http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/09/solar-siblings-astronomers-discover-sun-long-lost-brother/ http://phys.org/news/2014-05-astronomers-sun-long-lost-brother-pave.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/09/solar-sibling-sun-sister-star-discovered_n_5295475.html Sun's 'Long-Lost Sibling' Star Identified By Texas Astronomers Cool. If we could get there now!
*puts suitcase in the car* Hop in, but you better take your bathroom break now. All joking aside, this is cool! It's nice to actually find a sister to our own Sun!
Right. Astronomers do not know as much about stars as we are led to believe. Actually, FG Sagittae is not unique in this dance up and down the H-R diagram. Others include V 605 Aquilae, V 4334 Sagittarii, V838 Monocerotis and Capella. Our ignorance concerning such stars is glossed over with terms like "variable star" and "late thermal pulse." The fact is, researchers have been trying for years to computer model stars and how they nova, yet all the models can produce is a fizzle, not a bang. Until that is worked out, I'd take any claims of stellar genealogy with a grain of salt.
^It's a given that any scientific conclusion is not presented as inviolable fact, just the best model that we've been able to construct given current knowledge. The entire scientific process is designed to challenge and question such models, to test them to destruction if necessary in order to weed out the inaccuracies and mistakes and draw closer to the truth. When scientists issue a finding, they aren't saying "This is Truth and you must never question it." On the contrary, they're saying to other scientists, "This is the way things appear to us, now please try to prove us wrong." Only if a conclusion survives that peer-review process is it kept around, and only as long as it isn't contradicted by new evidence. The problem is that the press and the public don't understand this, so they mistake scientific findings for being the same kind of assertions of Truth that politicians, pundits, and ideologues issue.
That's called "science by press release." And the linked articles do present the conclusion as fact: "Astronomers discover Sun's long-lost brother." No "may," no "perhaps." To me the effort sounds like an a priori goal using statistical analysis to find a match that is "close enough." It also proceeds from the nebular hypothesis of star and planet formation, which has long been proven untenable. The real problem is not the scientific method; the problem is that method is no longer followed as purely as we are all taught. There are budgets, grants and all other manner of pressures that affect the research. That's practically spelled out in the articles: Translation: This is what we (allegedly) found, and what more we may find if our funding is continued. Also note that the scientific paper has not yet been published. Announce spectacular results to the public press first. EDIT And the mainstream reverses itself: Stars on the outskirts actually are the oldest Yet this does nothing to clarify the picture:
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/...-lost-brother/ Fox obviously can't, since they think its a boy.
Uh, depending on whether it's a B or G type star? We may be on the wrong side. I've heard that if you can get behind a star and lift its tail... No, no! That can be dangerous if it turns out to be a skunk star.