Short answer: The outer Solar System may be far less stable after the Sun becomes a white dwarf than the classic smooth-mass-loss picture suggests. In 672 computer simulations, as many as 96% of cases with larger, discrete ejections became unstable within 3 billion years of white-dwarf formation, and about 40% were already disrupted or violently scattered before the Sun finished losing its mass. Those percentages are model outcomes—not measured odds for the real Sun.
What the 672 simulations tested
Konstantin Batygin and Jim Fuller of Caltech and Fred Adams of the University of Michigan modeled the Sun’s evolution through its giant-star phases and into a white dwarf. They followed Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune while changing two properties of the Sun’s mass loss:
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
The Astronomy Book (DK Big Ideas) | $12.15 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
National Geographic Stargazer's Atlas: The Ultimate Guide to the Night Sky | $36.70 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
National Geographic Backyard Guide to the Night Sky, 2nd Edition | $14.29 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Universe, Third Edition | $17.83 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
Astronomy: A Self-Teaching Guide, Eighth Edition | $14.67 | Buy on Amazon |
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
- How much mass left in each event: smaller versus larger discrete bursts.
- When the bursts occurred: throughout the giant phases or only near the end of the envelope-shedding process.
Each scenario was then integrated for 3 billion years after white-dwarf formation. The calculations ask how a planetary system responds when the Sun loses mass in separate, asymmetric parcels rather than as a perfectly smooth wind. The findings were reported by Phys.org in October 2026.
PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Outdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchWhy discrete bursts change planetary orbits
Smooth loss lets orbits expand predictably
If stellar mass declines gradually and symmetrically, the planets feel a slowly weakening gravitational pull. Their orbits expand, but the overall architecture can remain orderly. This is the baseline behind much older estimates of a very long-lived outer system.
#1 Best Overall
Asymmetric parcels give the Sun recoil kicks
A burst that leaves unevenly carries momentum away in one direction. Conservation of momentum gives the Sun a small recoil, or “kick.” A single kick may be modest, but repeated kicks alter the planets’ orbital sizes, eccentricities and mutual spacing. Because the giant planets are gravitationally coupled, a change in one orbit can propagate through the system.
The authors summarized the distinction in a sentence quoted by Phys.org: “Everything changes when the envelope departs in pieces.”
What happened in the larger-burst runs
| Outcome or condition | Result reported for the simulations | Qualification |
|---|---|---|
| Instability after white-dwarf formation | Up to 96% of systems became unstable within 3 billion years | Larger-burst simulations; this is a model fraction, not an observed probability |
| Disruption before mass loss ended | About 40% were disrupted or violently scattered | Applies to the scenarios highlighted in the Phys.org report; instability occurred while the Sun was still shedding its envelope |
| Planetary ejection | Some planets were expelled from the Solar System | The report does not assign one universal ejection rate to each planet |
| Change in orbital order | Uranus and Neptune swapped places in some systems | An example of a rearranged, not necessarily immediately ejected, architecture |
| Long-term survival | Some gentler-burst systems remained stable for the full 3-billion-year integration | Stability was possible, but not guaranteed |
“Unstable” does not mean every planet disappears at once. It can mean close encounters, orbit crossing, a planet being scattered onto a very wide orbit, or eventual ejection. In other cases, the planets can settle into a different but still bound configuration.
How quickly could the outer system fail?
The timing has two distinct parts. In roughly 40% of the more disruptive cases, scattering began before the Sun completed its mass loss. In the post-white-dwarf calculation, as many as 96% of larger-burst systems became unstable within the following 3 billion years.
That is dramatically shorter than the traditional comparison quoted in the report: a smooth-loss estimate near a quintillion years for major outer-system disruption, versus roughly 1 billion years after white-dwarf formation in the burst-driven picture. These numbers describe different physical assumptions, so the newer result is not a revised countdown clock for the actual Solar System. It shows how strongly the timescale depends on whether mass loss is smooth or delivered in substantial, asymmetric bursts.
Could Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus or Neptune be ejected?
Jupiter and Saturn
The two largest planets dominate the outer system’s gravitational structure. A recoil kick can change their spacing and eccentricities, and subsequent exchanges with the ice giants can amplify those changes. The simulations allow outcomes in which a giant planet is scattered outward and eventually leaves the Sun’s gravitational control, but the reported results do not establish that one named planet is more likely than the others to be ejected.
Rank #4
Uranus and Neptune
The ice giants are especially sensitive to changes in the Jupiter–Saturn backbone. Some simulated systems exchanged Uranus and Neptune’s orbital order, demonstrating that the familiar present-day sequence is not guaranteed to survive. Either planet could instead remain bound on a wider orbit, enter a resonance, or be expelled, depending on the sequence and strength of the bursts.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Why some systems survived
Not every burst-driven calculation ended in chaos. Gentler ejections sometimes placed planets into mean-motion resonances—repeating orbital-period relationships that help maintain their relative spacing. Resonance capture can protect a system from immediate close encounters even while the planets’ orbits expand and the Sun’s mass declines.
Best Value
The simulations also varied whether bursts happened throughout all giant phases or were concentrated late. A late burst sequence gives the planets less time to respond while the Sun is evolving, whereas repeated events across the giant phases can accumulate orbital changes. Phys.org’s October 2026 report compares these cases, but it does not provide a single percentage for each timing category.
Are 96% and 40% the odds for our Solar System?
No. They are conditional fractions produced by a set of assumed burst histories. The study does not establish the real Sun’s future distribution of burst sizes, directions or timing. In particular:
- The larger-burst cases are deliberately different from smooth mass loss; the Sun’s actual bursts billions of years from now are unknown.
- The percentages describe the 672 modeled scenarios, not a survey of stars or a measured frequency in nature.
- A system counted as unstable can experience anything from orbital rearrangement to ejection; the outcomes are not identical.
- The 3-billion-year integration is a simulation window, not a claim that every instability must occur by that date.
The defensible conclusion is therefore comparative: if the Sun loses its envelope in sufficiently large, asymmetric pieces, the outer planets face a much greater risk of scattering than they would under an idealized smooth wind.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →What this means for the Sun’s eventual white-dwarf system
The inner planets are not the focus of these results; the modeled architecture consists of Jupiter through Neptune. For those four giants, survival is not a simple yes-or-no question. A gentle sequence can leave a resonant, stable system for at least 3 billion simulated years. Larger bursts can trigger instability during the Sun’s transformation or within about a billion years afterward, with possible ejections and orbital-order reversals.
The study’s lasting contribution is to identify the missing variable in smooth-loss forecasts: the granularity and asymmetry of the escaping envelope. Until stellar-evolution observations or improved models constrain that burst behavior for a Sun-like star, the simulations provide a range of physically possible futures rather than a probability forecast for our own planets.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
