It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Most stars are born in clusters rather than singly, and there’s plenty of evidence that the Sun was too.
For one thing, the material of the infant solar system (as preserved in the earliest meteorites) was enriched by fresh supernova debris from at least one very young, massive star (having 15 to 25 solar masses) that exploded less than 5 light-years away, no more than 2 million years after the Sun's formation. Today no such massive star exists within 300 light-years of the Sun. Clearly, the early solar system had stars close around it.
Soucre: The Lost Siblings of the Sun
The anomalous chemical abundances and the structure of the Edgeworth–Kuiper belt observed in the solar system constrain the initial mass and radius of the star cluster in which the Sun was born to M 500–3000M☉ and R 1–3 pc. When the cluster dissolved, the siblings of the Sun dispersed through the galaxy, but they remained on a similar orbit around the Galactic center. Today these stars hide among the field stars, but 10–60 of them are still present within a distance of ~100 pc. These siblings of the Sun can be identified by accurate measurements of their chemical abundances, positions, and their velocities. Finding even a few will strongly constrain the parameters of the parental star cluster and the location in the Galaxy where we were born.
When the sun was a baby, some 4.5 billion years ago, it was nourished in the same stellar nursery as thousands of other baby stars. After a billion years, the cluster of young stars went their own ways, dispersing throughout interstellar space.
But, like any family, these stars have a lot in common. And like nursery mates here on Earth, they may have shared some germs and viruses during their formative years when they were in close proximity. But in this case, "cosmic chicken pox" may have formed the building blocks of life that eventually flourished on Earth. If there's life on Earth, might there be life on the planets that formed around our sun's siblings?
originally posted by: stirling
Just maybe the IRAS did take a pictue of one sibling....a red dwarf in close proximity......though we don't hear about that from the PTB anymore do we?
originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People
I think there is some hypothetical data that implies our Sun does indeed have a companion star. Apparently a Red Dwarf or Brown Dwarf star that's orbiting beyond the Oort cloud. Call it Nemesis/Nibiru or what ever else point is that there is evidence to suggest something big is out there at a distance of 95,000AU.
Is it our Suns sister, who knows? Sure would be interesting to find out! And we will never accomplish that until we actually go there.
After searching hundreds of millions of objects across our sky, NASA's Wide-Field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) has turned up no evidence of the hypothesized celestial body in our solar system commonly dubbed "Planet X."
Researchers previously had theorized about the existence of this large, but unseen celestial body, suspected to lie somewhere beyond the orbit of Pluto. In addition to "Planet X," the body had garnered other nicknames, including "Nemesis" and "Tyche."
This recent study, which involved an examination of WISE data covering the entire sky in infrared light, found no object the size of Saturn or larger exists out to a distance of 10,000 astronomical units (au), and no object larger than Jupiter exists out to 26,000 au. One astronomical unit equals 93 million miles. Earth is 1 au, and Pluto about 40 au, from the sun.
"The outer solar system probably does not contain a large gas giant planet, or a small, companion star," said Kevin Luhman of the Center for Exoplanets and Habitable Worlds at Penn State University, University Park, Pa., author of a paper in the Astrophysical Journal describing the results.
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
While I'm not necessarily a believer that panspermia is the origin of life on Earth (although I think it is a possible origin of Earth life), I do believe that the specific features that made our solar system a fertile place for live to thrive in at least one place in this solar system could be common in other solar systems. If these sister stars of the Sun (and their solar systems) were created in the same place and out of the same raw materials, then those other solar systems, too, may be fertile places for life to thrive.
originally posted by: wildespace
Funnily enough, the latest COSMOS episode talked about stars being born in clusters, and that the Sun's "siblings" have long since spread throughout the galaxy.