The issue here is that I don't read spanish. I used a translator - google, actually. And I know painfully well that sometimes translations are clunky even when they are generally good. I don't have a lot of experience between Spanish and English, but I do with Norwegian-English, and those are both germanic languages and often translate decently.
But not always. Some things are just messed up. Some things don't translate word-for-word simply because folks express things differently.
So yeah, it might be weird in English. Might not be in Spanish, though.
Here, an example in Timekeeping:
English and Norwegian speak about time differently. Direct translations from Norwegian to English - the sort you get with translate - will make it seem very, very weird. "Ti over halv ni" directly translates to "Ten over half nine": If you take the user suggestion, it says "Ten over eight thirty". In other words, 8:40 or twenty til nine.
While these are both technically correct, it still is a clunky way to talk about time when you are using English.
"The same in spanish" doesn't mean that it is the right expression in both languages.
See section 8.4 for details: https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.06833 But basically the idea is that they are assumed to have interacted in the past (based on the distance), and given that, all current models of such interactions would predict a very tight final orbit for the solar mass star.
> It's not entirely clear how the solar-mass star survived that episode, ending up an apparently normal star, as observations indicate. All theoretical models that allow for this survival predict that the solar-mass star should be in a much tighter orbit than is actually observed.
Should this last sentence actually read: "All theoretical models that allow for this survival predict that the solar-mass star should be in a much wider orbit than is actually observed."?