Community hub
0 subscribers8 pages, 0 posts
Recent from talks
All channels
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Welcome to the community hub built to collect knowledge and have discussions related to Star system.
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Star system
View on Wikipediafrom Wikipedia
The Algol three-star system imaged in the near-infrared by the CHARA interferometer with 0.5 mas resolution in 2009. The shape of Algol C is an artifact.
A star system or stellar system is a small number of stars that orbit each other,[1] bound by gravitational attraction. It may sometimes be used to refer to a single star.[2] A large group of stars bound by gravitation is generally called a star cluster or galaxy, although, broadly speaking, they are also star systems. Star systems are not to be confused with planetary systems, which include planets and similar bodies (such as comets).
Terminology
[edit]A star system of two stars is known as a binary star, binary star system or physical double star.
Systems with four or more components are rare, and are much less commonly found than those with 2 or 3.[3] Multiple-star systems are called triple, ternary, or trinary if they contain three stars; quadruple or quaternary if they contain four stars; quintuple or quintenary with five stars; sextuple or sextenary with six stars; septuple or septenary with seven stars; and octuple or octenary with eight stars.
These systems are smaller than open star clusters, which have more complex dynamics and typically have from 100 to 1,000 stars.[4]
Optical doubles and multiples
[edit]Binary and multiple star systems are also known as a physical multiple stars, to distinguish them from optical multiple stars, which merely look close together when viewed from Earth. Multiple stars may refer to either optical or physical,[5][3][6][7] but optical multiples do not form a star system.
Triple stars that are not all gravitationally bound (and thus do not form a triple star system) might comprise a physical binary and an optical companion (such as Beta Cephei) or, in rare cases, a purely optical triple star (such as Gamma Serpentis).
Abundance
[edit]Research on binary and multiple stars estimates they make up about a third of the star systems in the Milky Way galaxy, with two-thirds of stars being single.[8]
Binary stars are the most common non-single stars. With multiple star systems, the number of known systems decreases exponentially with multiplicity.[9] For example, in the 1999 revision of Tokovinin's catalog[3] of physical multiple stars, 551 out of the 728 systems described are triple. However, because of suspected selection effects, the ability to interpret these statistics is very limited.[10]
Detection
[edit]There are various methods to detect star systems and distinguish them from optical binaries multiples. These include:
- Make observations six months apart and look for differences caused by parallaxes. (Not feasible for distant stars.)
- Directly observe the stars orbiting each other or an apparently empty space (such as a dim star or neutron star). (Not feasible for distant stars or those with long orbital periods.)
- Observe a varying Doppler shift.
- Observe fluctuations in brightness that result from eclipses. (Relies on the Earth being in the orbital plane.)
- Observe fluctuations in brightness that result from stars reflecting each other's light or gravitationally deforming each other.
Orbital characteristics
[edit]In systems that satisfy the assumptions of the two-body problem – including having negligible tidal effects, perturbations (from the gravity of other bodies), and transfer of mass between stars – the two stars will trace out a stable elliptical orbit around the barycenter of the system. Examples of binary systems are Sirius, Procyon and Cygnus X-1, the last of which probably consists of a star and a black hole.
Multiple-star systems can be divided into two main dynamical classes:
- Hierarchical systems are stable and consist of nested orbits that do not interact much. Each level of the hierarchy can be treated as a two-body problem.
- Trapezia have unstable, strongly interacting orbits and are modelled as an n-body problem, exhibiting chaotic behavior.[11] They can have 2, 3, or 4 stars.
Hierarchical systems
[edit]
Most multiple-star systems are organized in what is called a hierarchical system: the stars in the system can be divided into two smaller groups, each of which traverses a larger orbit around the system's center of mass. Each of these smaller groups must also be hierarchical, which means that they must be divided into smaller subgroups which themselves are hierarchical, and so on.[13] Each level of the hierarchy can be treated as a two-body problem by considering close pairs as if they were a single star. In these systems there is little interaction between the orbits and the stars' motion will continue to approximate stable[3][14] Keplerian orbits around the system's center of mass.[15]
For example, stable trinary systems consist of two stars in a close binary system, with a third orbiting this pair at a distance much larger than that of the binary orbit.[16][13] If the inner and outer orbits are comparable in size, the system may become dynamically unstable, leading to a star being ejected from the system.[17] EZ Aquarii is an example of a physical hierarchical triple system, which has an outer star orbiting an inner binary composed of two more red dwarf stars.
Mobile diagrams
[edit]
- multiplex
- simplex, binary system
- simplex, triple system, hierarchy 2
- simplex, quadruple system, hierarchy 2
- simplex, quadruple system, hierarchy 3
- simplex, quintuple system, hierarchy 4.
Hierarchical arrangements can be organized by what Evans (1968) called mobile diagrams, which look similar to ornamental mobiles hung from the ceiling. Each level of the mobile illustrates the decomposition of the system into two or more systems with smaller size. Evans calls a diagram multiplex if there is a node with more than two children, i.e. if the decomposition of some subsystem involves two or more orbits with comparable size. Because multiplexes may be unstable, multiple stars are expected to be simplex, meaning that at each level there are exactly two children. Evans calls the number of levels in the diagram its hierarchy.[13]
- A simplex diagram of hierarchy 1, as in (b), describes a binary system.
- A simplex diagram of hierarchy 2 may describe a triple system, as in (c), or a quadruple system, as in (d).
- A simplex diagram of hierarchy 3 may describe a system with anywhere from four to eight components. The mobile diagram in (e) shows an example of a quadruple system with hierarchy 3, consisting of a single distant component orbiting a close binary system, with one of the components of the close binary being an even closer binary.
- A real example of a system with hierarchy 3 is Castor, also known as Alpha Geminorum or α Gem. It consists of what appears to be a visual binary star which, upon closer inspection, can be seen to consist of two spectroscopic binary stars. By itself, this would be a quadruple hierarchy 2 system as in (d), but it is orbited by a fainter more distant component, which is also a close red dwarf binary. This forms a sextuple system of hierarchy 3.[18]
- The maximum hierarchy occurring in A. A. Tokovinin's Multiple Star Catalogue, as of 1999, is 4.[3] For example, the stars Gliese 644A and Gliese 644B form what appears to be a close visual binary star; because Gliese 644B is a spectroscopic binary, this is actually a triple system. The triple system has the more distant visual companion Gliese 643 and the still more distant visual companion Gliese 644C, which, because of their common motion with Gliese 644AB, are thought to be gravitationally bound to the triple system. This forms a quintuple system whose mobile diagram would be the diagram of level 4 appearing in (f).[19]
Higher hierarchies are also possible.[13][20] Most of these higher hierarchies either are stable or suffer from internal perturbations.[21][22][23] Others consider complex multiple stars will in time theoretically disintegrate into less complex multiple stars, like more common observed triples or quadruples.[24][25]
Trapezia
[edit]Trapezia are usually very young, unstable systems. These are thought to form in stellar nurseries, and quickly fragment into stable multiple stars, which in the process may eject components as galactic high-velocity stars.[26][27] They are named after the multiple star system known as the Trapezium Cluster in the heart of the Orion Nebula.[26] Such systems are not rare, and commonly appear close to or within bright nebulae. These stars have no standard hierarchical arrangements, but compete for stable orbits. This relationship is called interplay.[28] Such stars eventually settle down to a close binary with a distant companion, with the other star(s) previously in the system ejected into interstellar space at high velocities.[28] This dynamic may explain the runaway stars that might have been ejected during a collision of two binary star groups or a multiple system. This event is credited with ejecting AE Aurigae, Mu Columbae and 53 Arietis at above 200 km·s−1 and has been traced to the Trapezium cluster in the Orion Nebula some two million years ago.[29][30]
Designations and nomenclature
[edit]Multiple star designations
[edit]The components of multiple stars can be specified by appending the suffixes A, B, C, etc., to the system's designation. Suffixes such as AB may be used to denote the pair consisting of A and B. The sequence of letters B, C, etc. may be assigned in order of separation from the component A.[31][32] Components discovered close to an already known component may be assigned suffixes such as Aa, Ba, and so forth.[32]
Nomenclature in the Multiple Star Catalogue
[edit]
A. A. Tokovinin's Multiple Star Catalogue uses a system in which each subsystem in a mobile diagram is encoded by a sequence of digits. In the mobile diagram (d) above, for example, the widest system would be given the number 1, while the subsystem containing its primary component would be numbered 11 and the subsystem containing its secondary component would be numbered 12. Subsystems which would appear below this in the mobile diagram will be given numbers with three, four, or more digits. When describing a non-hierarchical system by this method, the same subsystem number will be used more than once; for example, a system with three visual components, A, B, and C, no two of which can be grouped into a subsystem, would have two subsystems numbered 1 denoting the two binaries AB and AC. In this case, if B and C were subsequently resolved into binaries, they would be given the subsystem numbers 12 and 13.[3]
Future multiple star system nomenclature
[edit]The current nomenclature for double and multiple stars can cause confusion as binary stars discovered in different ways are given different designations (for example, discoverer designations for visual binary stars and variable star designations for eclipsing binary stars), and, worse, component letters may be assigned differently by different authors, so that, for example, one person's A can be another's C.[33] Discussion starting in 1999 resulted in four proposed schemes to address this problem:[33]
- KoMa, a hierarchical scheme using upper- and lower-case letters and Arabic and Roman numerals;
- The Urban/Corbin Designation Method, a hierarchical numeric scheme similar to the Dewey Decimal Classification system;[34]
- The Sequential Designation Method, a non-hierarchical scheme in which components and subsystems are assigned numbers in order of discovery;[35] and
- WMC, the Washington Multiplicity Catalog, a hierarchical scheme in which the suffixes used in the Washington Double Star Catalog are extended with additional suffixed letters and numbers.
For a designation system, identifying the hierarchy within the system has the advantage that it makes identifying subsystems and computing their properties easier. However, it causes problems when new components are discovered at a level above or intermediate to the existing hierarchy. In this case, part of the hierarchy will shift inwards. Components which are found to be nonexistent, or are later reassigned to a different subsystem, also cause problems.[36][37]
During the 24th General Assembly of the International Astronomical Union in 2000, the WMC scheme was endorsed and it was resolved by Commissions 5, 8, 26, 42, and 45 that it should be expanded into a usable uniform designation scheme.[33] A sample of a catalog using the WMC scheme, covering half an hour of right ascension, was later prepared.[38] The issue was discussed again at the 25th General Assembly in 2003, and it was again resolved by commissions 5, 8, 26, 42, and 45, as well as the Working Group on Interferometry, that the WMC scheme should be expanded and further developed.[39]
The sample WMC is hierarchically organized; the hierarchy used is based on observed orbital periods or separations. Since it contains many visual double stars, which may be optical rather than physical, this hierarchy may be only apparent. It uses upper-case letters (A, B, ...) for the first level of the hierarchy, lower-case letters (a, b, ...) for the second level, and numbers (1, 2, ...) for the third. Subsequent levels would use alternating lower-case letters and numbers, but no examples of this were found in the sample.[33]
Examples
[edit]Binary
[edit]
- Sirius, a binary consisting of a main-sequence type A star and a white dwarf
- Procyon, which is similar to Sirius
- Mira, a variable consisting of a red giant and a white dwarf
- Delta Cephei, a Cepheid variable
- Almaaz, an eclipsing binary
- Spica
Triple
[edit]- Alpha Centauri is a triple star composed of a main binary yellow dwarf and an orange dwarf pair (Rigil Kentaurus and Toliman), and an outlying red dwarf, Proxima Centauri. Together, Rigil Kentaurus and Toliman form a physical binary star, designated as Alpha Centauri AB, α Cen AB, or RHD 1 AB, where the AB denotes this is a binary system.[40] The moderately eccentric orbit of the binary can make the components be as close as 11 AU or as far away as 36 AU. Proxima Centauri, also (though less frequently) called Alpha Centauri C, is much farther away (between 4300 and 13,000 AU) from α Cen AB, and orbits the central pair with a period of 547,000 (+66,000/-40,000) years.[41]
- Polaris or Alpha Ursae Minoris (α UMi), the north star, is a triple star system in which the closer companion star is extremely close to the main star—so close that it was only known from its gravitational tug on Polaris A (α UMi A) until it was imaged by the Hubble Space Telescope in 2006.
- Gliese 667 is a triple star system with two K-type main sequence stars and a red dwarf. The red dwarf, C, hosts between two and seven planets, of which one, Cc, alongside the unconfirmed Cf and Ce, are potentially habitable.
- HD 188753 is a triple star system located approximately 149 light-years away from Earth in the constellation Cygnus. The system is composed of HD 188753A, a yellow dwarf; HD 188753B, an orange dwarf; and HD 188753C, a red dwarf. B and C orbit each other every 156 days, and, as a group, orbit A every 25.7 years.[42]
- Fomalhaut (α PsA, α Piscis Austrini) is a triple star system in the constellation Piscis Austrinus. It was discovered to be a triple system in 2013, when the K type flare star TW Piscis Austrini and the red dwarf LP 876-10 were all confirmed to share proper motion through space. The primary has a massive dust disk similar to that of the early Solar System, but much more massive. It also contains a gas giant, Fomalhaut b. That same year, the tertiary star, LP 876-10 was also confirmed to house a dust disk.
- HD 181068 is a unique triple system, consisting of a red giant and two main-sequence stars. The orbits of the stars are oriented in such a way that all three stars eclipse each other.
Quadruple
[edit]
- Capella, a pair of giant stars orbited by a pair of red dwarfs, around 42 light years away from the Solar System. It has an apparent magnitude of around 0.08, making Capella one of the brightest stars in the night sky.
- 4 Centauri[43]
- Mizar is often said to have been the first binary star discovered when it was observed in 1650 by Giovanni Battista Riccioli[44], p. 1[45] but it was probably observed earlier, by Benedetto Castelli and Galileo.[citation needed] Later, spectroscopy of its components Mizar A and B revealed that they are both binary stars themselves.[46]
- HD 98800
- The PH1 system has the planet PH1 b (discovered in 2012 by the Planet Hunters group, a part of the Zooniverse) orbiting two of the four stars, making it the first known planet to be in a quadruple star system.[47]
- KOI-2626 is the first quadruple star system with an Earth-sized planet.[48]
- Xi Tauri (ξ Tau, ξ Tauri), located about 222 light years away, is a spectroscopic and eclipsing quadruple star consisting of three blue-white B-type main-sequence stars, along with an F-type star. Two of the stars are in a close orbit and revolve around each other once every 7.15 days. These in turn orbit the third star once every 145 days. The fourth star orbits the other three stars roughly every fifty years.[49]
Quintuple
[edit]Sextuple
[edit]- Beta Tucanae[54]
- Castor[55]
- HD 139691[56]
- TYC 7037-89-1[57]
- If Alcor is considered part of the Mizar system, the system can be considered a sextuple.
Septuple
[edit]Octuple
[edit]Nonuple
[edit]See also
[edit]
References
[edit]- ^ A.S. Bhatia, ed. (2005). Modern Dictionary of Astronomy and Space Technology. New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications. ISBN 81-7629-741-0.
- ^ "The 100 Nearest Star Systems". Archived from the original on 29 April 2025.
- ^ a b c d e f Tokovinin, A.A. (1997). "MSC - a catalogue of physical multiple stars". Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series. 124: 75. Bibcode:1997A&AS..124...75T. doi:10.1051/aas:1997181.
Online versions at
- "online version at VizieR". Archived from the original on 11 March 2007.
- A. Tokovin (ed.). "Multiple star catalog". ctio.noao.edu.
- ^ Binney, James; Tremaine, Scott (1987). Galactic Dynamics. Princeton University Press. p. 247. ISBN 0-691-08445-9.
- ^ John R. Percy (2007). Understanding Variable Stars. Cambridge University Press. p. 16. ISBN 978-1-139-46328-7.
- ^ "Double and multiple stars". Hipparcos. European Space Agency. Retrieved 31 October 2007.
- ^ "Binary and multiple stars". messier.seds.org. Retrieved 26 May 2007.
- ^ Most Milky Way Stars Are Single, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
- ^ Tokovinin, A. (2001). "Statistics of multiple stars: Some clues to formation mechanisms". The Formation of Binary Stars. 200: 84. Bibcode:2001IAUS..200...84T.
- ^ Tokovinin, A. (2004). "Statistics of multiple stars". Revista Mexicana de Astronomía y Astrofísica, Serie de Conferencias. 21: 7. Bibcode:2004RMxAC..21....7T.
- ^ Leonard, Peter J.T. (2001). "Multiple stellar systems: Types and stability". In Murdin, P. (ed.). Encyclopedia of Astronomy and Astrophysics (online ed.). Institute of Physics. Archived from the original on 9 July 2012. Nature Publishing Group published the original print edition.
- ^ "Smoke ring for a halo". Retrieved 26 October 2015.
- ^ a b c d Evans, David S. (1968). "Stars of Higher Multiplicity". Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society. 9: 388–400. Bibcode:1968QJRAS...9..388E.
- ^ Heintz, W. D. (1978). Double Stars. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht. pp. 1. ISBN 90-277-0885-1.
- ^ Dynamics of multiple stars: observations Archived 19 September 2006 at the Wayback Machine, A. Tokovinin, in "Massive Stars in Interacting Binaries", 16–20 August 2004, Quebec (ASP Conf. Ser., in print).
- ^ Heintz, W. D. (1978). Double Stars. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht. pp. 66–67. ISBN 90-277-0885-1.
- ^ Kiseleva, G.; Eggleton, P. P.; Anosova, J. P. (1994). "A note on the stability of hierarchical triple stars with initially circular orbits". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 267: 161. Bibcode:1994MNRAS.267..161K. doi:10.1093/mnras/267.1.161.
- ^ Heintz, W. D. (1978). Double Stars. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht. p. 72. ISBN 90-277-0885-1.
- ^ Mazeh, Tzevi; et al. (2001). "Studies of multiple stellar systems – IV. The triple-lined spectroscopic system Gliese 644". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 325 (1): 343–357. arXiv:astro-ph/0102451. Bibcode:2001MNRAS.325..343M. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04419.x. S2CID 16472347.; see §7–8 for a discussion of the quintuple system.
- ^ Heintz, W. D. (1978). Double Stars. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht. pp. 65–66. ISBN 90-277-0885-1.
- ^ Harrington, R.S. (1970). "Encounter Phenomena in Triple Stars". Astronomical Journal. 75: 114–118. Bibcode:1970AJ.....75.1140H. doi:10.1086/111067.
- ^ Fekel, Francis C (1987). "Multiple stars: Anathemas or friends?". Vistas in Astronomy. 30 (1): 69–76. Bibcode:1987VA.....30...69F. doi:10.1016/0083-6656(87)90021-3.
- ^ Zhuchkov, R. Ya.; Orlov, V. V.; Rubinov, A. V. (2006). "Multiple stars with low hierarchy: stable or unstable?". Publications of the Astronomical Observatory of Belgrade. 80: 155–160. Bibcode:2006POBeo..80..155Z.
- ^ Rubinov, A. V. (2004). "Dynamical Evolution of Multiple Stars: Influence of the Initial Parameters of the System". Astronomy Reports. 48 (1): 155–160. Bibcode:2004ARep...48...45R. doi:10.1134/1.1641122. S2CID 119705425.
- ^ Harrington, R. S. (1977). "Multiple Star Formation from N-Body System Decay". Rev. Mex. Astron. Astrofís. 3: 209. Bibcode:1977RMxAA...3..209H.
- ^ a b Heintz, W. D. (1978). Double Stars. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht. pp. 67–68. ISBN 90-277-0885-1.
- ^ Allen, C.; Poveda, A.; Hernández-Alcántara, A. (2006). "Runaway Stars, Trapezia, and Subtrapezia". Revista Mexicana de Astronomía y Astrofísica, Serie de Conferencias. 25: 13. Bibcode:2006RMxAC..25...13A.
- ^ a b Heintz, W. D. (1978). Double Stars. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht. p. 68. ISBN 90-277-0885-1.
- ^ Blaauw, A.; Morgan, W.W. (1954). "The Space Motions of AE Aurigae and mu Columbae with Respect to the Orion Nebula". Astrophysical Journal. 119: 625. Bibcode:1954ApJ...119..625B. doi:10.1086/145866.
- ^ Hoogerwerf, R.; de Bruijne, J.H.J.; de Zeeuw, P.T (2000). "The origin of runaway stars". Astrophysical Journal. 544 (2): 133–136. arXiv:astro-ph/0007436. Bibcode:2000ApJ...544L.133H. doi:10.1086/317315. S2CID 6725343.
- ^ Heintz, W. D. (1978). Double Stars. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company. p. 19. ISBN 90-277-0885-1.
- ^ a b Format, The Washington Double Star Catalog Archived 12 April 2008 at the Wayback Machine, Brian D. Mason, Gary L. Wycoff, and William I. Hartkopf, Astrometry Department, United States Naval Observatory. Accessed on line 20 August 2008.
- ^ a b c d William I. Hartkopf & Brian D. Mason. "Addressing confusion in double star nomenclature: The Washington Multiplicity Catalog". United States Naval Observatory. Archived from the original on 17 May 2011. Retrieved 12 September 2008.
- ^ "Urban/Corbin Designation Method". United States Naval Observatory. Archived from the original on 24 April 2003. Retrieved 12 September 2008.
- ^ "Sequential Designation Method". United States Naval Observatory. Archived from the original on 24 April 2003. Retrieved 12 September 2008.
- ^ A. Tokovinin (18 April 2000). "On the designation of multiple stars". Archived from the original on 22 September 2007. Retrieved 12 September 2008.
- ^ A. Tokovinin (17 April 2000). "Examples of multiple stellar systems discovery history to test new designation schemes". Archived from the original on 22 September 2007. Retrieved 12 September 2008.
- ^ William I. Hartkopf & Brian D. Mason. "Sample Washington Multiplicity Catalog". United States Naval Observatory. Archived from the original on 21 July 2009. Retrieved 12 September 2008.
- ^ Argyle, R. W. (2004). "A new classification scheme for double and multiple stars". The Observatory. 124: 94. Bibcode:2004Obs...124...94A.
- ^ Mason, Brian D.; Wycoff, Gary L.; Hartkopf, William I.; Douglass, Geoffrey G.; Worley, Charles E. (December 2001). "The 2001 US Naval Observatory Double Star CD-ROM. I. The Washington Double Star Catalog". The Astronomical Journal. 122 (6). U. S. Naval Observatory, Washington D.C.: 3466–3471. Bibcode:2001AJ....122.3466M. doi:10.1086/323920.
- ^ Kervella, P.; Thévenin, F.; Lovis, C. (2017). "Proxima's orbit around α Centauri". Astronomy and Astrophysics. 598: L7. arXiv:1611.03495. Bibcode:2017A&A...598L...7K. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629930. S2CID 50867264.
- ^ Does triple star orbit directly affect orbit time, Jeremy Hien, Jon Shewarts, Astronomical News 132, No. 6 (November 2011)
- ^ 4 Centauri Archived 15 June 2011 at the Wayback Machine, entry in the Multiple Star Catalog.
- ^ Robert Grant Aitken (2019). The Binary Stars. Creative Media Partners, LLC. ISBN 978-0-530-46473-2.
- ^ Vol. 1, part 1, p. 422, Almagestum Novum Archived 10 August 2011 at the Wayback Machine, Giovanni Battista Riccioli, Bononiae: Ex typographia haeredis Victorij Benatij, 1651.
- ^ A New View of Mizar Archived 7 March 2008 at the Wayback Machine, Leos Ondra, accessed on line 26 May 2007.
- ^ "PH1 : A planet in a four-star system". Planet Hunters. 15 October 2012. Retrieved 13 January 2024.
- ^ Ciardi, David. "KOI 2626: A Quadruple System with a Planet?" (PDF). nexsci.caltech.edu. Retrieved 13 January 2024.
- ^ Nemravová, J. A.; et al. (2013). "An Unusual Quadruple System ξ Tauri". Central European Astrophysical Bulletin. 37 (1): 207–216. Bibcode:2013CEAB...37..207N.
- ^ Lee Mohon (12 November 2015). "More Than Meets the Eye: Delta Orionis in Orion's Belt".
- ^ Schütz, O.; Meeus, G.; Carmona, A.; Juhász, A.; Sterzik, M. F. (2011). "The young B-star quintuple system HD 155448". Astronomy and Astrophysics. 533: A54. arXiv:1108.1557. Bibcode:2011A&A...533A..54S. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201016396. S2CID 56143776.
- ^ Gregg, T. A.; Prsa, A.; Welsh, W. F.; Orosz, J. A.; Fetherolf, T. (2013). "A Syzygy of KIC 4150611". American Astronomical Society. 221: 142.12. Bibcode:2013AAS...22114212G.
- ^ Lohr, M. E.; et al. (2015). "The doubly eclipsing quintuple low-mass star system 1SWASP J093010.78+533859.5". Astronomy & Astrophysics. 578: A103. arXiv:1504.07065. Bibcode:2015A&A...578A.103L. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525973. S2CID 44548756.
- ^ "Multiple Star Catalog (MSC)". Archived from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 23 December 2012.
- ^ Stelzer, B.; Burwitz, V. (2003). "Castor a and Castor B resolved in a simultaneous Chandra and XMM-Newton observation". Astronomy and Astrophysics. 402 (2): 719–728. arXiv:astro-ph/0302570. Bibcode:2003A&A...402..719S. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030286. S2CID 15268418.
- ^ Tokovinin, A. A.; Shatskii, N. I.; Magnitskii, A. K. (1998). "ADS 9731: A new sextuple system". Astronomy Letters. 24 (6): 795. Bibcode:1998AstL...24..795T.
- ^ Kazmierczak, Jeanette. "Discovery Alert: First Six-star System Where All Six Stars Undergo Eclipses". Exoplanet Exploration: Planets Beyond our Solar System. Retrieved 29 June 2022.
- ^ Nu Scorpii Archived 10 April 2020 at the Wayback Machine, entry in the Multiple Star Catalog.
- ^ AR Cassiopeiae Archived 10 April 2020 at the Wayback Machine, entry in the Multiple Star Catalog.
- ^ Zasche, P.; Henzl, Z.; Mašek, M. (2022). "Multiply eclipsing candidates from the TESS satellite". Astronomy & Astrophysics. 664: A96. arXiv:2205.03934. Bibcode:2022A&A...664A..96Z. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243723. S2CID 248571745.
- ^ Hutter, D. J.; Tycner, C.; Zavala, R. T.; Benson, J. A.; Hummel, C. A.; Zirm, H. (2021). "Surveying the Bright Stars by Optical Interferometry. III. A Magnitude-limited Multiplicity Survey of Classical Be Stars". The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series. 257 (2): 69. arXiv:2109.06839. Bibcode:2021ApJS..257...69H. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac23cb. S2CID 237503492.
- ^ Mayer, P.; Harmanec, P.; Zasche, P.; Brož, M.; Catalan-Hurtado, R.; Barlow, B. N.; Frondorf, W.; Wolf, M.; Drechsel, H.; Chini, R.; Nasseri, A.; Pigulski, A.; Labadie-Bartz, J.; Christie, G. W.; Walker, W. S. G.; Blackford, M.; Blane, D.; Henden, A. A.; Bohlsen, T.; Božić, H.; Jonák, J. (2022). "Towards a consistent model of the hot quadruple system HD 93206 = QZ Carinæ — I. Observations and their initial analyses". Astronomy & Astrophysics. 666: A23. arXiv:2204.07045. Bibcode:2022A&A...666A..23M. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142108. S2CID 248177961.
External links
[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Multiple star systems.
- NASA Astronomy Picture of the Day: Triple star system (11 September 2002)
- NASA Astronomy Picture of the Day: Alpha Centauri system (23 March 2003)
- Alpha Centauri, APOD, 2002 April 25
- General news on triple star systems, TSN, 2008 April 22 Archived 3 April 2019 at the Wayback Machine
- The Double Star Library Archived 15 December 2008 at the Wayback Machine is located at the U.S. Naval Observatory
- Naming New Extrasolar Planets
Individual specimens
[edit]- NASA Astronomy Picture of the Day: Triple star system (11 September 2002)
- NASA Astronomy Picture of the Day: Alpha Centauri system (23 March 2003)
- Alpha Centauri, APOD, 2002 April 25
| Bound | |
|---|---|
| Unbound | |
| Visual grouping | |
| Formation | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evolution | |||||||
| Classification |
| ||||||
| Nucleosynthesis | |||||||
| Structure | |||||||
| Properties | |||||||
| Star systems | |||||||
| Earth-centric observations | |||||||
| Lists | |||||||
| Related | |||||||
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
Star system
View on Grokipediafrom Grokipedia
A star system, also known as a multiple star system, is a gravitationally bound group of two or more stars that orbit their common center of mass, in contrast to single-star systems like our own Solar System.[1] These systems range from simple binaries—pairs of stars—to complex hierarchies involving up to seven or more stars, often organized in stable configurations to avoid gravitational disruptions.[1] More than half of all stars in the Milky Way Galaxy belong to such multiple systems, making them a dominant feature of stellar populations in the universe.[1]
Binary star systems, the most common type, consist of two stars orbiting each other, with separations varying from close pairs that interact through tidal forces to wide binaries separated by thousands of astronomical units.[1] Higher-order systems, such as triples or quadruples, typically feature an inner binary orbited by one or more additional companions, allowing long-term dynamical stability.[1] These configurations can influence stellar evolution, as interactions like mass transfer in close binaries lead to phenomena such as X-ray emissions from heated accretion disks or the production of heavy elements through mergers.[1]
Notable examples include Alpha Centauri, the closest star system to Earth at approximately 4.3 light-years away, which forms a triple system with two Sun-like stars (Alpha Centauri A and B) and the red dwarf Proxima Centauri; Proxima hosts the nearest known exoplanet to our Solar System.[2][3] Another striking case is the sextuple system TYC 7037-89-1, featuring two tight binaries orbited by a wider pair, all within a compact region spanning just 140 astronomical units.[1] Multiple star systems also play a key role in exoplanet formation and habitability, as planets have been detected orbiting stars in binaries like TOI 1338, demonstrating that stable planetary orbits are possible even in multi-star environments.[4]
Definition and Fundamentals
Definition and Scope
A star system, also known as a multiple star system or stellar system, consists of two or more stars that are gravitationally bound together and orbit a common center of mass, known as the barycenter.[5] This distinguishes true star systems from optical doubles or apparent alignments, where stars merely appear close in the sky due to their positions along the observer's line of sight but are not physically associated or bound by gravity.[6] The gravitational binding ensures that the stars maintain their relative positions over long periods, governed by Newtonian dynamics, without external perturbations disrupting the configuration. The recognition of star systems as physical entities dates back to the late 18th century, when astronomer William Herschel conducted systematic observations of double stars starting in 1780.[7] Through repeated measurements, Herschel identified changes in the relative positions of certain pairs, concluding that they were true binaries held together by mutual attraction rather than coincidental projections on the celestial sphere.[7] His catalogs, published in 1782 and 1785, laid the foundation for understanding these systems, and by 1802, he had formalized the term "binary stars" to describe such gravitationally connected pairs.[7] In scope, star systems encompass a range of multiplicities, from simple binaries to more complex arrangements like triples, quadruples, and higher orders up to nonuples, though systems with more than four or five stars are uncommon due to dynamical challenges.[8] Single stars are excluded as trivial cases, as a star system inherently requires multiple components interacting gravitationally. While planetary systems can form around the barycenter of such stellar groups, they represent a distinct subset focused on substellar companions rather than the stars themselves. A key requirement for classification as a star system is dynamical stability, meaning the configuration must persist over the typical lifetimes of its member stars—often billions of years for low-mass main-sequence stars—without ejection or disruption of components.[9]Terminology and Classification
In astronomy, a binary star system consists of two stars gravitationally bound and orbiting their common center of mass, following Kepler's laws of planetary motion.[10] Systems with three stars are termed triples or ternaries, while those with four or more are classified as quadruple, quintuple, or higher-order multiples, with the term "multiple star system" encompassing all configurations beyond singles.[1] Approximately half of all stars in the Milky Way reside in binary or higher-multiplicity systems, with the fraction varying by stellar mass (higher for more massive stars), highlighting their prevalence in stellar populations.[10] A critical distinction exists between physical star systems, which are truly gravitationally bound, and optical doubles or multiples, which appear close together in the sky due to projection effects but are not interacting gravitationally and lie at different distances.[11] Physical systems maintain stable orbits over time, whereas optical pairs are chance alignments unrelated by binding forces, a differentiation essential for accurate cataloging and study.[12] The preferred modern terminology uses "star system" to denote gravitationally bound groups, distinguishing them from mere visual associations.[1] Classification schemes for star systems are multifaceted, primarily organized by multiplicity (e.g., doubles for binaries, multiples for three or more components) and hierarchical structure, where subsystems orbit in nested configurations to ensure long-term stability, such as in hierarchical triples with an inner binary orbited by a distant third star. Additional categorization occurs by observational appearance and detection method, including visual binaries (resolved as separate stars through telescopes), eclipsing binaries (where one star periodically occults the other, causing brightness dips), spectroscopic binaries (identified via Doppler shifts in spectral lines indicating orbital motion), and astrometric binaries (detected through positional wobbles in one star's path). These schemes facilitate systematic analysis, with hierarchical multiples being common to avoid chaotic instabilities.[10] Historically, early observations referred to close stellar pairs as "double stars" in catalogs dating to the 18th century, initially without distinguishing bound from apparent associations.[12] Pioneering work by William Herschel in the late 1700s identified the first dynamically bound binaries through relative motion, evolving the field toward the modern "binary star" and "multiple star system" nomenclature by the 19th century, as spectroscopic and visual techniques confirmed gravitational interactions.[15] This progression from descriptive "doubles" to precise gravitational classifications reflects advances in observational astronomy.[16]Formation and Evolution
Formation Processes
Star systems originate primarily through the fragmentation of giant molecular clouds and subsequent protostellar structures during the collapse phase of star formation. In turbulent cloud collapse, supersonic turbulence within molecular clouds creates density perturbations that lead to the formation of multiple dense cores from a single collapsing fragment, each evolving into a separate star. This process naturally produces binary and higher-multiplicity systems as the cores remain gravitationally bound. Fragmentation of the protostellar disk surrounding an initial forming star represents another key mechanism, where gravitational instabilities in the massive, rapidly accreting disk cause it to break into clumps that collapse into companion stars on scales of hundreds of astronomical units. For rare wide binaries with separations exceeding 10,000 AU, dynamical capture of field stars or the "unfolding" of unstable triple systems in clusters provides an alternative pathway, though these are less common than fragmentation-based formation.[17] Turbulence and magnetic fields in giant molecular clouds critically influence the multiplicity of forming star systems by shaping the initial collapse dynamics. Supersonic turbulence imparts high angular momentum to cloud fragments, promoting the formation of rotating structures that resist full central collapse and instead fragment into binaries or multiples rather than isolated stars. This turbulent support delays collapse until density thresholds are met, allowing multiple cores to emerge on scales of 0.01-0.1 parsecs. Magnetic fields, threaded through the clouds, provide additional support against gravity via magnetic pressure and tension, modulating fragmentation; misaligned or weak fields (plasma β > 1) permit more extensive multiplicity, while strong, ordered fields suppress it, favoring fewer companions. Together, these factors ensure that binary formation is the dominant outcome in typical cloud environments with Mach numbers around 10.[18][19] Numerical simulations of turbulent cloud collapse demonstrate that approximately 60-70% of stars form as members of multiple systems, reflecting the prevalence of fragmentation over isolated collapse. The timescale for protostellar disk fragmentation, driven by cooling and gravitational instability, occurs rapidly on the order of to years after disk formation, allowing companions to accrete material concurrently with the primary. Observational evidence from young clusters, such as the Orion Nebula Cluster, supports these mechanisms through detections of multiple protostars embedded in shared envelopes with associated protoplanetary disks, indicating simultaneous multiple accretion from a common reservoir.[20][21] Higher-multiplicity systems, like triples, arise through distinct processes emphasizing sequential buildup or interactions. Sequential accretion onto an initial binary pair, where a third core forms and captures material from the shared envelope, accounts for compact triples with inner periods under 100 years. In denser cluster environments, dynamical interactions among embedded protostars can assemble triples by exchanging components or capturing passing stars, particularly during the Class 0 phase when systems are still accreting. These pathways explain the typical hierarchical architectures observed in higher-multiplicity systems.Evolutionary Dynamics
The evolutionary dynamics of star systems are profoundly influenced by stellar mass loss, which occurs primarily during post-main-sequence phases such as the red giant branch and asymptotic giant branch. In binary systems, isotropic mass loss from one or both stars leads to an expansion of the orbital separation, as the orbital energy, given by where is the gravitational constant, and are the stellar masses, and is the semi-major axis, becomes less bound due to the reduced total mass. For non-conservative mass loss where ejected material carries negligible specific angular momentum, the semi-major axis scales approximately as , causing orbits to widen over gigayear timescales; simulations of wide binaries containing white dwarfs show that post-main-sequence mass loss can increase separations by factors of 2–4 for progenitors above 2 , contributing to the observed lower eccentricities in evolved systems compared to main-sequence binaries.[22][23] Binary evolution stages further drive dynamical changes through mass transfer and envelope interactions. During stable mass transfer, angular momentum conservation can tighten or widen orbits depending on the mass ratio; for example, in Case B transfer (hydrogen core burning donor), the orbit typically shrinks if the donor is more massive. The common envelope phase, triggered when the expanding envelope of an evolved star engulfs the companion, results in rapid orbital inspiral due to drag forces, ejecting the envelope and forming tight binaries with compact objects; this phase is crucial for producing short-period systems like double neutron stars, with survival rates depending on the envelope binding energy and recombination efficiency, often modeled via the alpha formalism where (energy transfer efficiency) ranges from 0.2–1.[22][24] A key outcome of binary evolution is the production of Type Ia supernovae, which arise from thermonuclear explosions of carbon-oxygen white dwarfs in binary systems reaching the Chandrasekhar limit (~1.4 ). In the single-degenerate channel, accretion from a hydrogen- or helium-rich companion grows the white dwarf until ignition, while the double-degenerate channel involves mergers driven by gravitational wave emission, with delay times following a distribution spanning 100 Myr to the Hubble time; both pathways contribute to observed luminosities, with sub-Chandrasekhar mergers (~1 ) explaining subluminous events via double detonations.[25] In higher-multiplicity systems, dynamical interactions amplify evolution, particularly through the triple evolution dynamical instability (TEDI), where mass loss destabilizes hierarchical configurations, leading to ejections or collisions. Unstable triples, comprising ~5% of synthetic populations, result in ~55% of cases ejecting a star within 10 Myr, often producing eccentric remnants; the octupole criterion for stability, incorporating higher-order perturbations, requires the outer-to-inner semi-major axis ratio (where is the inner binary mass ratio) to avoid chaos, beyond which secular perturbations drive eccentricity oscillations via the Kozai-Lidov mechanism extended to octupole order. Secular evolution in stable hierarchies involves long-term exchanges of angular momentum, with octupole terms inducing outer eccentricity variations absent in quadrupole approximations, potentially leading to resonances with general relativity.[26][27][28] Dynamical evolution in dense environments, such as star clusters, promotes mergers, with ~1% of primordial binaries undergoing collisions over cluster lifetimes due to close encounters and hardening; this fraction rises to ~9% in unstable triples but remains low overall, yielding galactic rates of ~10^{-4} yr^{-1} for massive star mergers. Approximately 10% of massive field stars are walkaways (velocities <30 km s^{-1}) from disrupted binaries, primarily via supernova kicks unbinding ~86% of systems at first core collapse, while true runaways (>30 km s^{-1}) constitute only ~0.5%, imprinting kinematical signatures of their progenitors. These processes collectively widen surviving binaries and disperse components, shaping the field population over gigayear scales.[26][29]Prevalence and Distribution
Abundance in Stellar Populations
In the Milky Way, the prevalence of multiple star systems varies significantly with stellar mass. Approximately 85% of massive stars (with masses greater than 8 solar masses) reside in binary or higher-order multiple systems, reflecting their formation in dense environments that favor companionship. In contrast, about 50% of solar-mass stars (roughly 0.5 to 1.5 solar masses) are found in multiples, with the fraction decreasing for lower-mass stars. This mass-dependent multiplicity arises from observational surveys that account for both close and wide companions, indicating that stellar interactions are more common among higher-mass objects throughout the galaxy. Multiplicity fractions exhibit clear environmental dependencies, with higher rates in dense star-forming regions compared to the galactic field or older populations. In young clusters and associations, the binary fraction can reach 70% or more, as observed in the Taurus star-forming region where companion frequencies are roughly twice those in the field.[30] Within open clusters, multiplicity is elevated relative to the field, but decreases in more evolved or dispersed populations due to dynamical disruptions over time. Recent Gaia data from the 2020s reveal that the binary fraction anticorrelates with local stellar density, dropping in high-density environments like cluster cores where interactions disrupt wide pairs.[31] Early estimates of multiplicity underestimated fractions due to detection biases favoring bright, close binaries while missing faint or wide companions, leading to incomplete catalogs until advanced surveys. Modern missions like Gaia have corrected these by providing precise astrometry for millions of stars, updating the intrinsic multiplicity to higher values across populations, with recent Gaia DR3 analyses (as of 2022) refining fractions to around 45–50% for solar-type field stars.[32] Key statistical properties include a binary separation distribution that peaks at 10–100 AU, consistent across young and field stars when biases are accounted for.[33] The multiplicity function for orbital periods follows a log-normal distribution, with a peak around log P ≈ 5 days (corresponding to separations of tens of AU) and a dispersion of σ_log P ≈ 2.3, describing the broad range of stable configurations observed empirically.[34]Statistical Properties by Multiplicity
The distribution of stellar systems by multiplicity order reveals a clear dominance of lower-order configurations, with binaries comprising approximately 33% of all systems in the solar neighborhood, based on comprehensive surveys of main-sequence stars. This fraction arises from analyses of nearby field populations, where singles account for about 50%, while higher multiplicities decline rapidly. Triples represent around 10% of systems, quadruples about 1%, and the frequency continues to drop for quintuples and beyond, following an approximate exponential scaling given by the multiplicity fraction , where is the number of stars and is the binary fraction.[35][36] The period distribution for binaries is roughly log-flat, spanning from short periods of about 10 days to long periods up to years, consistent with Öpik's law and reflecting a broad range of formation mechanisms from disk fragmentation to capture processes. This flat distribution in logarithmic space indicates equal probability per decade of period, with peaks in separation around 10–50 AU for solar-type stars. For higher multiplicities, the outer orbital periods are systematically longer, leading to average separations that increase with system order; for instance, the median outer separation in triples exceeds 1000 AU, compared to ~40 AU for inner binaries. Mass ratios in close binaries (periods <100 days) show a preference for similar masses, with an excess of "twins" (q > 0.95) at about 20–30% above random pairing from the initial mass function, particularly among solar-type and higher-mass stars.[35][37] Over 90% of systems with multiplicity are hierarchical, featuring nested orbits where each subsystem is sufficiently separated (outer-to-inner period ratio >10–100) to ensure long-term stability, as cataloged in large datasets. The Multiple Star Catalogue (MSC) compiles observational data on thousands of such hierarchical systems, with updates incorporating Gaia astrometry revealing refined orbital parameters for over 2000 high-order hierarchies as of the early 2020s.[38] Recent surveys of young clusters, such as those in high-mass star-forming regions, indicate elevated rates of quadruples (up to 5–10% locally) compared to field populations, suggesting that dynamical interactions may disrupt some higher-order systems over time.[39][40]Observation and Detection Methods
Visual and Imaging Techniques
Visual and imaging techniques for star systems primarily involve direct resolution of stellar components through high-angular-resolution observations, enabling the measurement of spatial configurations without relying on indirect indicators like velocity shifts. These methods have evolved significantly since the late 18th century, when William Herschel conducted systematic visual surveys using refracting telescopes to catalog thousands of apparent double stars, distinguishing them as potential physical pairs or mere line-of-sight alignments based on qualitative assessments of proximity. Early efforts, such as Herschel's 1782 and 1785 catalogs, laid the foundation for identifying visual doubles, though limited by atmospheric distortion and instrumental resolution to separations greater than about 1 arcsecond. Advancements in the 20th century introduced speckle interferometry, a technique that captures short-exposure images to mitigate atmospheric turbulence, reconstructing diffraction-limited resolutions by analyzing interference patterns in the speckle pattern. This method, pioneered in the 1970s, allows resolution of close pairs down to approximately 20-50 milliarcseconds (mas) on moderate-sized telescopes, providing precise measurements of position angles—the angular orientation of the secondary relative to the primary, measured counterclockwise from north—and angular separations in arcseconds or mas.[41] For instance, speckle interferometry has been instrumental in resolving binaries with separations as small as 0.2 arcseconds, even for companions up to 6 magnitudes fainter (Δm ≈ 6) than the primary, though detection sensitivity drops for fainter or closer companions due to glare and noise. Contemporary high-resolution imaging employs adaptive optics (AO) systems on large ground-based telescopes like the Very Large Telescope (VLT), which use deformable mirrors and laser guide stars to correct real-time atmospheric aberrations, achieving resolutions around 20-50 mas in the near-infrared.[42] The VLT's NACO instrument, for example, has resolved subarcsecond binaries in lunar occultation observations, measuring separations and position angles for systems previously undetectable.[42] Space-based observatories further enhance this capability; the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) has resolved complex multiple systems, such as those in the Trapezium Cluster, at resolutions below 50 mas, while the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) extends infrared imaging to faint, dust-enshrouded binaries like Wolf-Rayet 140, with NIRCam achieving ~65 mas resolution at 2 μm. Modern limits for direct imaging now approach ~10 mas with advanced AO and interferometric modes, such as those on the VLT Interferometer. These techniques are applied to differentiate optical doubles—unrelated stars aligned by chance—from physical systems by tracking relative proper motions over time; only a small fraction, approximately 10%, of apparent visual doubles are confirmed as gravitationally bound through consistent motion patterns. Angular separation and position angle measurements, combined with parallax distances from missions like Gaia, yield physical projected separations in astronomical units, providing insights into system scales and stability. Challenges persist for faint companions, where magnitude differences exceeding Δm ≈ 5 limit detection due to contrast issues, often requiring complementary spectroscopic confirmation of physical association.Spectroscopic and Astrometric Detection
Spectroscopic detection of star systems relies on observing periodic variations in the radial velocities of stars caused by the gravitational influence of unseen companions. These variations manifest as Doppler shifts in the spectral lines, where the wavelength of light from the star alternately redshifts and blueshifts as it moves toward and away from the observer along the line of sight.[43] By measuring these shifts over time, astronomers can infer the presence of a companion and derive orbital parameters such as the period and velocity amplitude. This method is particularly effective for detecting close binaries where the orbital motion produces measurable velocity changes of several kilometers per second.[44] In single-lined spectroscopic binaries (SB1), only the spectral lines of the brighter or more massive primary star are visible and show Doppler shifts, indicating an unseen secondary companion. The radial velocity curve of the primary allows estimation of the companion's minimum mass through the mass function, though the true masses require additional information like inclination. Double-lined spectroscopic binaries (SB2), in contrast, reveal spectral lines from both stars, enabling measurement of the mass ratio and more precise mass determinations for both components. SB2 systems provide stronger constraints on orbital elements but are less common due to the need for comparable brightness in both stars.[45] The radial velocity semi-amplitude for the primary star in a spectroscopic binary is given by: where is the orbital period, and are the masses of the primary and secondary, is the orbital inclination, and is the eccentricity. This equation, derived from Kepler's third law and the definition of radial velocity projection, quantifies the observable velocity perturbation caused by the companion.[45] The first spectroscopic binary, Mizar A (ζ Ursae Majoris A), was identified in 1889 by Edward Charles Pickering at Harvard Observatory through the periodic doubling of its spectral lines due to Doppler shifts, revealing an orbital period of 20.5 days.[46] Spectroscopic methods excel at detecting close binaries with periods ranging from days to several years, detecting a significant fraction of such systems, with binary fractions up to 60–70% in certain populations such as Am stars.[47] Astrometric detection complements spectroscopy by measuring the positional wobble of a star across the sky, caused by the reflex motion around the system's center of mass. High-precision astrometry at micro-arcsecond levels reveals these perturbations as non-linear proper motions or acceleration anomalies, particularly for wider orbits where radial velocity signals may be weak. The European Space Agency's Gaia mission has revolutionized this technique, using its astrometric capabilities to detect proper motion anomalies indicative of unseen companions. In Gaia Data Release 3 (2022), over 186,000 spectroscopic binary solutions were cataloged, while astrometric processing identified approximately 165,000 more systems through orbital solutions and non-single star indicators.[48][49]Orbital Dynamics and Configurations
Binary and Basic Orbital Parameters
Binary star systems are characterized by six fundamental orbital elements that fully describe their relative motion under Newtonian gravity. The semi-major axis represents the average separation between the two stars, scaled to the relative orbit, while the eccentricity quantifies the orbital shape, ranging from 0 for circular orbits to values approaching 1 for highly elongated ones. The orbital period is the time for one complete revolution, directly tied to via Kepler's laws. The inclination measures the tilt of the orbital plane relative to the sky, with for edge-on views; the longitude of the ascending node locates the point where the orbit crosses the reference plane; and the argument of pericenter specifies the orientation of the closest approach within the orbit. These elements are determined from astrometric, spectroscopic, or combined observations and form the basis for modeling binary dynamics.[50] Kepler's third law extends naturally to binary systems, relating the orbital period to the semi-major axis through , where the constant of proportionality involves the total mass of the pair. For the relative orbit, this becomes , allowing dynamical masses to be inferred when and are measured.[51] The vis-viva equation further describes the speed at any separation along the orbit: , where ; this conservation-of-energy relation highlights how velocities peak at pericenter and minimize at apocenter, influencing tidal interactions and stability. These laws assume a two-body approximation, valid for isolated binaries where external perturbations are negligible. Orbital stability in binaries is governed by key thresholds, such as the Roche lobe, which delineates the gravitational influence zone around each star; when a star's radius exceeds its Roche lobe, mass transfer begins through the inner Lagrange point , potentially leading to common-envelope evolution or accretion disks. The Roche lobe size scales with the separation and mass ratio, approximated for the donor as where is the mass ratio.[52] Tidal friction also drives orbital circularization over timescales that depend on stellar structure and separation; for late-type binaries, these timescales range from to years, shortening for closer pairs due to enhanced dissipation in convective envelopes.[53] Observational statistics reveal that eccentricities are typically low (e < 0.5) for close-period binaries across spectral types due to tidal damping, though tends to increase with longer periods for wider systems.[54] For visual binaries—those resolvable by direct imaging—the average orbital period is approximately 100 years, reflecting their wider separations amenable to ground-based observations. These trends underscore the diversity of binary configurations while emphasizing the prevalence of near-circular orbits in short-period systems.[54] A cornerstone derivation from Kepler's third law enables computation of the total mass from observable parameters: , where is in astronomical units, in years, and masses in solar units for convenience (yielding directly in ). This requires resolved (e.g., from visual orbits) and , providing a direct probe of stellar masses independent of luminosity-based methods. For unresolved systems, approximations using projected separations or radial velocities yield mass functions, but full resolution unlocks precise dynamics.[51]Hierarchical and Higher-Order Systems
Hierarchical multiple star systems extend the binary configuration by incorporating additional stellar companions in a structured manner, typically forming an inner binary orbited by an outer companion at a significantly greater separation. This arrangement ensures dynamical stability through large separation ratios, where the semi-major axis of the outer orbit () is much larger than that of the inner orbit (), often exceeding 10:1 to minimize perturbative influences on the inner pair.[55] Nearly all observed stable triples and higher-order configurations exhibit this hierarchical architecture to prevent chaotic interactions.[56] Such systems dominate observed multiples, with the vast majority featuring this structure.[39] In triple systems, stability can be assessed using empirical criteria derived from N-body simulations, such as the requirement for circular, coplanar orbits where for equal-mass components, beyond which the probability of ejection or collision drops sharply.[57] Higher-order dynamics introduce complexities like the Kozai-Lidov mechanism, a secular resonance in inclined triples that induces oscillations in the inner binary's eccentricity and inclination due to quadrupole gravitational perturbations from the outer companion. These oscillations can drive the inner eccentricity from near-zero to values approaching 1 over timescales comparable to the outer orbital period, potentially leading to tidal interactions or mergers.[58] For quadruple and higher systems, N-body simulations reveal that stability relies on nested hierarchies, with each level maintaining separation ratios similar to triples; deviations can result in ejections within millions of years.[59] Non-hierarchical multiples, such as trapezium systems, represent rare, compact configurations where four or more stars orbit a common center without clear nesting, leading to rapid instability. The Orion Trapezium, comprising the four bright stars θ¹ Orionis A–D within ~0.1 pc, exemplifies this, with N-body models predicting dynamical decay on timescales of ~10⁵ years due to close encounters and ejections.[60] Visualizing these relative orbits often employs mobile diagrams, tree-like schematics that depict hierarchical levels as branches from an inner binary core, aiding in cataloging and analysis of observed systems.[39] Perturbations in such setups are quantified through averaged Hamiltonians, where the leading quadrupole term scales as , with the outer mass, the mutual inclination, and the Legendre polynomial, highlighting the dominance of wide separations in maintaining equilibrium.[58]Nomenclature and Catalogues
Designation Systems
In multiple star systems, individual components are designated using a hierarchical labeling scheme to distinguish the primary star (labeled A), secondary (B), and subsequent tertiaries (C, D, etc.), based on apparent brightness or discovery order.[61] This convention appends capital letters to the system's primary identifier, such as a Bayer designation (Greek letter followed by the Latin genitive of the constellation) or a catalog number; for instance, unresolved close pairs may retain the Greek letter prefix while adding suffixes like A or B.[62] The system ensures clarity by treating the brightest or most massive star as the primary, with companions labeled sequentially to reflect their relative positions or orbital roles.[63] For binary systems, the Washington Double Star Catalog (WDS) employs discoverer-based codes, combining the initials of the discoverer (or a standard abbreviation), the year of discovery abbreviated to two digits, and a sequence number, followed by component labels such as AB to denote the pair.[62] This format, maintained by the U.S. Naval Observatory, standardizes entries for visual doubles and resolves ambiguities in observations, particularly in dense stellar fields where multiple pairs might otherwise overlap.[64] As of 2025, the WDS catalogs approximately 157,000 such systems, facilitating precise tracking and avoiding misidentification in crowded regions like galactic clusters.[65] In higher-multiplicity systems, designations extend hierarchically to capture subsystem structures, using lowercase suffixes for inner binaries (e.g., Aa and Ab orbiting a common center within the A component) and uppercase for outer levels (e.g., Aa-Ab-B to indicate a close pair Aa-Ab with a wider companion B).[63] This notation, as formalized in the Multiple Star Catalog (MSC), links components via parent-child relationships, allowing truncation for super-components (e.g., Aa-Ab as a single unit) and accommodating discoveries of new subsystems without renaming established labels.[38] Historically, early designations drew from Bayer's 1603 Greek-letter system and Flamsteed's 1725 numerical catalog for single stars, which were adapted ad hoc for multiples by adding letters based on visual separation.[61] Modern standards, endorsed by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) through its Working Group on Star Names (WGSN) since 2016, prioritize these hierarchical extensions for consistency in research publications.[66] In the 2020s, proposals like those updating the MSC emphasize unified codes integrating astrometric data from Gaia missions to handle increasing discoveries of complex hierarchies, promoting interoperability with broader catalogs.[67] These systems integrate briefly with historical and modern catalogs to maintain legacy identifiers while enabling precise multiplicity tracking.[62]Historical and Modern Catalogues
The compilation of catalogues for double and multiple star systems began in the late 18th century but saw significant advancements in the early 20th century with comprehensive efforts to document visual binaries. One foundational historical catalogue is Burnham's General Catalogue of Double Stars (BDS), published in 1906, which compiled 13,665 entries for visual double stars observed up to that time, including positions, separations, and discoverer notes.[68] This was followed by the Aitken Double Star Catalogue (ADS) in 1932, authored by Robert G. Aitken and Anne N. Doolittle, encompassing approximately 17,180 double star systems with detailed measurements of angular separations, position angles, and orbital elements where available.[62] These early catalogues primarily focused on visual observations from ground-based telescopes and laid the groundwork for tracking relative motions, though they were limited to brighter, northern sky objects and lacked proper motions for many entries. In the late 20th century, efforts shifted toward hierarchical multiple systems beyond simple binaries. The Multiple Star Catalogue (MSC), first published by Andrei Tokovinin in 1997, documented 612 physical multiple stars of multiplicity 3 to 7, emphasizing hierarchical configurations with data on orbital hierarchies, component masses, and periods derived from spectroscopic and visual observations.[69] Updated versions, such as the 2018 edition (with a further update in December 2023), expanded to include 5,719 systems by incorporating new detections from surveys like Hipparcos, providing supplementary astrometry, photometry, and identifiers to facilitate studies of system stability.[38][70] These catalogues tracked key parameters like separations, positions, and partial orbits but highlighted gaps in coverage for faint or southern systems. Modern catalogues have grown dramatically in scale and precision due to space-based astrometry. The Washington Double Star Catalog (WDS), maintained by the U.S. Naval Observatory since 1963 as a successor to earlier 20th-century compilations, now contains over 157,000 entries as of 2024, covering double and multiple systems with J2000 positions, discoverer designations, epochs, position angles, separations, magnitudes, spectral types, proper motions, and orbital data when determined. Ongoing updates integrate new observations, including those resolving components in previously unresolved systems, and address historical gaps by including exoplanet-hosting multiples identified in recent surveys.[64] The European Space Agency's Gaia mission has revolutionized multiple star detection through its Data Release 3 (DR3) in 2022, which includes a non-single star catalogue identifying more than 433,000 multiple stellar systems with determined orbits, alongside candidate lists exceeding 800,000 potential wide binaries based on common proper motion and parallax matches.[71] This resource provides high-precision astrometric parameters, such as relative orbits and component separations down to milliarcseconds, enabling the inclusion of faint and distant systems previously undetectable from ground observations. Recent additions focus on exoplanet-hosting multiples, with studies cross-matching Gaia data to TESS candidates revealing multiplicity rates around 40% for planet hosts.[72] Looking ahead, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) continues to refine nomenclature through its Working Group on Designations, issuing guidelines in the 2020s for standardizing identifiers in multi-star systems, such as hierarchical labeling (e.g., Aa, Ab) to complement catalogue entries and reduce ambiguity in cross-references.[61]Notable Examples
Prominent Binary Systems
One of the most prominent binary star systems is Alpha Centauri AB, the closest binary pair to the Sun at a distance of 4.37 light years within the triple Alpha Centauri system, consisting of two Sun-like stars, Alpha Centauri A and B, observable as a visual binary.[73] This system serves as a key benchmark for understanding stellar masses and dynamics due to its proximity and well-resolved orbit, with an orbital period of approximately 79.9 years and an eccentricity of 0.52, allowing detailed astrometric tracking. Recent observations from the Gaia mission in the 2020s have further refined its orbital elements, improving parallax measurements and confirming the system's stability as a model for binary evolution in solar-type stars. Sirius, the brightest star in the night sky, forms another iconic binary system with its companion Sirius B, located about 8.6 light years from Earth, where Sirius A is a main-sequence A-type star and Sirius B is a white dwarf.[74] The companion's existence was first inferred in 1844 through astrometric perturbations by Friedrich Bessel, marking the initial detection of a white dwarf, though visual confirmation came in 1862. With an orbital period of about 50.1 years, this system has provided essential insights into stellar evolution, as Sirius B represents the endpoint of a once-massive star's life cycle, offering a rare direct probe of white dwarf properties through its high mass of roughly 1 solar mass. The Algol system, also known as Beta Persei, exemplifies an eclipsing binary with significant scientific importance for studying mass transfer processes, featuring a semi-detached configuration where the less massive subgiant secondary transfers material to the hotter main-sequence primary via Roche lobe overflow.[75] Its short orbital period of 2.87 days causes regular eclipses, making it the prototype for Algol-type variables and highlighting the "Algol paradox," where the more massive star appears less evolved due to prior mass exchange that reversed the initial mass ratio.[75] This post-mass-transfer scenario has been instrumental in validating binary evolution models, demonstrating how such interactions can alter stellar structures and lifespans.[75] While approximately 10% of binary systems may host planets, the stellar dynamics in these prominent examples primarily underscore benchmarks for mass determination and evolutionary pathways rather than exoplanetary contexts.[76]Complex Multiple Systems
Complex multiple star systems, consisting of three or more gravitationally bound stars, exhibit intricate hierarchical structures that challenge our understanding of stellar formation and long-term stability. These systems are relatively rare, comprising about 25% of all stellar multiples, yet they provide critical insights into the dynamical processes occurring in dense star clusters where most stars are born.[34] Higher-order multiples often form through the capture of companions or fragmentation during the collapse of molecular clouds, resulting in configurations where inner binary or triple subsystems orbit a more distant outer companion.[77] A prominent example of a triple system is Alpha Centauri, the closest star system to the Sun at approximately 4.37 light-years away (with Proxima Centauri at 4.24 light-years), comprising the binary pair Alpha Centauri A and B, orbited by the red dwarf Proxima Centauri at a separation of about 0.21 light-years. This hierarchical arrangement features a close inner binary with an orbital period of roughly 80 years, while Proxima completes a much wider orbit estimated at 550,000 years, making the overall system dynamically stable over billions of years. Including Proxima, the system is sometimes considered part of a broader quadruple context when accounting for its planetary companions, though the stellar components remain three.[1][78] The Castor system (Alpha Geminorum), located about 51 light-years away in the constellation Gemini, represents one of the most complex known multiples with six stellar components organized in a hierarchical structure. It consists of three spectroscopic binaries: Castor A (two A-type stars orbiting every 9.2 days), Castor B (two similar stars with a 2.9-day period), and the distant Castor C (two M-type dwarfs in an eclipsing binary with a 0.8-day period). The A and B pairs form a visual binary with a 470-year orbital period at a separation of about 100 AU, while Castor C orbits the A-B subsystem at over 1,000 AU with a period exceeding 10,000 years, showcasing orbital timescales ranging from days (eclipsing inner pairs) to millennia. This configuration highlights the diversity of interactions in higher-order systems, including tidal influences that maintain stability.[79] Among quadruple systems, the Trapezium cluster in the Orion Nebula features four massive O- and B-type stars (Theta¹ Orionis A, B, C, and D) packed within a mere 0.05 parsecs, forming a dynamically unstable configuration with a predicted lifetime under 100,000 years. This young system, aged about 1 million years, experiences frequent close encounters leading to dynamical ejections, where stars are flung out at speeds near escape velocity, contributing to the dispersal of massive stars from their birth clusters. Such ejections have been simulated to occur without producing hypervelocity runaways in this setup, underscoring the role of N-body interactions in shaping cluster evolution.[80][81] The Fomalhaut system, about 25 light-years distant, was discovered to be a triple in 2013, with the third stellar component Fomalhaut C (LP 876-10) orbiting the primary A star at around 2.5 light-years (158,000 AU), completing the hierarchical structure alongside the closer Fomalhaut B at 0.91 light-years (58,000 AU). Recent studies using Gaia data have refined this wide-orbit companion, revealing a stable setup despite the vast separations, which span periods of millions of years.[82][83] These complex systems are invaluable for testing N-body simulations of gravitational stability, as their hierarchical architectures resist chaotic disruptions that would destabilize non-hierarchical multiples, providing benchmarks for computational models of three- or more-body interactions. Higher-order multiples are rare but essential for tracing the origins of stars in clusters, where dynamical processes like ejections and mergers mimic those in early universe star formation environments. In the 2020s, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has enhanced resolution of components in distant multiples, such as in the Orion Nebula, allowing unprecedented imaging of young hierarchical systems and their protoplanetary disks, thus refining models of multiplicity evolution.[40][77]References
- https://science.[nasa](/page/NASA).gov/universe/stars/multiple-star-systems/
- https://www.[sciencedirect](/page/ScienceDirect).com/topics/physics-and-astronomy/multiple-stars