Team of researchers challenge bold astronomical prediction

ĆŪĢŅapp College professor of astronomy Larry Molnar made a bold announcement in 2017āhe and his team had identified a binary star in the constellation Cygnus, the Swan, that was a strong candidate to merge and explode in the near future.Ā Known by itsĀ KeplerĀ mission number, KIC 9832227, the pair of stars is about 1800 light years from Earth and has an orbit so close that it takes just 11 hours to go around once.Ā That first-of-its-kind prediction caught the attention of an international audience, creating excitement within the scientific community and among the general public.
Digging deeper
The interest led Molnarās peers to dig deeper into the discovery, in essence doing what Molnar says is āgood scienceāāscrupulously testing his prediction.
Now, 18 months later, a team of researchers led by Quentin Socia, a graduate student at San Diego State University, hasĀ in the Astrophysical Journal Letters reevaluating Molnarās predicted merger, concluding it will not happen. And Molnar agrees with that assessment.Ā
āGood science makes testable predictions,ā said Molnar. āThere have been a few other papers that have tried to poke at our project, and weāve been able to poke backācriticisms that just donāt fly. Ā But this one does fly, and I think they have a good point. This illustrates how science can be self-correcting.ā
Molnarās prediction was anchored by data.Ā The binary orbit is oriented such that the stars take turns eclipsing each other from Earthās viewpoint.Ā The prediction used measured times of minimum light (mid-eclipse) from all available sources.Ā From 2013 to 2016, the ĆŪĢŅapp Observatory was used to make an extensive series of measurements.Ā Archival measurements from other observatories were found from every year from 2007 to 2013.Ā This was rounded out with one very early measurement from 1999 from the Northern Sky Variability Survey (NSVS). Furthermore, since the prediction was made public, over a year of new data from the ĆŪĢŅapp Observatory has been taken that follows the predicted trajectory.
Layers of discovery
Socia and his team explored the observation gap between 1999 and 2007 by analyzing previously unpublished archival data taken in 2003 for the NASA Ames Vulcan Project. They were surprised to find the eclipses occurring one half hour later than expected by the merger hypothesis.Ā This led them to re-evaluate Molnarās estimates of eclipse timing.Ā They confirmed the many values from 2007 on.Ā But they found the 1999 NSVS value to be a full hour later.
The discrepant NSVS value was traced to a typographical error in the paper published to describe the 1999 data.Ā The paper misrepresented the time of the eclipse by exactly 12 hours. This, in turn, put Molnarās calculation off by one orbit (11 hours) plus one hour.Ā Finally, the revised status of what occurred from 1999 to 2003 alters predictions for the future. So, the agreement between the past year of measurements and Molnarās published prediction must now be seen as a coincidence rather than a confirmation.
Determined Quest for Truth and Knowledge
āThis is arguably the most important part of the scientific process. Knowledge advances the most when bold predictions are made, and people question and test those predictions,ā said Socia. āOften the most exciting discoveries happen when our expectations are not met. This is a good example of how scientists from different parts of the world can work together to better understand how our universe works, bringing with them new pieces to the puzzle.ā
āWhile this is disappointing from a public anticipation point of view, itās an important scientific step that was necessary so that we could develop the tools and techniques to look at these things more generally, so we can eventually find a pair of stars about to merge,ā said Matt Walhout, chair of ĆŪĢŅappās physics and astronomy department. āAnd thatās something that wasnāt being done by others, but we are still pursuing. We arenāt packing our bags and going homeāLarry has made an important contribution to discoveries about how to look for these things.Ā There are other examples of that kind of dynamic in the history of science as well, where the first search doesnāt pan out and eventually someone does make a discovery.ā
āThe authors of the manuscript donāt question our fundamental premise, which is to say āthis is something that you should be looking for, this is something that can be found,āā said Molnar. āItās actually because they agree with that fundamental premise that they dug deeper. And so the search for an impending stellar merger continues.ā
Contact information
ĆŪĢŅapp College Media Relations
Matthew Kucinski
+1 616-526-8935
msk23@calvin.edu
ĆŪĢŅapp College Scientist
Larry Molnar
+1 616-526-6341
lmolnar@calvin.edu
San Diego State University Scientist
Quentin Socia
+1 619-594-0893
quentin.socia@gmail.com
Supplemental online material including a figure can be found at: