DOCSLIB.ORG

Planetary Orbits Around Binary Star Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Planetary Orbits Around Binary Star Systems Planetary Orbits Around Binary Star Systems A. A. Lascelles School of Physics and Astronomy University of Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom E-mail: [email protected] May 3, 2016 Abstract A simulation of planetary orbits around a binary star system using a Runge-Kutta procedure is presented. Through choices of initial velocities and positions, orbit stability is tested for a range of P- and S-type orbits confined to a disc in the x-y plane around the central stars. The boundary conditions and time-evolution of such orbits is explored. Chaos theory, habitable zones, and other such related phenomena are discussed. 1 1 Introduction Binary stars are systems containing two companion stars orbiting each other via gravi- tational attraction with a common centre of mass. It is generally believed that more than half of all star systems we observe contain multiple stars[1]. The search for a habitable exoplanet is currently an active area of research in astronomy, and recent results confirm the existence of exoplanets that orbit binary star systems[2]. Studying such planets is of great importance for exo-biology. For life to exist, the planet on which it lives must keep to a stable orbit over long time-scales. This is needed because the time for protoplanetary formation and for evolution would encompass billions of orbital periods. There are two species of orbit possible for a planet in a binary system, namely P-type and S-type. P-type orbits will orbit the combined centre of mass of the two stars as if they are one single body whereas planets in an S-type orbit only travel around one of the stars with the other acting as a perturbation[3]. To solve the differential equations involved in a 3-body system, the equations of motion must first be derived (as shown in appendix A). This assumes Newtonian physics is appropriate, and combines Newton's 2nd law with the gravitational attraction of the two stars. Satellites do not strictly follow this motion because of perturbations from other planets, comets, asteroids, and even effects such as accretion changing the gravitational field. However, for the scope of this paper, where we neglect such effects, they can be considered valid. Throughout, we assume that masses are in units of solar masses (M ) so that M = 1M , distances are in terms of astronomical units (AU) so that R = 1AU, and time in units of years. It is further assumed that the system is confined to a 2D plane, as we observe in most solar systems. In the following section, the methodology of this paper will be discussed. The two-fold method includes mathematical manipulation of differential equations, derived in appendix A, in order to achieve a form that can be computationally evaluated. The purpose of Sec- tion 3, which forms the main bulk of the scientific findings, is to explain the physics behind the various orbits found. Boundary conditions for each type of orbit will be discussed along with the reasons behind the shape of the S-type, P-type, circular, and elliptical orbits found together with the extension detailing chaotic orbits and habitable zones. Section 4 concludes the findings of this paper, whilst the appendix is where derivations of the equations of motion used herein can be found. 2 2 Methodology 2.1 Manipulation of Differential Equations In order to make the differential equations suitable for the computational Runge-Kutta algorithm, they are first non-dimensionalised and then converted into four first-order equations. These four equations can be sub-divided into two representing the x-velocity and x-acceleration and two representing the y-velocity and y-acceleration as detailed in the following paragraphs. First consider a pair of stars obeying Kepler's laws of motion and rotating with a period T around their common centre of mass on a circle of radius R. Their Cartesian coordinates will be given by, X1 = R cos(Ωt);Y1 = R sin(Ωt); (1) X2 = −R cos(Ωt);Y2 = −R sin(Ωt): (2) Introducing a planet of negligible mass into this scenario creates the 3-body system where the position, r1;2, of the planet from star 1 or star 2 is given by, 2 2 2 r1;2 = (x − X1;2) + (y − Y1;2) : (3) Here, R is the radial distance coordinate, where the stars are set apart at a distance R, r1;2 are the radial distances of the planet from star 1 and 2 respectively, X1;2 and Y1;2 are the distances from the origin of star 1 and 2 respectively, x and y are the positions of 2π the planet with respect to the origin, and angular frequency Ω = T is the inverse of the period of orbit, T, for the two stars. This allows us to write the equations of motion for a 3-body system in the x and y directions (see appendix A), 1 x − X1 1 x − X2 x¨ = −GM 2 + 2 ; (4) r1 r1 r2 r2 1 y − Y1 1 y − Y2 y¨ = −GM 2 + 2 ; (5) r1 r1 r2 r2 where G is the gravitational constant and M is the mass of each star (equal mass stars are assumed). From Eq. (4) and (5) we can define: dx v = ; (6) x dt 3 and dy v = ; (7) y dt for the x and y velocities of the planet respectively - forming two of the four first order equations required. Subsequently, by a reformation of the two equations of motion in terms of the dimen- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 sionless variables t , x , y , vx, vy, r1;2, X1;2, and Y1;2, we can derive the final two first order equations needed as the inputs for the Runge-Kutta algorithm. The replacements are as follows, r t0 = Ωt; r0 = 1;2 ; (8) 1;2 R x y x0 = ; y0 = ; (9) R R X Y X0 = 1;2 ;Y 0 = 1;2 ; (10) 1;2 R 1;2 R 0 0 where vx and vy come from the implementation of these replacements in Eq. (4) and (5). After these substitutions and exploiting the connection between R and Ω { GM = R3Ω2 from Kepler's 3rd law, we arrive at, 0 0 0 0 0 dvx 1 dvx x − X1 x − X2 0 = 2 = − 0 3 + 0 3 ; (11) dt RΩ dt r1 r2 and the equivalent in the y-direction, 0 0 0 0 0 dvy 1 dvy y − Y1 y − Y2 0 = 2 = − 0 3 + 0 3 : (12) dt RΩ dt r1 r2 Hence, we have found the four first-order differential equations which act as the input for the Runge-Kutta algorithm - Eq. (6), (7), (11) and (12). 2.2 Runge-Kutta Algorithm The first-order equations listed in the previous section are input into the Runge-Kutta algorithm and four variables { x-position, y-position, x-velocity, and y-velocity are allowed to be changed manually in order to search for special types of orbit. When investigating certain orbit types, it is more useful to view them in the rotating frame of the stars. For example, if the planet moves in an ellipse around one star faster than the orbital period T, then in the fixed frame we would see a very complex motion opposed to simple 4 ellipses/circles in the rotating frame. The rotating frame is established through a change of variables when plotting the final function of the orbit, namely, ξ = x cos Ωt + y sin Ωt η = −x sin Ωt + y cos Ωt: (13) This is computed and plotted alongside the fixed frame to investigate whether the orbit is stable or not. Orbits can be narrowed down by whether they return to a similar place in the rotating frame whilst precessing or if they form closed loops indicating they had completed an orbit and returned to their initial positions. With this established, the next step is to enter the initial conditions for displacement and velocity and loop through the possibilities in order to search for interesting orbits. A function is defined that contains all of the initial conditions, including the length of time for which to run the program, τ, and finally calls the Runge-Kutta process. A suitable step size, N −1, and value for τ are chosen which limits the error appropriately at each calculated variable whilst keeping the calculation time to a minimum. In order to determine this step size, the process is repeated for varying step sizes until the calculated orbit remained relatively constant regardless of changes in this parameter. Then, using this value for step size, a test is run with varying values of τ and a value is chosen which gave the full orbit with sufficient iterations to check stability but not too many iterations that time is wasted. For the most part, the value of τ chosen is 100,000 and a step size of 0.001. Using error analysis[4], the value for the fourth-order Runge-Kutta error is found to be 1.00x10−8. To investigate orbits around a single combined centre of mass or a single star (so-called `P-type' orbits), the star-planet separation is made to be large. If sufficiently large, no matter what change in displacement along the x or y axis, a circular or elliptical orbit is returned. It is found that starting the planet on the x axis as opposed to on the y axis produces a change in the final orbit due to the stars being initially aligned on the x axis at positions (0,R) and (0,-R), where R is the radius of the circular path that they follow.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Planetarian Index
    Planetarian Cumulative Index 1972 – 2008 Vol. 1, #1 through Vol. 37, #3 John Mosley [email protected] The PLANETARIAN (ISSN 0090-3213) is published quarterly by the International Planetarium Society under the auspices of the Publications Committee. ©International Planetarium Society, Inc. From the Compiler I compiled the first edition of this index 25 years ago after a frustrating search to find an article that I knew existed and that I really needed. It was a long search without even annual indices to help. By the time I found it, I had run across a dozen other articles that I’d forgotten about but was glad to see again. It was clear that there are a lot of good articles buried in back issues, but that without some sort of index they’d stay lost. I had recently bought an Apple II computer and was receptive to projects that would let me become more familiar with its word processing program. A cumulative index seemed a reasonable project that would be instructive while not consuming too much time. Hah! I did learn some useful solutions to word-processing problems I hadn’t previously known exist, but it certainly did consume more time than I’d imagined by a factor of a dozen or so. You too have probably reached the point where you’ve invested so much time in a project that it’s psychologically easier to finish it than admit defeat. That’s how the first index came to be, and that’s why I’ve kept it up to date.
    [Show full text]
  • Moons, Planets, Solar System, Stars, Galaxies, in Our Universe - an Introduction by Rick Kang Education/Public Outreach Coord
    Moons, Planets, Solar System, Stars, Galaxies, in our Universe - An introduction by Rick Kang Education/Public Outreach Coord. Oregon Astrophysics Outreach HIERARCHY: one within another n Moons ORBIT Planets n Planets ORBIT Stars (Suns) n Stars orbited by Planets are Solar Systems (all Stars?) n Solar Systems form from Nebulas and recyle back into Nebulas (dust & gas) n Nebulas and Solar Systems ORBIT within Galaxies (huge Star Cities) n Many Galaxies fill our Universe Moons Our Solar System’s Planets Our Star (the Sun) Our Galaxy (Milky Way) edge-on from within the pancake (STAR CITY) Stars: distant Suns – Birth, Life, Death (Nebulas, Clusters) Solar System Formation Recycling Stars Heavy Duty Recycling: SUPERNOVA – elements galore DRAWING of our Milky Way Galaxy Looking toward Cygnus and toward galactic center Reality Check: n Visualize SOLAR SYSTEM vs. GALAXY Reality Check: n Visualize SOLAR SYSTEM vs. GALAXY n A Solar System is a VERY TINY DOT within a GALAXY…microscopic! n A ¼” paper punchout vs. a huge disk about 150 MILES WIDE (Coast to Bend or Portland to Roseburg!) Our Sister Galaxy, Andromeda, M31 Other Galaxies in Deep Space The HUBBLE ULTRA-DEEP FIELD a tiny swatch of sky-galaxies galore Hundreds of Billions of GALAXIES in our UNIVERSE n We don’t have enough data to figure out where we are within the UNIVERSE nor how big our Universe might be…evidence is it’s expanding! n We are a member of a cluster and a supercluster of galaxies. How do we know that? n If you leave from a place, how far could you travel in a given amount of time? How old is our Universe, how would that relate to its size? .
    [Show full text]
  • A Review on Substellar Objects Below the Deuterium Burning Mass Limit: Planets, Brown Dwarfs Or What?
    geosciences Review A Review on Substellar Objects below the Deuterium Burning Mass Limit: Planets, Brown Dwarfs or What? José A. Caballero Centro de Astrobiología (CSIC-INTA), ESAC, Camino Bajo del Castillo s/n, E-28692 Villanueva de la Cañada, Madrid, Spain; [email protected] Received: 23 August 2018; Accepted: 10 September 2018; Published: 28 September 2018 Abstract: “Free-floating, non-deuterium-burning, substellar objects” are isolated bodies of a few Jupiter masses found in very young open clusters and associations, nearby young moving groups, and in the immediate vicinity of the Sun. They are neither brown dwarfs nor planets. In this paper, their nomenclature, history of discovery, sites of detection, formation mechanisms, and future directions of research are reviewed. Most free-floating, non-deuterium-burning, substellar objects share the same formation mechanism as low-mass stars and brown dwarfs, but there are still a few caveats, such as the value of the opacity mass limit, the minimum mass at which an isolated body can form via turbulent fragmentation from a cloud. The least massive free-floating substellar objects found to date have masses of about 0.004 Msol, but current and future surveys should aim at breaking this record. For that, we may need LSST, Euclid and WFIRST. Keywords: planetary systems; stars: brown dwarfs; stars: low mass; galaxy: solar neighborhood; galaxy: open clusters and associations 1. Introduction I can’t answer why (I’m not a gangstar) But I can tell you how (I’m not a flam star) We were born upside-down (I’m a star’s star) Born the wrong way ’round (I’m not a white star) I’m a blackstar, I’m not a gangstar I’m a blackstar, I’m a blackstar I’m not a pornstar, I’m not a wandering star I’m a blackstar, I’m a blackstar Blackstar, F (2016), David Bowie The tenth star of George van Biesbroeck’s catalogue of high, common, proper motion companions, vB 10, was from the end of the Second World War to the early 1980s, and had an entry on the least massive star known [1–3].
    [Show full text]
  • Size and Scale Attendance Quiz II
    Size and Scale Attendance Quiz II Are you here today? Here! (a) yes (b) no (c) are we still here? Today’s Topics • “How do we know?” exercise • Size and Scale • What is the Universe made of? • How big are these things? • How do they compare to each other? • How can we organize objects to make sense of them? What is the Universe made of? Stars • Stars make up the vast majority of the visible mass of the Universe • A star is a large, glowing ball of gas that generates heat and light through nuclear fusion • Our Sun is a star Planets • According to the IAU, a planet is an object that 1. orbits a star 2. has sufficient self-gravity to make it round 3. has a mass below the minimum mass to trigger nuclear fusion 4. has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit • A dwarf planet (such as Pluto) fulfills all these definitions except 4 • Planets shine by reflected light • Planets may be rocky, icy, or gaseous in composition. Moons, Asteroids, and Comets • Moons (or satellites) are objects that orbit a planet • An asteroid is a relatively small and rocky object that orbits a star • A comet is a relatively small and icy object that orbits a star Solar (Star) System • A solar (star) system consists of a star and all the material that orbits it, including its planets and their moons Star Clusters • Most stars are found in clusters; there are two main types • Open clusters consist of a few thousand stars and are young (1-10 million years old) • Globular clusters are denser collections of 10s-100s of thousand stars, and are older (10-14 billion years
    [Show full text]
  • Brown Dwarf Desert Evolved Systems Atmospheres And
    Irradiated brown dwarfs - hot Jupiter analogues? Sarah L Casewell1* STFC Ernest Rutherford Research Fellow 1. University of Leicester, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Leicester, UK *email: [email protected] As brown dwarfs have atmospheres similar to those we see in Jupiter and in hot Jupiter exoplanets, irradiated brown dwarfs have been described as “filling the fourth corner of parameter space between the solar system planets, hot Jupiter exoplanets and isolated brown dwarfs”. Irradiated brown dwarfs are however, rare. There are only about 22 known around main sequence stars, and even fewer that have survived the evolution of their host star to form close, post-common envelope systems where the brown dwarf orbits a white dwarf. These systems are however, extremely useful. The white dwarf emits more at shorter wavelengths, where the brown dwarf is brightest in the infrared, meaning it is possible to directly observe the brown dwarf – something that is extremely challenging for the main sequence star-brown dwarf systems. BROWN DWARF DESERT ATMOSPHERES AND IRRADIATION Despite there being a plethora of Hot Jupiters known, there are very few The brown dwarfs in these systems are highly irradiated leading to emission brown dwarfs discovered in similar orbits, a phenomenon known as the lines being seen from hydrogen, Ca I, Na I, K I, Ti I and Fe in the systems with brown dwarf desert. This is thought to be caused by the difference in white dwarfs hotter than 13000 K. The hottest primaries show fewer emission formation mechanisms, planets forming via core accretion around stars, lines due to dissociation, but large day- night temperature differences of ~500 but brown dwarfs forming via gravitational instabilty .
    [Show full text]
  • Brown Dwarfs: at Last Filling the Gap Between Stars and Planets
    Perspective Brown dwarfs: At last filling the gap between stars and planets Ben Zuckerman* Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095 Until the mid-1990s a person could not point to any celestial object and say with assurance known (refs. 5–9), the vast majority of that ‘‘here is a brown dwarf.’’ Now dozens are known, and the study of brown dwarfs has brown dwarfs are freely floating among come of age, touching upon major issues in astrophysics, including the nature of dark the stars (2–4). Indeed, the contrast be- matter, the properties of substellar objects, and the origin of binary stars and planetary tween the scarcity of companion brown systems. dwarfs and the plentitude of free floaters was totally unexpected; this dichotomy Stars, Brown Dwarfs, and Dark Matter superplanet from a brown dwarf, such as now constitutes a major unsolved problem in stellar physics (see below). lanets (Greek ‘‘wanderers’’) and stars how they formed, so that the dividing line Surveys for free floaters, both within have been known for millennia, but need not necessarily fall at 13 Jovian P ϳ100 light years of the Sun and in (more the physics underlying their differences masses. distant) clusters such as the Pleiades (The became understood only during the 20th Low-mass stars spend a lot of time, tens Seven Sisters), are still in their early century. Stars fuse protons into helium of billions to trillions of years, fusing pro- stages. But the picture is becoming clear. nuclei in their hot interiors and planets do tons into helium on the so-called ‘‘main Currently, it is estimated that there are not.
    [Show full text]
  • GEORGE HERBIG and Early Stellar Evolution
    GEORGE HERBIG and Early Stellar Evolution Bo Reipurth Institute for Astronomy Special Publications No. 1 George Herbig in 1960 —————————————————————– GEORGE HERBIG and Early Stellar Evolution —————————————————————– Bo Reipurth Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii at Manoa 640 North Aohoku Place Hilo, HI 96720 USA . Dedicated to Hannelore Herbig c 2016 by Bo Reipurth Version 1.0 – April 19, 2016 Cover Image: The HH 24 complex in the Lynds 1630 cloud in Orion was discov- ered by Herbig and Kuhi in 1963. This near-infrared HST image shows several collimated Herbig-Haro jets emanating from an embedded multiple system of T Tauri stars. Courtesy Space Telescope Science Institute. This book can be referenced as follows: Reipurth, B. 2016, http://ifa.hawaii.edu/SP1 i FOREWORD I first learned about George Herbig’s work when I was a teenager. I grew up in Denmark in the 1950s, a time when Europe was healing the wounds after the ravages of the Second World War. Already at the age of 7 I had fallen in love with astronomy, but information was very hard to come by in those days, so I scraped together what I could, mainly relying on the local library. At some point I was introduced to the magazine Sky and Telescope, and soon invested my pocket money in a subscription. Every month I would sit at our dining room table with a dictionary and work my way through the latest issue. In one issue I read about Herbig-Haro objects, and I was completely mesmerized that these objects could be signposts of the formation of stars, and I dreamt about some day being able to contribute to this field of study.
    [Show full text]
  • Binary Star Hypothesis of Origin of Solar System
    B.A. PART - 1 ( PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY : PAPER - 1) TOPIC : BINARY STAR HYPOTHESIS OF ORIGIN OF SOLAR SYSTEM - Prof. KUMARI NISHA RANI (DATE: 21/07/2020) Binary Star Hypothesis of Russell: It may be pointed out that the hypothesis based on dualistic concept failed to explain the high amount of angular momentum of the planets of present solar system, high atomic weight of the constituent elements of the planets of inner circle and lighter atomic weight of the planets of outer circle of the solar system and the distances of different planets from the sun. In order to solve these problems the scientists tried to explain the origin of the earth and the solar system with the help of three heavenly bodies. H.N. Russell, an American astronomer, propounded his ‘binary star hypothesis’ in the year 1937 to remove the shortcomings of tidal hypothesis of Sir James Jeans. Russell opined that there were two stars near the primitive sun in the universe. In the beginning the ‘companion star’ was revolving around the primitive sun. Later on one giant star (the third one) named as ‘approaching star’ came near the companion star but the direction of revolution of the approaching star was opposite to that of the companion star. It was believed that the distance between two stars might have been about 48,00,000 to 64,00,000 km. 1 It means that the approaching star might have been at a far greater distance from the primitive sun. Thus, there would have been no effect of tidal force of the giant approaching star on the primitive sun but large amount of matter of the companion star was attracted towards the giant approaching star because of its massive tidal force (gravitational pull).
    [Show full text]
  • Newsleiter I
    + THE NEWSLEITER I VOLUME IV NO. 1 1981 THE OLIVER CHALLENGE T he Monterey I nstitute for Research in Ast ronomy will soon become an important center for stellar astronorny due in large part to the determination of its staff and the generous st^pport of many individuals and companies. Thanks to donations of equipment, f oundation grants, and personal contributions, M IRA now possesses a telescope and instrumentat ion. With a use permit for Chews Ridge in the Los Padres National Forest, MIRA has access to one of the finest sites for optical astronorny in North America. But, one component of MIRA's observatory is still missing: the observatory building. ln December 1980, Dr. Bbrnard M. Oliver, recently retired Vice-President for Research and Development at Hewlett- Packard, pledged a personal challenge grant of $200,000 for the construction of M IRA's observatory building. For every dollar contributed to the building fund between now and the end of the year, Dr. oliver will donate a matching dollar. The matching of ttre Oliver Challenge by MIRA's Friends will be a maior step toward the construction of the observatory building on Chews Ridge. A native Californian educated at Stanford and the California lnstitute of Technology, Dr. oliver's interest in M IRA dates back several years. tast June, he visited Monterey to give a lecture m the 'Search for Extraterrestrial I ntelligence' to the Friends of MIRA. At that time, he visited the MIRA shop to assess the staf f 's work on the Ret icon Spect rophotqmeter and related instrumentation.
    [Show full text]
  • Pocket Solar System
    Pocket Solar System Building scale models of the solar system is a challenge because of the vast distances and huge size differences involved. This is a simple little model to give you an overview of the distances between the orbits of the planets and other objects in our solar system. (It is also a good tool for reviewing fractions.) Materials needed: ÿ At least 1 meter of paper tape per person, such as adding machine paper ÿ Pen or pencil each Just to review, the order of the planets and large objects going out from the Sun and their average distances are: Object Distance in kilometers Distance in AUÅ Mercury 58 million 0.39 Venus 108 million 0.72 Earth 150 million 1 Mars 228 million 1.52 Asteroid Belt (including Ceres Ç) 416 million 2.77 Jupiter 778 million 5.2 Saturn 1,427 million 9.54 Uranus 2,870 million 19.2 Neptune 4,497 million 30.1 Pluto Ç and the 5,850 million 39.5 inner edge of the Kuiper belt ErisÇ 10,200 million 67.8 ÅAU stands for Astronomical Unit and is defined as the average distance between the Sun and the Earth (about 93 million miles or 150 million kilometers). ÇThe International Astronomical Union (IAU), the organization in charge of naming celestial objects, classified these objects as “dwarf planets” in 2006. Making Your Pocket Solar System Make sure everyone has a strip of register tape at least a meter long and at most, the length of the person’s body. Cut or fold over the ends so they are straight.
    [Show full text]
  • Solar System Scavenger Hunt Activity
    Solar System Scavenger Hunt Activity Materials: Solar system questions worksheet (pages 2-3) 18 solar system fact cards (pages 4-8) Tape and scissors Preparation Print the fact cards on card stock or brightly-colored paper and cut them apart along the dotted lines. Make copies of the solar system questions worksheet (2-sided). Each student will need his or her own copy. Hide all 18 solar system fact cards around your classroom where students will be able to find them. You can put them on the back of your classroom door, on chairs, on the computer keyboard, on the sides of student desks, or wherever you like. Activity Students receive copies of the question worksheet. They have to search the classroom to find the fact cards to answer the questions. After they have completed the question sheet, you can go over the answers together with the class. Management tips You may want to make this a silent activity so students don't share answers with each other. You can have the kids work by themselves or with partners. Don't be afraid to hide the facts in tough places. Kids think it's more fun when they have to search around a little. Examples of good hiding spots might include: • sticking out of a book, like a bookmark • the back of the classroom door • laying flat on the bookshelf • on the back of the teacher's chair • on the side of your computer monitor Have a plan for students who finish early. You may want to have an assignment for them to complete when they're done, or you may have them help other students find fact cards.
    [Show full text]
  • Solar System Our Solar System Is the System of Planets and Other Objects
    Name__________________________ Date_________________ Solar System Our solar system is the system of planets and other objects that orbit our sun. It has many parts. Our sun, the star of our solar system, holds everything in place by its gravity. There are eight planets and many moons. There are asteroids and comets. There are meteoroids and tiny particles of rock and dust. The sun, which is actually a star, is the largest object in the solar system. It contains more than 99% of the mass of the solar system. What is a star? A star is a huge body in space made of gases that is held together by its own gravity. It makes heat and light by the chemical process of nuclear fusion. This process combines hydrogen atoms by joining them or fusing them together. When this happens, a huge amount of energy is released. Our sun is an average-sized star that is about half way through its life cycle. It should continue making heat and light for another 5 billion years! Our sun provides all the energy for life on Earth. Without its heat, Earth would be too cold to live on. Without its light, plants could not grow, and there would be no food for people and animals. Our solar system formed about 4.6 billion years ago. It formed from dust and gas in the universe left over from the Big Bang. The sun began as a cloud of gases and dust, which began condensing until it was big enough to begin nuclear fusion. As its heat and light burst forth, more matter began to clump together.
    [Show full text]