<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulus" rel="nofollow">Regulus ($\alpha$ Leo)</a> is the one to beat, with ecliptic latitude $\beta$ = +0.46$^\circ$ and apparent V magnitude +1.4.
Some dimmer stars are closer to the ecliptic, e.g.
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Librae" rel="nofollow">$\alpha$ Lib</a> ($\beta$=+0.33$^\circ$, V=+2.7),
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Geminorum" rel="nofollow">$\delta$ Gem</a> ($\beta$=-0.18$^\circ$, V=+3.5), and
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Cancri" rel="nofollow">$\delta$ Cnc</a> ($\beta$=+0.08$^\circ$, V=+3.9).
For more suggestions, poke around in Stellarium with the Ecliptic turned on.</p>

<p>If you want linear distance from the ecliptic plane, multiply the distance from us by $\sin \beta$.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-07T15:00:03.043Z
2016-05-07T21:04:03.513Z
2016-05-07T21:04:03.513Z
Mike G
<p>HIP 76880 = $\kappa$ Librae (V=4.72) has an Ecliptic latitude of -0.019 degrees.</p>

<p>This is the winner amongst all stars in the Hipparco/Tycho catalogue with a Hipparcos magnitude &lt;6.</p>

<p>If you mean physical distance, rather than angular distance, then the sine of the ecliptic latitude must be multiplied by a distance estimate for the star. This cannot be conclusive, the distances to many naked eye stars are very uncertain, a small fraction of Hipparcos parallaxes are too uncertain to be useful in this regard.
However, from those with decent parallaxes then <strong>HIP 3765 = HD 4628</strong> (V=5.72) has an absolute distance of 0.036 pc above the ecliptic plane.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-07T20:42:13.510Z
$\gamma^2$ Nor *ecliptic* latitude is -28.3 degrees.
Mike G
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-07T22:17:11.813Z
@MikeG Aaaargh, I put in Galactic coords!
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-07T23:06:33.217Z
Now fixed (I hope).
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-07T20:04:10.127Z
2016-05-07T23:05:50.480Z
2016-05-07T23:05:50.480Z
ProfRob
<p>If we were to project the ecliptic out as an infinite plane, what visible star (besides the sun) would lie closest to it?</p>

<ecliptic>
What visible star is closest to the ecliptic?
Tyler Durden
# What visible star is closest to the ecliptic?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-05-07)

If we were to project the ecliptic out as an infinite plane, what visible star (besides the sun) would lie closest to it?

**Tags:** ecliptic

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2016-05-07. Score: 2

[Regulus ($\alpha$ Leo)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulus) is the one to beat, with ecliptic latitude $\beta$ = +0.46$^\circ$ and apparent V magnitude +1.4.
Some dimmer stars are closer to the ecliptic, e.g.
[$\alpha$ Lib](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Librae) ($\beta$=+0.33$^\circ$, V=+2.7),
[$\delta$ Gem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Geminorum) ($\beta$=-0.18$^\circ$, V=+3.5), and
[$\delta$ Cnc](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Cancri) ($\beta$=+0.08$^\circ$, V=+3.9).
For more suggestions, poke around in Stellarium with the Ecliptic turned on.

If you want linear distance from the ecliptic plane, multiply the distance from us by $\sin \beta$.


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2016-05-07. Score: 2

HIP 76880 = $\kappa$ Librae (V=4.72) has an Ecliptic latitude of -0.019 degrees.

This is the winner amongst all stars in the Hipparco/Tycho catalogue with a Hipparcos magnitude <6.

If you mean physical distance, rather than angular distance, then the sine of the ecliptic latitude must be multiplied by a distance estimate for the star. This cannot be conclusive, the distances to many naked eye stars are very uncertain, a small fraction of Hipparcos parallaxes are too uncertain to be useful in this regard.
However, from those with decent parallaxes then **HIP 3765 = HD 4628** (V=5.72) has an absolute distance of 0.036 pc above the ecliptic plane.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: $\gamma^2$ Nor *ecliptic* latitude is -28.3 degrees.  
> **username_2**: @MikeG Aaaargh, I put in Galactic coords!  
> **username_2**: Now fixed (I hope).  

---

