Game of Thrones - Is the World Actually a Dyson Sphere/Shell?

[137th Gebirg]

I'm not very keen on Game of Thrones as fiction, but the extreme variation of the climate reminds me very much of that of the planet Helliconia in the trilogy of the same name by Brian Aldiss.

Helliconia lies in a loose binary star system, which consists of a yellow-orange dwarf similar to our sun, Batalix (spectral class G4), and a hotter and brighter white star, Freyr (Type A supergiant). Helliconia orbits Batalix, which in turn orbits Freyr. The Batalix-Freyr system is supposedly in the constellation of Ophiuchus, about a thousand light years from Earth.

Helliconia orbits Batalix in 480 days. [...] This is called the "small year". Helliconia and Batalix's orbit around Freyr, the "great year", is highly elliptical and takes approximately 1,825 small years which equates to some 2,592 Earth years. At periastron Batalix is 236 astronomical units from Freyr, whilst at apastron is 710 AU distant. [...] While seasonal changes in the small year are slighter than those of Earth, the long seasons of the great year are much more marked. When distant from Freyr, Batalix's illumination is sufficient only to maintain ice age conditions. However, Freyr's output is many times greater than Batalix's, so as Helliconia approaches Freyr, the tropics of Helliconia become hotter even than the tropics of Earth.

Diagram of the orbital mechanics here.

It's an interesting theory, and I could easily see where the seasons would be affected by a binary star system like that, but has there ever been a second sun mentioned in any of the books? I'm just finishing up the first one now so I'm not sure at present. The only near astral bodies that I know of are the one sun, the one moon and the moon that was destroyed in ancient times creating the first dragons.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Well I guess the planet could be in a highly elliptical orbit around a single star, but, of course, that would also lead to very long winters compared to the summers (by Kepler's law of planetary motion relating to the radius vector sweeping out equal areas in equal times). I couldn't really get into the book or the series. I'm more interested to know the author's scientific basis for the scenario - if he has one other than invoking magic. I can accept Tolkien's universe because it explicitly depends on the existence of a hierarchy of supernatural beings and it also has an engaging story. Other fantasy works I find quite tedious or derivative.

 

[Venardhi]

The seasons are uneven and appear to have no pattern, so even a highly elliptical orbit wouldn't be sufficient. The only theory I've heard that seemed to satisfy that important detail was that there are other planets in the system that occasionally come close enough to pull their world closer or further away from their sun. Doing so while staying in any sort of reliable orbit seems highly unlikely though.

A wizard did it, probably an evil one. Accept it and move on.

 

[EyalM]

You'd never see stars.

Correct. Can't really work around that one. Unless, of course we get really hyper-teched and assume that the sphere builders have thousands of little satellites in heliosynchronous orbit around the star shining these absurdly powerful omnidirectional light bulbs simulating stars. Not bloody likely, but a cute idea nonetheless. If they can build a sphere, why not throw in a couple thousand star-satellites?

Can't the stars be cities on the opposite side of the sphere?

 

[Venardhi]

No.

 

[137th Gebirg]

^^^ Tell him why. A single-word answer is helpful to no one.

You'd never see stars.

Correct. Can't really work around that one. Unless, of course we get really hyper-teched and assume that the sphere builders have thousands of little satellites in heliosynchronous orbit around the star shining these absurdly powerful omnidirectional light bulbs simulating stars. Not bloody likely, but a cute idea nonetheless. If they can build a sphere, why not throw in a couple thousand star-satellites?

Can't the stars be cities on the opposite side of the sphere?

Probably not, as atmospheric haze and distortion would likely prevent much light from reaching the opposite side of the sphere. Remember, it's approximately 2 AU's from one side of the sphere to the other. That's the orbit of the earth around the sun. Seeing lights on earth at that distance, even from our biggest cities without atmospheric haze would be nigh impossible. Also, if you were in night, seeing the stars, they couldn't be lights on the other side, as that would be daytime and you would not be able to see said lights. The only existence of star light inside a sphere that makes sense is a set of light-emitting satellites. Either that, or some elaborate holographic system projecting stars onto the upper atmosphere from an unknown source.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

You'd never see stars.

Correct. Can't really work around that one. Unless, of course we get really hyper-teched and assume that the sphere builders have thousands of little satellites in heliosynchronous orbit around the star shining these absurdly powerful omnidirectional light bulbs simulating stars. Not bloody likely, but a cute idea nonetheless. If they can build a sphere, why not throw in a couple thousand star-satellites?

Can't the stars be cities on the opposite side of the sphere?

Earth's cities aren't bright enough to be seen from the surface of Mars. The opposite side of a Dyson sphere would be even further than Earth-to-Mars at closest approach. Cities are simply too small to generate enough light to be seen at the distance of upwards of 150 million miles.