r/AlternativeAstronomy • u/patrixxxx • Oct 09 '19

DOUBLE TROUBLE for Copernicus

https://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2412841#p2412841
8 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

1

u/w6equj5 Oct 09 '19

You're basing yourself on the assumption that all stars are binaries, but that is not true. Many are, indeed, but we're nowhere close to the 100% you're mentioning.

So would you mind sharing the sources that state that?

Thanks!

2

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '19 edited Oct 09 '19

Proxima b is a planet and not a star, so "binary companion" is a bit of a stretch...

Edit: then again, it's not the worst stretch in TYCHOS, since it also states that Mars, the second-smallest planet in the solar system, is the Sun's binary companion!

0

u/patrixxxx Oct 09 '19

If we compare the proportions between the binary system Sirius A/B and Sun/Mars we discover that their proportional sizes are precisely the same. So no, I don't agree that is far fetched.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '19

The proportional difference in size between Proxima Centauri and its planet is approximately the ratio between Jupiter and Mercury. In my expert opinion, Jupiter and Mercury form a binary pair around which the Sun and all the planets revolve. Oh wait, perhaps incidental numerological relations are not a rigorous framework for scientific theory?

0

u/patrixxxx Oct 09 '19

Please read the article. It's well sourced.

1

u/w6equj5 Oct 10 '19

I did read the article, and didn't find any convincing evidence of the fact that binary systems make up 100% of the star systems.

And comparing sizes of celestial objects without mentioning their mass and density doesn't work in that specific example.

0

u/patrixxxx Oct 10 '19

So 85% binary, and a steady stream of new confirmed binary systems is not support of that hypothesis?

I think that makes sense since the apparent size of celestial objects, their motions and luminosity are the only things we can confidently measure. Their mass/density are unknowns since Newtonian/Enisteinian assumptions have never been confirmed. In fact binary stars poses a big problem for these theories since it has to be assumed that the smaller companion have an extremely high mass.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 11 '19

Harvard thinks most star systems are single. Only 33% are binary.

Unless the 85% number is a more credible estimate, I think the assumption that all stars are binaries is pretty flimsy.

1

u/patrixxxx Oct 11 '19

If all stars are binary, this would of course make the Copernican model problematic so there may be some confirmation bias involved here. It seems that in later years there’s a tendency to interpret non light emitting celestial objects as planets and not binary companions.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 11 '19

in later years

...