17/02: Binary after all?
Category: General science news
Posted by: ajmilne
So there’s this odd notion some folk have been pursuing some decades: that our sun actually has a distant, dim binary companion…
Yes, I know, this is one of those conjectures with that faint, musty odour of ‘Planet X’ about it. But in fairness to this particular species of the notion, it’s got some numbers, some papers, some evidence, and most of all the entirely laudable property that it’s quite negatable—as there’s now a paper clearly stating where it should be, and how we’d confirm or disconfirm. One John Matese and one Daniel Whitmire have published in Icarus where they think the thing should be, and figure the WISE survey should show it well enough.
Kinda cool, anyway, to think there might actually be somethin’ that big out there, after all…
But sure, it’s still absolutely ‘might be’. Maybe. Sorta. As popular press has had a few others commenting, and generally saying: sure, could be, but it’s not like the evidence so far is exactly a clincher.
Yes, I know, this is one of those conjectures with that faint, musty odour of ‘Planet X’ about it. But in fairness to this particular species of the notion, it’s got some numbers, some papers, some evidence, and most of all the entirely laudable property that it’s quite negatable—as there’s now a paper clearly stating where it should be, and how we’d confirm or disconfirm. One John Matese and one Daniel Whitmire have published in Icarus where they think the thing should be, and figure the WISE survey should show it well enough.
Kinda cool, anyway, to think there might actually be somethin’ that big out there, after all…
But sure, it’s still absolutely ‘might be’. Maybe. Sorta. As popular press has had a few others commenting, and generally saying: sure, could be, but it’s not like the evidence so far is exactly a clincher.


Scott Garten wrote:
There probably ain’t no sich animull, but since I haven’t gone out there to see for myself, I can’t be absolutely certain.