orbits

Not really, since lots of satellites have technical requirements for polar orbits or are otherwise not following the least-energy, eastward orbits.

There are some reasons for science spacecraft to be in high orbits but most of what you see is decommissioned comsats in graveyard orbits, which are supersynchronous.

So it is certainly possible to find stable orbits, even in a very unusual star system like this one.

All orbits go around a common center of mass which is not the center of mass of the orbiting bodies separately.

But they are ( except in very rare cases), just elliptical orbits at huge distances.

Defense Support Program satellites are also in stationary orbits so they can watch fixed regions for nuclear missile launches with infrared cameras.

This is because such orbits have the least chance of decaying or of colliding with other satellites and creating a debris problem.

Mars gets within 0.3 AU of the Earth when the orbits line up.

The goal was to put satellites in odd orbits and still be able to return to a fixed airstrip, requiring great lateral transit.

I love the animated cover, but it wish it had relatively accurate orbits and periods (within reason).

Still, flat circles seem to deviate after about half a dozen orbits.

Yeah, I would think that the quasi stable orbits would be L4, L5 or orbiting around any of the pairs.

If it is reasonable to expect fewer collisions over time, as earlier collisions eject some objects from the belt and remaining objects settle into "safer" orbits?

According to one source[1], "The name of a newly discovered exoplanet is dependant on the name of the star which it orbits and also if any other exoplanets orbiting the same host star have been discovered.

A satellite can appear to "stand still" from the perspective of an observer on the ground, so long as it orbits at the right altitude/speed (speed and altitude of an orbit are proportional); the satellite's orbital period just has to be exactly a day long.