaning that a large enough collection of energy would generate gravity as well
actually if the two planets are actually sending a large amount of energy from one to the other and back
and the stored energy does generate gravity
then that would explain it
Pretty cool!
Couldn't we also take into account the gravity of the sun pulling on the sand?
If we assume that the planets orbit each other slow enough that one planet remains closer to the sun for long enough that the planet farther away transfers its sand to the smaller planet, then as they continue to orbit around the sun and each other, the now smaller planet ends up closer to the sun, and it pulls the sand back.
Have you considered that the gravitational constant in the outer wilds universe is likely much larger? A few km large star can maintain fusion for example
My notes page is full of stuff like that. Ultimately I decided to keep it simple then get caught up in all that mess.
Not only is the gravatational constant different, the dropoff rate is different too, so it's a whole different equation
Always assumed that everything was merely scaled down for the player's convenience, and that the tiny planets and scale are, in-universe, much more believable. It would just be incredibly boring to make the distances any larger (I mean, if you went for perfect believability, the game would be completely literally unplayable).
This is very cool
Dude, I need someone to make a simulation of this on Space Engine
i always assumed that outer wilds planet system was loosely based on the Trappist 1 system
Im here for the red clickbait arrow tbh
Doesn't the Ash Twins change gravity depending on how much sand they have...?
I think that you could have this by having the planetcwith the sand spin on it's axis extremely fast. this would effectively lower the total gravity, allowign trhe other planet to pull the sand off of the spinning planet, and due to it's rotational speed, it loses momentum as sand is pulled off. the sand then adds very small amounts of momentum to the planet which the sand is going towards, which means that planet will end up spinning faster. this leads to the planet having enough rotational speed for this to occur again, and again, etc.
i think due to how fast everything is moving in the game it doesnt really make sense. i imagine the only way would be the orbit of the planets around each other would have to be super slow and which ever side was closer to the star might create like a gravity multiplier to shift the sand torward which ever planet was closer to it in the orbit?
There is a novel called “Rocheworld”
Clicked because of “red clickbait arrow”
Bravo
Why can't I turn off the subtitles? Personally, they're distracting. Why not have them as part of the TH-cam subtitles system instead of part of the video?
Cuz TH-cam subtitles are wrong when autogenerated but take f’’king forever to make by yourself.
Interesting, CCs with CCs turned off.
I have deaf friends so I add subtitles so they can watch
@@Slormpington fair enough, I just find it kinda odd since TH-cam has a dedicated feature for it.
@@deltacx1059 auto captions are big dumb and writing your own captions takes ages
Thought it was Spore from the thumbnail lol
Hello!
Your immense inteligence does not tell you that the barycenter of the two objects possess an equalized gravity of both planets, meaning the gravitational force is zero between the two planets measured at the barycenter. This means by the time the pulled sand gets there, it might be able to pass the barycenter out of shear momentum, especialy if the barycenter's mass is closer to the other planet due to it pulling the sand in the first place. My other theory is that the sand is in a semi balanced state which can be pushed through by tidal effects, and in the moment the state breaks, the sand just launches towards the other planet due to for example magnetic sand maybe, i am no physicist. Also Earth in real life itself throws its atmosphere into the sky too, but i am not sure wether Moon falls into that immense jet sometimes, or not
Hell yeah science
generic comment for engagement
good!
Charon has a hard "ch". Great video though!
Actually it can be either. When specifically referring to the moon Charon, it was named after its discoverers wife. Which just happened to be Sharon but spelled with a ch. so it can official be called with a hard or soft ch.
@@Slormpington Yes, well, white people have been taking names from other cultures and butchering them since forever. "Sharon spelled with a ch" is just a pre-butchered name.
Since we tend to name celestial bodies after gods and other mythical figures, it follows that Charon should be pronounced "Khar-on."
It's how it's pronounced in academic circles, anyways. Go into any field that deals with astrology/space and call it "Sharon" and you'll become the laughingstock of the week.
Idea, sand tide.
Good shit
fwiw, the gravity in-game probably isn't the *best* thing to gauge off of, because when you jetpack it claims you're in 0-gravity immediately, which is obviously false since you just fall back to the surface. But it's probably good enough to use anyway for a goofy theory like this.
I don’t actually plan to stick around to watch this video, but I wanted to give you credit for the clickbait arrow in the thumbnail
I have access to matlab, ill run some numbers and look up the starcharts, maybe we will find the outer wilds solar system lmaooo.
i read the title as "how realistic are the hourglass twinks?"...😶😭
Im simple man i see RED CLICKBAIT ARROW i click video