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.

 

New data about two distant asteroids give a clue to the possible 'Planet Nine'

page: 2
21
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

The video was so long ago, and we didn't have as much information as we have now. I am just wondering if he has been able to update his information.

To be honest I, am the one that stuck on the Nibiru label. He actually called it Planet X.




posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Maybe I was referring more to something else, but it's similar as the OP describes. More like gravity bends light, why not using something similar to how we use to detect exoplanets and use background starlight or nebula's and use that to find planets to far away in our solar system by the planet's gravity that could bend the starlight from other stars or galaxies. Maybe to far fetched what I'm saying just a stupid idea I guess.



posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Thank you for so patiently explaining that so many times.

One other point from the OP needs to be addressed, where he writes:


originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
More, and more evidence keeps coming up pointing to the fact that there is at least one, or more planets, and planet 9 or X would be several times bigger than Earth (about 10 times) and possibly as large as Neptune or larger, up to 20 Earth masses and at a distance about 300 AU - 600 AU from our Sun.


(emphasis added) He wrote "bigger" when hi meant "more massive". This may seem like a nit-pick, but that bit of sloppy wording can, if not clarified, can be confusing and even unintentionally misleading. A shot-put is not much bigger than a baseball, but is much more massive. A basketball is much bigger than a shotput, but is also much less massive.

Fortunately, the OP did clarify what he meant with the helpful graphic he put right after it:






posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Star for helping me understand why we can see things outside our solar system better than things in it. When I google this question, I get articles full of math that I do not understand.



posted on Mar, 4 2017 @ 03:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Saint Exupery

You are right. Even after re-reading the op to try to iron out any errors I missed that.



posted on Mar, 4 2017 @ 06:05 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Interesting thing with gas giants and brown dwarfs "size versus mass", is that having more mass doesn't mean being much larger. The object's own gravity squeezes it muchly, making super-Jupiter planets, and even brown dwarfs, not much larger than our own Jupiter.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 05:13 AM
link   
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Are you talking about Nancy Leider and Mark Hazelwood? Back in either the late 1999 or so, to the early 2000-2001 there was a discussion group about Niburu on AOL, and Nancy and Hazelwood claimed Nibiru would approach us around 2003. They claimed this would happen around 2003, but never gave any actual evidence to corroborate their claims in 1999-2001. Of course 2003 came and went and nothing happened.

Most of us in the discussion group that had a sincere curiosity about some of the early signs we were seeing that there was a planet in the outer reaches of the solar system knew those two were scammers. Who knows how much money they got from people by selling their books and whatever else.

What I think is possible that has happened and will happen again, is once planet 9 or x's reaches it's perihelion, closer to our sun (it's orbit would still be very far away from us), it is possible that in it's wake it could attract and throw meteors towards the inner solar system. It would be similar to the theory of Nemesis.

Nemesis Star Theory: The Sun's 'Death Star' Companion

The thing is, so far all the evidence shows there is at least one major planet that we haven't seen in our solar system, but in order for it to keep it's orbit out there, and in order for ETNOs to also keep their orbits all the way out there there has to be a brown dwarf in the outer reaches of the solar system. Otherwise planet 9 or X would have slingshotted away from the solar system as it encountered other stars or major planets from other solar systems throughout the millions of years of it's existence.

Throughout the years there have been scientists who discovered anomalies within the solar system which seemed to indicate the existence of another major planet and brown dwarf. But they were dismissed because we could not see these planets, or brown dwarf. Some people claim we should have been able to see a brown dwarf if it existed in the solar system, but this is not accurate. There are classifications of brown dwarves that are so dim that they only emit around 100 degrees celsius, and those are the dimmest ones we have discovered.

Coldest Failed Star Ever Discovered

Some years ago I made a thread about a 1987 New Science and Invention Encyclopedia which depicted our solar system with another major planet (back then it was called tenth planet) and a brown dwarf/dead star around 50 billion miles away from the sun.



1987 New Science and Invention Encyclopedia Truth or Hoax?

To this day I am not sure if this was an attempt by some scientists who wanted people to know this, or if it was a hoax.

There are some discrepancies with the distances depicted in the encyclopedia, and where scientists today think that planet 9 or X would be at.

The encyclopedia put the tenth planet at around 4.7 billion miles away, and scientists today estimate that planet 9 or X should be around 300au -600 AU, which would be from over 27 billion miles away to over 54 billion miles away.



edit on 5-3-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Mar, 6 2017 @ 01:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

but in order for it to keep it's orbit out there, and in order for ETNOs to also keep their orbits all the way out there there has to be a brown dwarf in the outer reaches of the solar system. Otherwise planet 9 or X would have slingshotted away from the solar system as it encountered other stars or major planets from other solar systems throughout the millions of years of it's existence.

And you've got some research, equations, i.e. to prove this?

Wouldn't a brown dwarf in the outer reaches of the Solar System do the opposite and disturb Planet 9's orbit so that it either gets ejected or sent toward the inner Solar System?

I thought the WISE all-sky survey ruled out a brown dwarf in the outer Solar System, if I'm wrong hopefully someone will correct me.



posted on Mar, 6 2017 @ 03:11 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

No, you got it wrong. With a brown dwarf in the outer reaches of the solar system it would keep planet 9(X) and other planets out there in their orbits, just like the Sun is keeping the other 8 planets in an orbit around it. Without a failed star/brown dwarf out there even small astral rogues would have slingshotted planet 9 out of the solar system.

As for WISE, first of all, there is still a lot of data to go through. Second of all, in another thread in which you participated I posted the discussion of planetary scientists stating that it's possible that even WISE could not have captured this perturber.

Do you even know what WISE stands for? Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer. It's possible for a cold brown dwarf to exist in our solar system.

For example the brown dwarf WISE J085510.83-071442.5 has a temperature of between minus 54 and 9 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 48 to minus 13 degrees Celsius). Background noise could hide such a brown dwarf if it exists in our solar system.

NASA Discovers Coldest Brown Dwarf Neighbor of the Sun


edit on 6-3-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Mar, 6 2017 @ 04:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: wildespace

No, you got it wrong. With a brown dwarf in the outer reaches of the solar system it would keep planet 9(X) and other planets out there in their orbits, just like the Sun is keeping the other 8 planets in an orbit around it. Without a failed star/brown dwarf out there even small astral rogues would have slingshotted planet 9 out of the solar system.

It's all fine and dandy you saying that, but I'd actually like to see some research supporting this notion. Is there any credible research showing that, or is that just suppositions by anti-mainstreamers? I don't remember coming across any credible research that finds that a brown dwarf is needed for orbital stability in the outer Solar System.

As for WISE, the fact itself that we spotted very cold brown dwarfs several light years away suggests that if one existed in the Solar System we would have spotted it by now.



posted on Mar, 6 2017 @ 07:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace
With a brown dwarf in the outer reaches of the solar system it would keep planet 9(X) and other planets out there in their orbits, just like the Sun is keeping the other 8 planets in an orbit around it. Without a failed star/brown dwarf out there even small astral rogues would have slingshotted planet 9 out of the solar system.

Where would this brown dwarf be in this scenario? Would it be beyond Planet 9, or inside the orbit of Planet 9?

The reason I ask is because when I try to think of this logically (although I could be wrong, and someone who better understands orbital mechanics might tell me I am), it seems to me that a brown dwarf at the outside reaches, beyond a hypothetical Planet 9, would have a different effect on planet 9 that the the sun would have sitting in the center of the solar system.

I understand how the Sun's gravity would help keep Planet in the solar system, because Planet 9 would always tend to fall inward toward the Sun's gravity well as the planet orbited, but I would think that a brown dwarf or other very massive body outside the orbit of Planet 9 would tend to pull planet 9 outward.

In fact, I think a brown dwarf (or even a passing star that gets to close to the solar system), would have the effect of pulling the orbits of planets, asteroids, etc outward -- away from the Sun -- and into an eccentric orbit that might eventually lead to that asteroid, planet, etc being flung out of the solar system. Granted, even if that eccentricity of the orbit first takes it sunward before gathering enough speed from that path sunward to fling itself completely out of the solar system when it moves away from the sun again.

As wildspace said, I'd like to see some research on the effects of a brown dwarf (or other large gravity well on the far outer reaches of the solar system) on the material inside the solar system.


edit on 2017/3/6 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   
how would a brown dwarf, with its own slightly-to-a-lot more massive gravity well than Jupiter, keep bodies in an orbit not around itself?

You don't get negative gravity, any gravity well will draw things closer to itself. At best you get a counterbalance with another large gravity well (the sun), but only when an object is directly between them

The entire concept of a brown dwarf is nonsense within our solar system
edit on 6-3-2017 by MasterAtArms because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 02:26 AM
link   
a reply to: MasterAtArms

Perhaps you haven't noticed that planet 9 has a highly elliptical orbit around our sun. You should refer to the diagram shown on the first page of this thread.

Here it is.


The aphelion of planet 9 is 1,200 AU and it has a perihelion of just 200 AU. So, If only the sun exists as the main point of gravity in our solar system, why does planet 9 have such an elliptical orbit?

It makes no sense. Only if another main point of gravity exists out there in the Oort cloud would planet 9 elliptical orbit make sense. If there was no companion star, or in this case a failed star then planet 9's orbit would have been circular.

Planet 9 has existed in our solar system for at least millions of years. It would be the only way all other ETNOs have a stable, but also highly elliptical orbit. Likewise, in order for planet 9 to have and keep such an elliptical orbit there has to be a failed star in our solar system. A brown or sub-brown dwarf.


edit on 7-3-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: add graph and comment.

edit on 7-3-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 03:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: MasterAtArms

Perhaps you haven't noticed that planet 9 has a highly elliptical orbit around our sun. You should refer to the diagram shown on the first page of this thread.

Here it is.


The aphelion of planet 9 is 1,200 AU and it has a perihelion of just 200 AU. So, If only the sun exists as the main point of gravity in our solar system, why does planet 9 have such an elliptical orbit?

It makes no sense. Only if another main point of gravity exists out there in the Oort cloud would planet 9 elliptical orbit make sense. If there was no companion star, or in this case a failed star then planet 9's orbit would have been circular.

Planet 9 has existed in our solar system for at least millions of years. It would be the only way all other ETNOs have a stable, but also highly elliptical orbit. Likewise, in order for planet 9 to have and keep such an elliptical orbit there has to be a failed star in our solar system. A brown or sub-brown dwarf.


That is so silly it is not even wrong.



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 04:03 AM
link   

The aphelion of planet 9 is 1,200 AU and it has a perihelion of just 200 AU. So, If only the sun exists as the main point of gravity in our solar system, why does planet 9 have such an elliptical orbit?


There is a very real possibility that Planet 9 is the "missing fifth giant planet" that simulations of the early Solar System suggest should have been present to account for the orbits of the major planets as they exist today. If that is indeed the case, then a close encounter with one of the other giant planets (almost certainly Jupiter) several billion years ago would have drastically increased the eccentricity of Planet 9's orbit, resulting in an aphelion far beyond the realm of the other major planets, but with a perihelion still close to that of Jupiter's orbit. It would then have required something like the close passage of a star to raise the perihelion well outside the orbit of Neptune. This would have occurred when Planet 9 was near the aphelion of it's orbit at that time (probably close to the 1200AUs calculated for the present epoch).

The orbit of Planet 9 at that time would have been even more eccentric than it is estimated to be today.
edit on 7-3-2017 by Mogget because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2017 @ 11:45 PM
link   
a reply to: moebius

Yeah, here is something else people don't seem to realize. Planet 9 is apparenlty the cause of ETNOS having such a highly elliptical orbit, but why do ETNOS keep returning? Some of the orbits of ETNOS take them over 1,000AU.

Whats more, only 70,000 years ago the solar system had a visit from a red dwarf, Scholz's star, and a brown dwarf which went through the outer layer of the Oort cloud, at about 52,000 AU from the sun.



Scholz's star

But here is the thing. Apparently this intrusion of a red dwarf, and a brown dwarf in the outer Oort Cloud had nearly no effect at all on the outer Oort cloud.

Alien star system buzzed the Sun

It is believed that the red dwarf itself has 86+- 2 Jupiter masses.

How is that possible? It is true that this red dwarf, and it's brown dwarf companion have low mass, even though the red dwarf alone is about 86 Jupiter masses, and were speeding pretty fast, but still. The sun's gravitational pull out there is very small, and having a red dwarf and a brown dwarf cruise through the outer Oort Cloud should have caused havock, unless there is a brown dwarf companion to our sun which is massive enough to have negated the influence of Scholz's star and it's dwarf companion.


edit on 8-3-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 02:53 AM
link   
The passage of Scholz's star and its brown dwarf companion would have had a SIGNIFICANT effect on those Oort Cloud objects that were close to them as they passed through. However, if the gravitational perturbations induced were mostly positive (ie. the affected objects were accelerated rather than slowed down), then the inner Solar System would be entirely unaffected. The researchers involved in this study probably determined that this was the case here.

As for ETNOs "returning", why is that a mystery? They are in solar orbit, just like Planet 9.
edit on 8-3-2017 by Mogget because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 05:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: MasterAtArms

Perhaps you haven't noticed that planet 9 has a highly elliptical orbit around our sun. You should refer to the diagram shown on the first page of this thread.

Here it is.


The aphelion of planet 9 is 1,200 AU and it has a perihelion of just 200 AU. So, If only the sun exists as the main point of gravity in our solar system, why does planet 9 have such an elliptical orbit?

It makes no sense. Only if another main point of gravity exists out there in the Oort cloud would planet 9 elliptical orbit make sense. If there was no companion star, or in this case a failed star then planet 9's orbit would have been circular.

Planet 9 has existed in our solar system for at least millions of years. It would be the only way all other ETNOs have a stable, but also highly elliptical orbit. Likewise, in order for planet 9 to have and keep such an elliptical orbit there has to be a failed star in our solar system. A brown or sub-brown dwarf.


I don't profess to know a lot about orbital mechanics, but even I see a lot of basic errors in your reasoning.

All planets in the Solars System have elliptical orbits, where the Sun is at one focus of the ellipse, and there's nothing at the other focus. As such, a body in an elliptical orbit doesn't need a second source of gravity for such an orbit.

The deal with those ETNOS isn't that their orbits are elliptical, but with the fact that their perihelions are clustered together.

Highly elliptical orbits are quite normal in the Solar System, and, like Mogget mentioned, arise from interaction with Jupiter and perhaps some passing stars. They don't require a brown dwarf to always be there in the outer Solar System.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace


originally posted by: wildespace

I don't profess to know a lot about orbital mechanics, but even I see a lot of basic errors in your reasoning.

All planets in the Solars System have elliptical orbits, where the Sun is at one focus of the ellipse, and there's nothing at the other focus. As such, a body in an elliptical orbit doesn't need a second source of gravity for such an orbit.


The orbital eccentricity of inner solar system bodies is near 0. An orbital eccentricity of 0 is a perfect circular orbit.


nineplanets.org...

Earth's orbital eccentricity is ≈ 0.0167

Pluto's orbital eccentricity is ≈ 0.2488

Every planet in the inner solar system, including the gas giants and even the dwarf planet Pluto have a nearly circular orbit.

When a planet, or planetoid has an orbital eccentricity of 1 it is called parabolic trajectory.


Parabolic trajectory
...
Under standard assumptions a body traveling along an escape orbit will coast along a parabolic trajectory to infinity, with velocity relative to the central body tending to zero, and therefore will never return. Parabolic trajectories are minimum-energy escape trajectories, separating positive-energy hyperbolic trajectories from negative-energy elliptic orbits.
...

en.wikipedia.org...


When an orbital eccentricity is greater than 1 is called hyperbolic trajectory.

What this means is that when the eccentricity of an object, be it planet, asteroid, gas giant etc have a parabolic trajectory of 1 or a hyperbolic trajectory greater than 1, it has enough momentum/speed to escape the gravitational pull of it's main star.


Hyperbolic trajectory

In astrodynamics or celestial mechanics, a hyperbolic trajectory is the trajectory of any object around a central body with more than enough speed to escape the central object's gravitational pull. The name derives from the fact that according to Newtonian theory such an orbit has the shape of a hyperbola. In more technical terms this can be expressed by the condition that the orbital eccentricity is greater than one.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

Planet 9 (X) and ETNOS have a highly elliptical orbit, although not anywhere close to 1. It is believed planet 9 orbital eccentricity is around 0.6. But, (you knew a but was coming didn't you?) there are other objects in the solar system that come so close to having an orbital eccentricity of 1 that something else should be out there, somewhere close to or in the Oort Cloud, and massive enough to return these objects towards the inner solar system.

For example, the object 2014 FE72 has an eccentricity of 0.980 ± 0.014, with an aphelion of 4,274 AU and a perihelion of just 36.3 AU. The orbit of this object extends into the inner Oort cloud.

Here is a cool 3d video from Caltech showing the solar system, and objects we have found so far.






edit on 8-3-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: add link.

edit on 8-3-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Mar, 8 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace
...
Highly elliptical orbits are quite normal in the Solar System, and, like Mogget mentioned, arise from interaction with Jupiter and perhaps some passing stars. They don't require a brown dwarf to always be there in the outer Solar System.


They are only normal when there are other objects causing those highly elliptical orbits. They don't happen just because the planet or object wants to do it...

Here we go.


...
A tiny tug over time

The two leading models for planetary formation both suggest that planets start out in nearly circular orbits, which corresponds to an eccentricity measurement of 0. Earth’s orbit is nearly circular at 0.02, which keeps the planet approximately the same distance from the Sun throughout the year.

An increased eccentricity means that the planet has a more elliptical, or stretched, orbit. Such planets may spend more time far from their stars, creating long, bitter winters. As they draw close to their stars, they could suffer scorching summers, particularly in the hemisphere pointed toward the star.

A planet could have a more eccentric orbit for a number of reasons. For example, collisions during the formation period could knock it out of its circular orbit.

Interactions with other planets could also change how they travel around their stars. Of the highly eccentric planets discovered, 78 percent of those with eccentricities greater than 0.5 have only one planet in the system, Hulsebus said. While the other planets could have been kicked out over the course of their evolution, Hulsebus and his team looked for a third option — the presence of a distant brown dwarf that could wreak havoc on the orbit of planets.
...

www.astrobio.net...

A collision could not explain the highly elliptical orbits of planet 9, and other ETNOs, because over millions of years their orbit would have become shorter, more circular. To keep such highly elliptical orbits there has to be something with enough mass causing this.

Planet 9 and other ETNOs have orbits that extend to the inner Oort Cloud. "Passing stars" cannot account for these highly elliptical orbits on all Etnos and planet 9. A passing star could account for one, and at most 2 objects having such highly elliptical orbits, but over time their orbits would become more circular. But for all ETNOs and planet 9 to have such highly elliptical orbit, something massive has to exist in the Oort cloud causing the highly elliptical orbits.



edit on 8-3-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.

edit on 8-3-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join