upvote
https://numericaltank.sjtu.edu.cn/three-body/three-body.htm shows that there are three dimensional solutions.

We have no observed examples in nature of three body equilibrium. But then again, all places we have looked are either influenced by the chaotic orbits around them of the Solar System, our surrounding galaxy, or nearby galaxies in a cluster.

There aren't a lot of orbiting three bodies without external gravitational influences disturbing them.

reply
> There aren't a lot of orbiting three bodies without external gravitational influences disturbing them.

This is of course a relative statement. Every object affects every other object, subject to the limitations of lightspeed propagation of gravity waves through expanding space.

But as you point out, we still haven't noticed any examples that are stable short-term.

reply
Yes. Because 3 points are coplanar, so every "3D problem" with 3 objects can be turned into a 2D problem on the correspondent plane

(of course in real life your plane would keep changing, and probably some other complicated math I can't think right now)

reply
Put another way, while their positions are one set of 3 points, their momenta are another set of 3 points, and there is no requirement that 6 points will always lay on the same plane.

I wonder what phantom forces would appear when the reference frame changes in some complicated fashion. We get centrifugal "force" when we reconstruct F=dP/dt in a rotating reference frame, what would the 3-body "force" look like?

reply
Why would the plane keep changing? If there are only these three objects, won't the vectors of their gravitational pull to each other all be on this plane too?
reply
If you define the initial conditions such that their relative velocity is zero or parallel to the plane, yes. But that's not the case in general.
reply
Each orbit is a spinning top. You pull on a top from the side, it's spin axis precesses.
reply
It’s an arbitrary plane, chosen at each moment just so you can flatten it
reply
Not from an external point of view, as you might have a momentum component perpendicular to that plane

(but yes I think you might be right if we're centered on the CG)

reply
One of the necessary conditions here is that the three objects return to their exact initial position, and so does the centre of mass. Initial conditions with non-zero momentum must trivially be ruled out. But this doesn't stop them from having velocities perpendicular to the initial plane that cancel out perfectly, so this doesn't refute the assertion that the planes keep changing.
reply
Sorry, but this is a word salad.

Most of the solutions always have non-zero momentum, including in the initial conditions. And https://numericaltank.sjtu.edu.cn/three-body/three-body.htm includes periodic solutions that move in all three dimensions.

reply
They presumably meant non-zero total momentum. If the total momentum were non-zero, then the center of mass will be moving in a straight line, and will not return to where it began, and therefore the orbit would not be periodic.
reply
Big picture the center of mass momentum is concerned and it does not matter if the system as a whole is moving up or down or to the right or the left. Like the Earth is basically orbiting the sun in an ellipse [1] so far as the sun is concerned and from the viewpoint of the solar system not care so much that it is moving around the galaxy unless we are interested that orbit being perturbed by other stars that we pass near over millions and milions of years.

[1] ignoring the parameters of that ellipse changing slightly and slowly thanks to the other planets

reply
Oh. That makes sense. Yes. The total momentum has to be zero.

All of the things in the solution can constantly have momentum.

reply
Oh makes perfect sense, do you have thoughts about real life examples? I did some research using AI and it said there were examples of restricted 3 body problems like the trojan asteroids, but no examples in real life similar to what is in this web app
reply