Evidence for a solar companion star.

This is a document that I ran across. I suggest reading it as I believe it may be where the term "Nemesis" originated from when reffering to planet x. This research was done in 1984. Download the PDF to view the report.

Periodicity seen in both the mass extinctions and large impact cratering on earth can be explained if one postulates that the sun has a companion star, orbiting in a moderately eccentric orbit with a major axis of 2.8 light-years.

This new model of the mass extinctions makes several new predictions. The obvious one is the existence of the companion star. (If it is found, we suggested it be called "Nemesis".)

Evidence for a solar companion star.

Think this has been posted before I've read that document

2nd line

reply to post by PAranormal


I found this an interesting little film
if interested ?

www.youtube.com...


Sorry can't do the embedding bit yet !

He lost me here...

mass extinctions were not rare
individual events, but that they occured on a regular schedule: every 26 million
years. The last extinction took place about 13 million years ago, so we are halfway
between catastrophies.

It always seems that extraordinary proclamations are based on flawed assumptions very early on in their logic base, as this was in his introduction, and I read no more of it based on that.

I'm no expert, but i do think a companion star is a good explanation for our solar system's unusual movement across the Galactic plane.

It would seem though, that this companion star is actually bigger than our own sun, as we seem to be orbiting it rather than it orbiting us.

Cosmic...

Originally posted by Cosmic4life
I'm no expert, but i do think a companion star is a good explanation for our solar system's unusual movement across the Galactic plane.

It would seem though, that this companion star is actually bigger than our own sun, as we seem to be orbiting it rather than it orbiting us.

What manner of 'unusual movement' are you referring to? Also, this (very old) document and others have put a relatively small upper limit on the mass of any solar companion. What brings you to conclude that there could exist such a high-mass solar companion and how could it influence our (combined?) path through the plane of the galaxy?

reply to post by JustSomeIdiot


I think he is referring to the wobble/oscillation of our star on the galactic plane. I think it causes the precession of the equinoxes.

Precession of the equinoxes:
Wobble:

And to me, a companion star would explain why, apart from the wobble mentionned above, we are almost static in the universe and don't drift away so to say. The other star would bring the necessary gravity to "keep" the same coordinates, fluctuating in the wobble on the galactic plane. The supermassive blackhole at the center of the galaxy helps as well.

The Nemesis hypothesis has some problems.

It proposes that there have been regular cometary impacts which have led to mass extinctions.

One problem is that out of the 12 extinction events proposed, there is evidence of only two impacts related to them.

The largest problem is that it has been determined that an object with the required orbit cannot exist, the orbit would be unstable.
www.space.com...

reply to post by Phage


I have a question for you, Phage. Could it be possible the two orbits (Earth/Nemesis) "add up" to each other. This way they could both revolve around each others instead of one revolving around another. The motion could be something like electrons revolving around the core of a nucleus.



Do you think it would be possible? That might explain the precession of the equinoxes, admitting the time it would take for either one of these stars to revolve would be something like 26,000 years?

Just putting theories out there...

reply to post by Gab1159


Two or more gravitationally bound objects will orbit around their barycenter. So yes, binary stars would tend to orbit around some point that lies between their centers of mass, not simply around the heaviest one. In the case of the earth and sun this is also true, however while that barycenter is not the center of the Sun, it is not far from it and still well within the solar body itself.

Originally posted by JustSomeIdiot
reply to post by Gab1159

 

Two or more gravitationally bound objects will orbit around their barycenter. So yes, binary stars would tend to orbit around some point that lies between their centers of mass, not simply around the heaviest one. In the case of the earth and sun this is also true, however while that barycenter is not the center of the Sun, it is not far from it and still well within the solar body itself.

Oh thanks, I wasn't expecting that answer regarding Earth and Sun. I've always wanted to know why the center of gravity was not the Sun itself, but an inconstant point within the Sun. Aha this is amazing!

Thanks

reply to post by PAranormal


Nemesis was hypothesized as the cause for what was perceived to a periodic nature to extinctions. The periodic nature of extinctions turns out to be not true. The proposed orbit for Nemesis was shown to be unstable.

reply to post by Cosmic4life


If that were true then we'd have identified the companion a long time ago. The closest star to us is Alpha Centauri. If the companion were as large as the Sun then it would be bright and easy to see.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Cosmic4life
If that were true then we'd have identified the companion a long time ago. The closest star to us is Alpha Centauri. If the companion were as large as the Sun then it would be bright and easy to see.

Actually, the closest star to us (that we have so far detected) is the red dwarf Proxima Centauri which may or may not be the third member of the (currently defined as) binary star system that contains Alpha Centauri A and Alpha Centauri B, both of which are just a little bit further away from us than Proxima Centauri.

reply to post by JustSomeIdiot


Thanks for the good info on the star. Proxima Centauri is a red dwarf and is not unaided eye visible. It was found and is dimmer than a suggested star that is larger than the Sun and a companion to it.

Again, thanks for the correction.