25 comments

  • spectraldrift 17 minutes ago

    This might just be me, but I find metaphors like ''Fingerprints' inside the Sun' harder to read than the title of the original paper, which is probably what should be linked here per HN submission guidelines:

    > Planetary engulfment as a solution to solar-model discrepancies and its implications for planetary systems https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stag1527

    For the press release, something like The Real Sun and Its Simulations Disagree. A Planet That Fell In Early Might Explain It. might be easier to follow.

  • mturk 3 hours ago

    MESA, a piece of software referenced in this article, is a pretty incredible system. (Even referring to it as software underplays the extent of its community and impact.)

    Many people are involved in MESA and Bill Paxton was always quick to point out the many new folks that worked on it, but this article does a great job of celebrating his impact:

    https://www.kitp.ucsb.edu/news/an-accidental-astrophysicist

    It's amazing to me that he went from being the voice on the other end of the Mother Of All Demos to having such a major impact on stellar astrophysics during his "retirement." He passed away in 2025.

  • A_D_E_P_T 5 hours ago

    > Their results favour a scenario in which the young Sun engulfed a super-Earth around 5–10 times the mass of Earth

    Given the state of the early solar system, it would be surprising if the Sun didn't swallow a lot of metallic and carbonaceous rocks and pebbles. But it seems unclear to me how the researchers would distinguish between one super-Earth and >10^10 smaller rocks? Chemically I feel the two would be largely the same.

    • cfiggers 5 hours ago

      That's easy, they'll check whether there's one big fingerprint vs >10^10 little tiny fingerprints and conclude accordingly \j

      • amelius 4 hours ago

        Not if the EU has a say about it. Those rocks and pebbles have a right to privacy and fingerprinting is off the table.

    • hydrogen7800 3 hours ago

      >But it seems unclear to me how the researchers would distinguish between one super-Earth and >10^10 smaller rocks?

      I have a similar feeling when life on earth is suggested to be "alien", arriving via debris in the solar system as the earth formed. Isn't everything in the solar system coalesced from the same debris?

      • tracerbulletx an hour ago

        That always felt like a deus ex machina answer to me too. We don't know exactly how abiogenesis happened on earth so some people just like to cut off the chain of causation with the idea of, "it was seeded"... but then how did abiogenesis happen elsewhere?

        I don't think that's a very popular theory among anyone who knows what they're talking though.

      • jojobas 3 hours ago

        The life-bearing debris would have to arrive quite some time after formation of Earth, as it was molten. Surviving atmospheric entry is hard, surviving after landing in lava is impossible.

        • hydrogen7800 3 hours ago

          I was going to expand on my comment about the difference between alien and non-alien being a difference only in time. It's all from the same stuff.

          • post-it 3 hours ago

            It makes a difference to our understanding of the conditions under which life can form.

    • bell-cot 4 hours ago

      This, but how do they rule out the extra stuff landing in the sun much earlier - when the solar system was still a pre-solar nebula, and which bits would end up where (sun vs. planets vs. whatever) was far from settled?

    • omnicognate 5 hours ago

      > Researchers also found that such a world could survive its passage through the Sun's outer layers while losing very little mass, which suggests that planets may leave detectable fingerprints inside their host stars long after they have disappeared.

      So I guess the large size would have permitted it to smuggle stuff into the core that would have just vaporised in the corona if carried by many smaller objects?

      • monster_truck 3 hours ago

        Sounds reasonable to me.

        But also what the fuck happens to the core of such a planet when that happens?

        We aren't actually sure what gave our core the spin it has, right? I'm not fully awake yet but I think it's plain where I'm going with this.

  • kleton 41 minutes ago

    Nominative determinism- first author's name "Mutlu Yıldız" means "happy star"

  • huurtehoog 27 minutes ago

    I find it endlessly fascinating that information cannot be destroyed and we keep finding more and more ways to read the universe at every scale!

  • regularfry an hour ago

    Has someone got a quick explainer for why adding a planet would result in less lithium? Is it just that a super-earth would be big enough and have so little lithium that it would measurably water down the other elements?

    • accrual 21 minutes ago

      Not an astrophysicist, but since they mentioned the lithium is depleted, I wonder if that implies the collision of a planetary body with a sun would consume or react with the solar lithium.

  • jcims 3 hours ago

    You have to get nearly halfway from the surface of the sun (photospere) to its core before the density of the sun’s material is equivalent to that of the earth.

  • N_Lens 5 hours ago

    That’s it Apollo! Spit it out, what’s in your mouth, spit it out now!

  • hnd9q09qk4 4 hours ago

    Did stellar abundance fits in grad school, getting the Teff systematics out took months.

  • Razengan 31 minutes ago

    That sentence is kind of scary.

    Imagine being a civilization on a planet that knows it's going to be swallowed by their sun.. (during the lifetime of the living members)

  • roshanabdullah1 27 minutes ago

    and how exactly are we going to put our fingers into the sun?

  • run-good-code 4 hours ago

    When I saw the word 'Fingerprints', I thought it was a brilliant expression.

  • Martin_Silenus 4 hours ago

    I once ate a peanut too.