The question isn't whether this system would be natural or artificial--it'd work either way.

At the center of this solar system is a binary of yellow dwarves, each one rated F5 (120% the diameter, 130% the mass and 150% the luminosity of our sun). Orbiting this binary are six co-orbitals of other binary systems, each one a G2 (our sun) orbited by a K0 star (85% the width, 78% the mass and only 40% the luminosity of our sun). Each co-orbital is separated by 60 degrees of space, which in this case would be multiple, if not tens of, AUs between each binary in the co-orbit. And each co-orbital binary has its own habitable zone.

Would such a solar system be overall stable in the long run?

  • $\begingroup$ This system is fairly similar to the Klemperer rosette proposed in Ringworld by Larry Niven. Unfortunately, Niven was not an expert on stability of Ringwords or other planetary systems. :) As explained at that article, the rosettes are not actually stable. Making each moving component a binary star probably doesn't help to avoid perturbation of the system. $\endgroup$ Sep 13, 2021 at 2:23
  • $\begingroup$ Actually it has been claimed that a system of 7 to 42 equally massed and equally space objects can orbit a much more massive central body and be stable. planetplanet.net/2017/05/03/… - ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010CeMDA.107..487S/abstract A Klemperer rosette does not have a central body. Continued $\endgroup$ Sep 13, 2021 at 17:01
  • $\begingroup$ Continued. The problem with JohnWDailey's proposed system is that the central mass, a pair of F5V stars, close to the limit of stars which could last long enough to have habitable planets, would not be massive enough to have so many other pairs of stars in orbit in a ring around them. The two F5 stars would total only 2.60 times the mass of the Sun, while the 6 outer pairs would total 10.68 times the mass of the Sun, more than 4 times the mass of the central pair. The system would be fine with one of the pairs of smaller stars orbiting the central pair. $\endgroup$ Sep 13, 2021 at 17:06

1 Answer 1


No. All the masses are too similar for Lagrange point stability. You have a 14-body problem here, and those have chaotic behaviour.

  • $\begingroup$ "Too similar"? Meaning what? $\endgroup$ Sep 13, 2021 at 2:15
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @JohnWDailey: Lagrange point stability depends on one object being very much smaller than the other. If the mass of the object at the Lagrange point is not very much smaller than the mass of the main object then the system is not stable. $\endgroup$
    – AlexP
    Sep 13, 2021 at 3:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .