It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Brown Dwarf/Supernova - G1.9 Someone check it!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   
With all this new ressurgence of Planet X talk, and Caltec astronomers expecting a large mass lurking beyond Neptune, I can't help but remember the hype of the G1.9 supernova. A few people have expressed concern that this "supernova" is actually a Binary Brown Dwarf within our solar system. But those people were quickly beaten down and called stupid/crazy.

Well consider this...

There's no record of this "supernova" being there until it's discovery, Which happened mighty late considering it's light hit earth roughly a hundred or so years ago, and is considered by the mainstream to be 100 years old (not literally). Nasa has like, what? Two photographs of this "supernova"? One taken in 1985, and then just one more taken in 2007. This "supernova" somehow managed to grew astonomically between those two dates. If this supernova hit our eyes about 100 years ago, at that growth rate it should be *GIGANTIC* by now.

Unfortunately due to it's location, this object isn't visible to the naked eye. Consequently, regular optical telescopes are inadequate to view this, too... How convenient? Nasa is really the only one capable of monitoring this object. Amateur astronomers are typically unable to obtain live shots of G1.9 because they have no access to a Radio or Xray telescope. Thus, all we have to go on is two pictures... From the looks of it, this is no Supernova. It doesn't even look like a Supernova should...

So...does any of ATS have the ability to take a peak at G1.9 and see what it looks like now?

Basically, Nasa just gave us two pictures and said "It's a supernova, now shut up about it"




posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: kef33890
There's no record of this "supernova" being there until it's discovery, Which happened mighty late considering it's light hit earth roughly a hundred or so years ago

There's never a record of anything until it's discovered.

We haven't explored every inch of our sky. So, it doesn't really matter how long light from something has been shining towards Earth. New celestial objects are being discovered on a regular basis.



posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: kef33890

about your OP


G1.9+0.3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova_remnant_G1.9+0.3
Supernova remnant G1.9+0.3 in the constellation Sagittarius is the youngest known supernova remnant (SNR) in the Milky Way Galaxy. [1] The remnant's young age was ...


 



is there a link ? the supernova remnant G-1.9(+0.3)...and the latest space news about a real-life Planet X thought to be lurking at least 30 AU & up to 200 AU way from our solar system ?

I put the 'disinformation' label on all this planet & dark-star 'news'.. something to have the masses focused on instead of the dollar/petro dollar/economic/military & government collapse of the USA into a basket-case 3rd world status country very soon



posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: kef33890

I'm sorry but i think you have your wires crossed.

For starters brown dwarfs are hard to detect. Secondly brown dwarfs are failed stars and are not capable of supernova. Thirdly failed stars are detected through indirect methods. Many amateur astronomers know this let alone NASA so I dare say it is not a cover up.



posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: kef33890

en.wikipedia.org...

You've looked at the picture right? A whispy cloud with a halo.... a brown dwarf is a dense object this appears to be a space fart at best.



posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: kef33890




This "supernova" somehow managed to grew astonomically between those two dates.

Uh oh. Sounds like someone has been reading this:
Starviewer Team

Trouble is, the "Spanish astronomers" are out to lunch.

They present evidence from an article titled "A 20 Year Radio Light Curve for the Young Supernova Remnant G1.9+0.3". They present radio telescope observations and claim that the fluctuations in the size of G.19 demonstrate that it cannot possibly be a supernova remnant. It gets smaller, then larger, then smaller. The problem? The MOST radio telescope is not capable of determining changes in the size of G1.9.


The MOST observations are not at high enough resolution to detect significant changes in the size or mophology of G1.9+0.3 with time.

So what was observed? The brightness of G1.9. And what did those observations show?


Twenty years of observations with the Molonglo Observatory Synthesis Telescope show that the young supernova remnant G1.9+0.3 has increased in brightness by 1.22 ± 0.24 0.16 per cent yr−1 between 1998 and 2007
arxiv.org...

It found that G1.9 fits the profile of a young supernova remnant.


The "Spanish astronomers" are not astronomers or, if they are, they are very bad ones.
 


Basically, Nasa just gave us two pictures and said "It's a supernova, now shut up about it"
Can you show us those two pictures? But it was Astronomers from Australia who confirmed it is a supernova remnant by studying 20 years worth of radiotelescope data, not NASA.


If this supernova hit our eyes about 100 years ago, at that growth rate it should be *GIGANTIC* by now.
Maybe. But it's 24,000 light years away so, so what?
edit on 1/24/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 1/24/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)




top topics
 
0

log in

join