This is a frame challenge to the question. Why does the question assume that there can not be worlds habitable for liquid water using life around a red dwarf star? There are some factors which may make liquid water using life improbable around many or most red dwarf stars, but that is not certain at the moment. Furthermore, all other types of stars should also be suitable for having planets which are the right temperatures for hypothetical ammonia using life. The question seems to assume that all planets orbit their stars at the same distances. Thus if a star is very luminous all of its planets will be very, very hot, too hot for liquid water based life, and if a star is very dim like a red dwarf star all of its planets will all be very, very cold, too cold for liquid water based life. Take a look at our own solar system, which has eight officially recognized planets at the moment. The semi-major axis of the orbit of the Earth around the Sun is defined as one Astronomical Unit, or AU. So according to this table, [https://www.encyclopedia.com/reference/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/major-planets-solar-system-table][1] and not allowing for the eccentricity of planetary orbits: Mercury orbits the Sun (the source of light and heat), at 0.39 AU, Venus at 0.72 AU, Earth at 1 AU, Mars at 1.52 AU, Jupiter at 5.20 AU, Saturn at 9.54 AU, Uranus at 19.2 AU, and Neptune at 30.06 AU. So Neptune is 77.076 times as far from the Sun as Mercury is. Therefore Mercury receives 77.076 squared, or 5.940.85, times as much radiation from the Sun as Neptune does. Radiation from the Sun is not the only source of planetary heat, but it is the major source, and differences in the amount of radiation received from the Sun is the major cause of differences in planetary temperatures. At the present time in 2021 over 4,000 exoplanets in other star systems have been discovered, and astronomers have found that they vary a lot in various aspects. Wikipedia has a list of exoplanet extremes. Planet COCONUTS-2b orbits around the star COCONUTS-2 at so great a distance (about 6,471 AU) that its year is estimated to be about 1,100,000 Earth years long. [https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.02805][2] The previous record holder for longest year, JMASS J2126-8140, is a giant planet or brown dwarf orbiting the star TYC 9481-927-1, a spectral type M1V, a red dwarf, at a distance of about 6,900 AU and with a year about 900,000 Earth years long. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TYC_9486-927-1][3] The record for the coldest exoplanet is held by OGLE-2016-BLG-1195Lb, which orbits the very dim star OGLE-2016-BLG-1195L, at about 1 AU distance, but has a temperature of only about 31 degreees K. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OGLE-2016-BLG-1195Lb][4] There is a class of "Hot Jupiters", very large planets which orbit very close to their stars and are very hot as a result. "Ultra-hot Jupiters" have daytime temperatures over 2,200 degrees K. Hot Jupiters have very close obits but are not common around the least massive and least luminous stars, red dwarfs. > They appear to be more common around F- and G-type stars and less so around K-type stars. Hot Jupiters around red dwarfs are very rare.[14] Generalizations about the distribution of these planets must take into account the various observational biases, but in general their prevalence decreases exponentially as a function of the absolute stellar magnitude.[15] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_Jupiter#cite_note-41][5] Many hot jupiters orbit stars that are brighter than the Sun at distances much closer than the orbit of Mercury in our solar system. So in our solar system the orbital distances and surface temperatures of planets vary greatly, and examples of planets in other star systems show that the orbits of planets do not have to be proportional to the mass and luminosity of their stars. Any type of star, from the brightest to the dimmest, can have close planets, even planets which are many times closer than Mercury is to the Sun. Any type of star, from the brightest to the dimmest, can have distant planets, even planets which are many times as distant as Neptune is from the Sun. So any specific star of any type could possibly have one or more planets orbiting within its circumstellar habitable zone. And no specific star of any type is guaranteed to have even a single planet within its circumstellar habitable zone, at least not until one or more planets are actually discovered with that zone. Wikipedia has an article discussing Hypothetical biochemestries which myhypothetical be posisble in enviroments with different chemicals present in abundance, or with different temperatures. That is a good place to star reseraching ideas oa bout different biochemestries for planets where liquid water based life could not exist. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_types_of_biochemistry][6] The circumstellar habitable zone of a star is the range of distances where the temperatures of hypothetical planets would enable water to be liquid on their surfaces. It is shaped like a hollow shell between two concentric spheres with different radii. But since most star systems would have their planets orbiting in almost exactly the same plane, with no more than a few degrees of tilt, it is common to picture a circumstellar habitable zone as a disc with a smaller disc cut out from the center. And if alternate forms of biochemestry can work and be used by lifeforms at temperatures whee water is a gas or a solid, a star would have several different concentric habitable zones for different biochestries requring different temperatures. Even if there are several possible habitable zones around stars, no doubt many stars have planets which orbit outside of any habitable zone. Those planets might orbit too close and too hot for any possible form of life. They might orbit too far and too cold for any possible form of life. Or they might orbit within gaps betwen two habitable zones, where no possible lifeforms could survive the intermediate temperatures. And possibly some stars could have planets orbiting within every possible habitable zone. In theory it is easy to determine the inner and outer limits of the circumstellar habitable zone for liquid water using life forms of any specific stars whose luminiosity relative to that of the Sun is known. Just adjust the inner and outer edges of the Sun's circumstellar habitable zone to account for the star's luminosity. But the inner and outer edges of the Sun's circumstellar habitable zone are not know with certainty. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstellar_habitable_zone#Solar_System_estimates][7] The table lists of number of widely varying estimates of the inner and outer edges, or both, of the Sun's circumstellar habitable zone. I note that human beings cannot survive unprotected by clothing, shelters, and sometimes breathng equipment, in large parts of the biosphere of Earth where other lifeforms can survive and flourish. Also Earth formed about 4.54 billion years ago, and the earliest certainly known life on Earth was 3 billion years ago, but Earth didn't have an atmosphere breathable for humans until about 540 million years ago. So most scientific discussions of planetary habitability mean habitability for liquid water using lifeforms in general, and only a minority of such habitable worlds would also have oxygen rich atmospheres for land animals to breathe. Some of the inner and outer extensions to the habitable zone require specific atmospheric compositions to maintain the proper temperatures. Those atmospheres might not be breathable for humans, but native lifeforms might have no trouble tolerating them. I added a lot more to this answer, but lost all of that work on it. Tues. 09-28-2021 I guess I'll try to complete the answer. Of course the definition of the habitable zone is a zone where planets (with dense enough atmospheres that water doesn't go diectly from ice to vapor) can have the right temperatures for liquid water on their surfaces. There are many objects in the outer solar system which are largely composed of ices of water and other substances including ammonia and methane, mixed in with various types of rocks in varying proportions. And there are a number of ice covered objects in the outer solar system which have been found to have, or may possibly have, dense layers of ice entending down for many kilometers below their surfaces, with oceans of liquids belwow the ice and above the rocky surfaces of those objects. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_lakes_and_seas_in_the_Solar_System][8] And of course there is speculation about the possibility of lifeforms in those interior oceans. If there is liquid water using life in some of those interior oceans, and if the circumstellar habitable zone for liguid water using life is interpreted as including the regions where liquid water using life can exist in interior oceans, the habitable zone for liquid water using life should overlap drasically with the habitable zones for liquid ammonia using life and for liquid methane using life. If such hypothetical biochemestries are possible, of course. Lifeforms which exist on Earth are highly stratified by altitude. The biosphere of Earth extends kilometers high into the atmosphere and extends kilometers deep under the surface of the oceans, and also kilometers deep below the ground where microbes exist within rocks. In the oceans of Earth, lifeforms are adapted to a comparatively narrow range of depths and the varying water pressures, temperatures, oxygen levels, etc. at those depths, and will die outside their depth ranges. So I can believe that possibly some worlds might possibly have interior oceans many times deeper than those of Earth, with lifeforms having totally different biochemestries living at various depths, possibly including layers with liquid water using lifeforms, layers with liquid ammonia using lifeforms, layers with liquid methane using lifeforms, etc. Such a hypothetical world could be considered to be within several different circumstellar habitable zones at the same time, if the habitable zones are defined as extending to habitabilty for lifeforms in interior oceans as well as for lifeforms on the surface. [1]: https://www.encyclopedia.com/reference/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/major-planets-solar-system-table [2]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.02805 [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TYC_9486-927-1 [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OGLE-2016-BLG-1195Lb [5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_Jupiter#cite_note-41 [6]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_types_of_biochemistry [7]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstellar_habitable_zone#Solar_System_estimates [8]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_lakes_and_seas_in_the_Solar_System