The Marriage(s) Of Prophecy And Scientific Discovery

[Capstone]

Yep, another thread on Mormonism, People, BUT despite the cheeky allusion to polygamy in the title, not one involving the usual suspects in terms of its topic.

According to the exegetic work of B.H. Roberts, Joseph Smith stated that our solar system was the outermost link in a quaternary star system.

From Wikipedia (yes, I'm fully aware of the pitfalls in citing Wiki articles as source material):

[. . .]LDS Church leader and historian B. H. Roberts (1857–1933) interpreted Smith's statements to mean that our solar system and its governing "planet" (the Sun) revolved around a star known as Kae-e-vanrash, which itself revolved with its own solar system around a star called Kli-flos-is-es or Hah-ko-kau-beam, which themselves revolve around Kolob, which he characterized as "the great centre of that part of the universe to which our planetary system belongs".[11] Roberts was confident that this hierarchy of stars orbiting other stars would be confirmed by astronomers.[12][...][emphasis Capstone's]

Forget about the names of our Sun's alleged companions and consider that a small but vocal minority of astronomical researchers have recently consolidated their efforts in order to promote a more compelling explanatory model for observable phenomena in our little neck of the Milky Way's woods.

[. . .]While there is no obvious visible companion star to our Sun, there could be a dark binary, such as a brown dwarf or possibly a relatively small black hole, either of which might be very difficult to detect, without accurate and lengthy analysis.

There is also the possibility that our sun might be in a binary or complex gravitational relationship with one of several nearby “visible” stars. This scenario may require thinking beyond standard Newtonian dynamics to embrace MOND or MOG or some similar theory (that suggests that the constant of G might be stronger between stellar objects than between planetary objects within the solar system). There could be many types of unknown and unidentified masses that might cause our solar system to curve through space, including the local stellar cluster and even the galactic center to some small degree, each producing some small effect within the total precession observable. Consequently, at this point our work is primarily focused on understanding the precession observable and its nuances as the likely signature of our solar system's angular velocity around some common center of mass. We believe that this approach of analyzing the precession observable (the sun's motion relative to the fixed stars as seen from earth) will provide valuable and helpful data regarding the sun's most likely stellar companion (if one exists).

In summary, beyond direct detection – one way to determine if we are in a binary or multiple star system is to see if the Sun is curving through space. To us on Earth that means we should experience a gradual “changing orientation to inertial space.” Such a phenomenon is observed as the precession of the equinox.[...][emphasis Capstone's]

Even mainstream astrophysicists have recently come around to the realization that binary stars are far more common than previously thought (it should be noted: the data used to arrive at the 90%-plus figure was drawn from "high-mass stars" that are up to 100 times heavier than our Sun).

Now on to the questions that I feel justify this thread's placement in this forum:

• If, as predicted by B.H. Roberts prior to his death in 1933, scientific discoveries eventually confirm that our Sun is in fact part of a quaternary system (not merely binary or trinary, mind you), would you consider either his interpretation or the relevant writings of Joseph Smith as viable candidates for prophecies fulfilled?
  
• And, if so, would this fulfillment of prophecy/independent verification of the veracity of Smith's work on the matter be sufficient to convince you that the CJCLDS is the way go, so to speak?

To me, the quaternary aspect of the interpretation/prediction was (and still is) sufficiently 'out there' to give serious pause to even the most critical of thinkers, if and when it's proven accurate, so I could see the rationale behind answering in the affirmative to both questions.

Not that I would, necessarily...

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Next nearest star to Sol (the Sun) is Proxima Centauri 4.2 light-years away. Interestingly perhaps, it IS part of a trinary system along with Alpha Centauri A & B. And it's believed to have planets.

However, that's the extent of any support for this hypothesis. While it's true the Sun orbits the local group of stars, and these the larger group and so on, there no reliable evidence the Sun is part of any binary, trinary, or quartenary system of stars.

 

[Steven_R]

If the Sun were part of a binary system, the Solar System we know and love would be impossible. Gravitational pull from another star that close would play all kinds of havoc with the planets, asteroid belt, and Kuiper belt objects, not to mention cause a near endless barrage of comets to be flung our way.

 

[Capstone]

Next nearest star to Sol (the Sun) is Proxima Centauri 4.2 light-years away. Interestingly perhaps, it IS part of a trinary system along with Alpha Centauri A & B. And it's believed to have planets.[...]

You're talking about visible stars there, Delta.

One of the constraints of C (the speed of light) on visible stellar phenomena is that stars closer to us appear more advanced in age than they would further away, including advanced stages in which they may have disappeared from the visible spectrum altogether.

...However, that's the extent of any support for this hypothesis. While it's true the Sun orbits the local group of stars, and these the larger group and so on, there no reliable evidence the Sun is part of any binary, trinary, or quartenary system of stars.

As has often been the case in various fields of research, the "extent of support" for a given hypothesis should be subject to change in light of new ways of thinking about the direct and indirect evidence that may have been right in front of us all along.

Now, we could discuss things like the recent WISE findings and the strange wording of various articles and press releases that seem more intent on debunking than discovery, ETC., but the questions posed in the OP are based on hypothetically granting the scientific validation of Smith's writings and what effects (if any) that would have on people's opinions of the LDS Church.

 

[Capstone]

If the Sun were part of a binary system, the Solar System we know and love would be impossible. Gravitational pull from another star that close would play all kinds of havoc with the planets, asteroid belt, and Kuiper belt objects, not to mention cause a near endless barrage of comets to be flung our way.

Solely for the purposes of this discussion, I'm asking that you set aside everything you think you know about the cosmos in order to answer the questions posed in the original post.

That's why I posted this thread in the Religion and Ethics forum.

 

[Capstone]

Maybe a better way to phrase the questions would be to consolidate them.

In terms of secular/scientific validation, what would it take to convince you that the Mormon Church might be onto something that actually resembles the truth?

 

[Steven_R]

It would take objective proof that doesn't rely on holy books and open ended prophecy.

 

[Capstone]

It would take objective proof that doesn't rely on holy books and open ended prophecy.

Since our solar system's objective status as a component of a quaternary star system is not by any means "open ended", would the hypothetical vindication in the OP meet your standard of "objective proof" of a prophecy fulfilled?

Or would you regard it as mere coincidence, despite the apparent outlandishness of the claim, especially at the time in which it was made (pre 1930's)?

Granting the hypothetical scenario, it seems to me that some weight would have to be given at least to the prospect that Smith and Roberts tapped into some means of prophetic knowledge.

 

[jwoodie]

This will probably offend everyone, but why not treat Joseph Smith as a kind of latter day John the Baptist, who was a kook eating locusts and wild honey but foretold the coming of Jesus? It seems that ascribing infallibility to him is not only scientifically preposterous, but also an anathema to the most basic tenets of Christianity: If also infallible, was Joseph Smith the equal of Jesus?

 

[sealybobo]

If the Sun were part of a binary system, the Solar System we know and love would be impossible. Gravitational pull from another star that close would play all kinds of havoc with the planets, asteroid belt, and Kuiper belt objects, not to mention cause a near endless barrage of comets to be flung our way.

They were showing on the Cosmos how in 4 billion years our galaxy will merge with
Andromeda–Milky Way collision
We're in the Milky Way system.