<p>There is absolutely no possibility that our Sun is part of a "binary star system". Even the least luminous star (with a mass of about 8% that of the Sun) would have an apparent brightness and proper motion that would easily have led to its discovery. See for example <a href="https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/2531/is-sun-a-part-of-a-binary-system">Is Sun a part of a binary system?</a> and  <a href="https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/10124/is-it-possible-that-the-sun-has-a-binary-partner-the-nemesis-theory-that-has-e">Is it possible that the Sun has a binary partner (the Nemesis Theory) that has eluded detection?</a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T00:22:23.013Z
How about a star consisting of dark matter held together by dark energy fueled by antimatter from the collision of the edge of another universe? Just having fun with that, sorry. If a theory is to b come fact it should be testable and make accurate predictions of outcomes. The precessional cycle has been speeding up ,this last century and the axial wobble theory dud not predict it at all.
user22614
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T00:30:45.017Z
As a layman to these theories one thing I have noticed when idling perusing the  nternet on this subject is that detractors of our solar system having an orbit of some type attack the idea very specifically and input parameters as to why it can't be true. Something seems fishy. Axial wobble is a weak theory (to explain precession) that does not make accurate predictions.
user22614
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T01:52:47.907Z
One author of an answer in links supplied stated that we (meaning the scientific community, I assume) came to the 'conclusion' that are SS isn't in a binary. This wording is suspect and points to a bias the author holds. 'present interpretation of observable evidence does not support a binary system' would be better said.
user22614
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T02:17:18.983Z
Other info from wiki that seemed to apply to this topic:The flow of the interstellar medium (ISM) into the heliosphere has been measured by at least 11 different spacecraft as of 2013.By 2013, it was suspected that the direction of the flow had changed over time.[42] The flow, coming from Earth's perspective from the constellation Scorpius, has probably changed direction by several degrees since the 1970s.[42]
user22614
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T02:29:14.073Z
"The IBEX results are truly remarkable! What we are seeing in these maps does not match with any of the previous theoretical models of this region. It will be exciting for scientists to review these (ENA) maps and revise the way we understand our heliosphere and how it interacts with the galaxy."[
user22614
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-11T17:58:10.767Z
2018-04-11T17:58:10.767Z
ProfRob
<p>New study out saying elusive 'planet 9' may actually be a primordial black hole that is perturbing orbits throughout solar system and causing them to 'point' a certain direction where 'nothing is'.h</p>

<p>
<a href="https://arxiv.org/PDF/1909.11090.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://arxiv.org/PDF/1909.11090.pdf</a></p>

<p>The relevance of this paper to earths 'axial wobble theory' , which scientist use to explain observations, is that there are other theories being put forth by the scientific community on orbital permutations in our local area. The paper does state that orbit within certain au's have been completely accounted for and that there paper addresses orbital characteristics further out than earths, this paper may shed light onto or at lest open the door to ask more questions and further evaluate some accepted hypothesis, such as.'axialwobble', that do account for observations but do not make accurate predictions. 'Axial wobble', in its perported  state just accounts for observations and then syas 'well if the earth wobbled on its axis than it was cause these observations'. This is weak to me and harkens to a time when a model of the solar system was accepted by the scientific community that had earth at the center and made very accuRate predictions. Of course when planets went retrograde there were problems with this theory so they had planets with orbits within orbits and very complicated paths. It did work to some degree but was bizarre. When the sun was put at the center than we have the model we accept today. Same thing with axial wobble. Some sort of weird permutation of earths rotation that accounts for observation but makes poor predictions. What needs to happen until to verify this is to check to see if other planets have a similar ''axial wobble', like mars, and check maybe a moon of Saturn or Jupiter. Once we have multiple readings from several locations with 'axial wobbles', this may lead to a better understanding of this phenomenon.
 This paper sheds light on the fact that there could be a body in our local area that we cannot detect easily that is affecting orbits.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-10-07T20:57:43.647Z
While interesting in itself, it's not clear how this answers the question. If possible, please edit your answer to make its relevance more obvious.
Mike G
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-10-08T16:42:43.220Z
What do you mean by a"axial wobble"? That the Earth's axis of rotation undergoes small changes, has been attributed to small changes in its structure with time. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X18305314?via%3Dihub  It is nothing like adopting a geocentric point of view with no observational evidence or test.
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-12-30T07:12:53.770Z
You should add your own understanding instead of copying the abstract of some paper.
Nilay Ghosh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-10-07T18:12:29.820Z
2019-10-08T13:52:15.277Z
2019-10-08T13:52:15.277Z
Andy
<p>Axial wobble may exist, or does exist in small permutations I would imagine. I am referring to precession -which causes us to see constellations ‘move’ in a circular pattern over a 26,000 year cycle. My understanding is the that the axial wobble has been attributed to this effect. There is no known confirmation of this wobble other than seeing the constellations change location in the sky over a period of time. Scientists who purported this theory have the earth axis of rotation a steady ‘wobble’ and this has accounted for the observed effect. Oddly local bodies in the solar system are not affected by the wobble in any observable form. the wobble only affects  viewable bodies outside of the solar system. Furthermore the precessionary cycle is ‘speeding up’ which the wobble does not predict. The observable evidence that would confirm a binary system or other non accounted for local gravity affecting body must be attained by seeking this information and not sitting on the precessionary wobble theory.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-10-08T17:24:43.250Z
2019-10-08T17:24:43.250Z
Andy
<p>Is our solar system affected by a body unobserved as of yet that causes our solar system to curve through space in an orbit? Is this idea outlandish or us there any evidence to support it? Consider this information: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"In 2007 Voyager 2 unexpectedly reached the edge of the heliosphere at a distance approximately 1.5 billion km less than the distance traveled by Voyager 1, indicating the SS is bullet shaped in the direction of the interstellar magnetic field." </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Another bit of information is that a binary system with a moving SS was suggested as far back in modern times as 1894 -- with predictions 40x more accurate than an earth wobble to calculate precession of equinoxes (over 100 years). </p>

<p>Also unknown to me was precession was observed millennia ago, for which we have some records, but today's accepted notion was formed in the 1850's -- before it was accepted that the solar system even moved. Our current theory of precession takes no account for SS movement. Zero. </p>

<p>Lasly local bodies do not precess at all, only distant stars and -- from what I understand -- all of them. </p>

<ul>
<li>Is a binary star system just bunk? Can it be tested for? </li>
<li>Is the axial wobble theory tried tested and come up true every time or Does this theory have predictability issues that have to be tweeked constantly? </li>
<li>Why is it that the moons orbit around the earth, as well as the earths orbit around the sun, are increasing and the precessional cycle is speeding up? Shouldn't that have the opposite effect?</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-11T17:59:28.980Z
I don't really understand the rest of the question. Are you saying that somehow the motion of the solar system through space causes precession?
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T00:15:19.640Z
Yes, your term 'somehow'  is well put as I am not a scientist or even very schooled in astronomy. And yes I did form my question in very much the same way as a statement. But yes: Is it possible that an elliptical orbit our solar system takes around a shared point with a binary cause precession in fixed points outside of our SS?
user22614
<the-sun><the-moon><precession>
Axial wobble or binary star system
user22614
# Axial wobble or binary star system

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-04-10)

Is our solar system affected by a body unobserved as of yet that causes our solar system to curve through space in an orbit? Is this idea outlandish or us there any evidence to support it? Consider this information:

> "In 2007 Voyager 2 unexpectedly reached the edge of the heliosphere at a distance approximately 1.5 billion km less than the distance traveled by Voyager 1, indicating the SS is bullet shaped in the direction of the interstellar magnetic field."

Another bit of information is that a binary system with a moving SS was suggested as far back in modern times as 1894 -- with predictions 40x more accurate than an earth wobble to calculate precession of equinoxes (over 100 years).

Also unknown to me was precession was observed millennia ago, for which we have some records, but today's accepted notion was formed in the 1850's -- before it was accepted that the solar system even moved. Our current theory of precession takes no account for SS movement. Zero.

Lasly local bodies do not precess at all, only distant stars and -- from what I understand -- all of them.

* Is a binary star system just bunk? Can it be tested for?
* Is the axial wobble theory tried tested and come up true every time or Does this theory have predictability issues that have to be tweeked constantly?
* Why is it that the moons orbit around the earth, as well as the earths orbit around the sun, are increasing and the precessional cycle is speeding up? Shouldn't that have the opposite effect?

**Tags:** the-sun, the-moon, precession
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I don't really understand the rest of the question. Are you saying that somehow the motion of the solar system through space causes precession?  
> **username_0**: Yes, your term 'somehow'  is well put as I am not a scientist or even very schooled in astronomy. And yes I did form my question in very much the same way as a statement. But yes: Is it possible that an elliptical orbit our solar system takes around a shared point with a binary cause precession in fixed points outside of our SS?  

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2018-04-11. Score: 5

There is absolutely no possibility that our Sun is part of a "binary star system". Even the least luminous star (with a mass of about 8% that of the Sun) would have an apparent brightness and proper motion that would easily have led to its discovery. See for example [Is Sun a part of a binary system?](https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/2531/is-sun-a-part-of-a-binary-system) and [Is it possible that the Sun has a binary partner (the Nemesis Theory) that has eluded detection?](https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/10124/is-it-possible-that-the-sun-has-a-binary-partner-the-nemesis-theory-that-has-e)

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: How about a star consisting of dark matter held together by dark energy fueled by antimatter from the collision of the edge of another universe? Just having fun with that, sorry. If a theory is to b come fact it should be testable and make accurate predictions of outcomes. The precessional cycle has been speeding up ,this last century and the axial wobble theory dud not predict it at all.  
> **username_0**: As a layman to these theories one thing I have noticed when idling perusing the  nternet on this subject is that detractors of our solar system having an orbit of some type attack the idea very specifically and input parameters as to why it can't be true. Something seems fishy. Axial wobble is a weak theory (to explain precession) that does not make accurate predictions.  
> **username_0**: One author of an answer in links supplied stated that we (meaning the scientific community, I assume) came to the 'conclusion' that are SS isn't in a binary. This wording is suspect and points to a bias the author holds. 'present interpretation of observable evidence does not support a binary system' would be better said.  
> **username_0**: Other info from wiki that seemed to apply to this topic:The flow of the interstellar medium (ISM) into the heliosphere has been measured by at least 11 different spacecraft as of 2013.By 2013, it was suspected that the direction of the flow had changed over time.[42] The flow, coming from Earth's perspective from the constellation Scorpius, has probably changed direction by several degrees since the 1970s.[42]  
> **username_0**: "The IBEX results are truly remarkable! What we are seeing in these maps does not match with any of the previous theoretical models of this region. It will be exciting for scientists to review these (ENA) maps and revise the way we understand our heliosphere and how it interacts with the galaxy."[  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-10-07. Score: -2

New study out saying elusive 'planet 9' may actually be a primordial black hole that is perturbing orbits throughout solar system and causing them to 'point' a certain direction where 'nothing is'.h

<https://arxiv.org/PDF/1909.11090.pdf>

The relevance of this paper to earths 'axial wobble theory' , which scientist use to explain observations, is that there are other theories being put forth by the scientific community on orbital permutations in our local area. The paper does state that orbit within certain au's have been completely accounted for and that there paper addresses orbital characteristics further out than earths, this paper may shed light onto or at lest open the door to ask more questions and further evaluate some accepted hypothesis, such as.'axialwobble', that do account for observations but do not make accurate predictions. 'Axial wobble', in its perported state just accounts for observations and then syas 'well if the earth wobbled on its axis than it was cause these observations'. This is weak to me and harkens to a time when a model of the solar system was accepted by the scientific community that had earth at the center and made very accuRate predictions. Of course when planets went retrograde there were problems with this theory so they had planets with orbits within orbits and very complicated paths. It did work to some degree but was bizarre. When the sun was put at the center than we have the model we accept today. Same thing with axial wobble. Some sort of weird permutation of earths rotation that accounts for observation but makes poor predictions. What needs to happen until to verify this is to check to see if other planets have a similar ''axial wobble', like mars, and check maybe a moon of Saturn or Jupiter. Once we have multiple readings from several locations with 'axial wobbles', this may lead to a better understanding of this phenomenon.
This paper sheds light on the fact that there could be a body in our local area that we cannot detect easily that is affecting orbits.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: While interesting in itself, it's not clear how this answers the question. If possible, please edit your answer to make its relevance more obvious.  
> **username_1**: What do you mean by a"axial wobble"? That the Earth's axis of rotation undergoes small changes, has been attributed to small changes in its structure with time. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X18305314?via%3Dihub  It is nothing like adopting a geocentric point of view with no observational evidence or test.  
> **username_4**: You should add your own understanding instead of copying the abstract of some paper.  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-10-08. Score: -3

Axial wobble may exist, or does exist in small permutations I would imagine. I am referring to precession -which causes us to see constellations ‘move’ in a circular pattern over a 26,000 year cycle. My understanding is the that the axial wobble has been attributed to this effect. There is no known confirmation of this wobble other than seeing the constellations change location in the sky over a period of time. Scientists who purported this theory have the earth axis of rotation a steady ‘wobble’ and this has accounted for the observed effect. Oddly local bodies in the solar system are not affected by the wobble in any observable form. the wobble only affects viewable bodies outside of the solar system. Furthermore the precessionary cycle is ‘speeding up’ which the wobble does not predict. The observable evidence that would confirm a binary system or other non accounted for local gravity affecting body must be attained by seeking this information and not sitting on the precessionary wobble theory.


---

