Sorry, cruzion, very fascinating diatribe, though a little difficult to follow without paragraph breaks. I kept up with you, even if the science was questionable, especially your propasal about 'perpindicular' motion, it just doesn't fit with observed motions. I'm afraid that it, your post, realy left me cold at the end, however....
You claimed another 'companion' star to our Sun in order for a 'Niburu' to exist...your claim that there's not enough 'attraction'....well, there is no evidence of this companion, as far as I know. Perhaps you have a link to this data? In absence of data, this is a fantastic claim, and very hard to reconcile with known observations.
Finally, gravity works very well, the Einstenian theory, combined with Newtonian Laws of motion, in describing and predicting celestial motions.
Not every object that passes by a larger mass will always fall into a stable orbit...this idea has been shown quite often in our use of a planet's gravity to provide a 'slingshot' effect for quite a few of our spacecraft, especially as example: Apollo 13.
After the damage on the Service Module, and since the vehicle had already completed its burn for TLI, the trajectory was altered slightly to utilize the Moon's gravity for a 'free return trajectory'. Obviously, time was of the essence, (consumables were lost in the explosion of the O2 tanks) and there was insufficient fuel to 'reverse' course any other way. So, a minor alteration resulted in the 'slingshot' effect around the Moon, instead of the original Lunar Orbit Injection used for other Apollo missions.
Of course, even after the 'slingshot', other minor corrections were needed to ensure the TEI...those people were literally off the charts, thinking 'outside the box' in order to successfully save the crew. Pretty amazing, shows lots of intelligent people work at NASA, and shows how the science of orbital mechanics is as solid as Mathematics, since that's really the basis of it.
Once again, I didn't intend to argue about the 'Magnetic Universe' theory, there are other threads that take care of that subject. I detected (pun) a little possibility that that was what you alluded to in your post, and felt I had the right to step up and give an alternate view, however 'mainstream' it may appear to be.
That being said, it seems that you and I agree with the OP, at least, about the unlikelihood of a 'Nibiru', if I read your posts correctly? Perhaps for different reasons, but time will tell...
Hope I didn't misunderstand, if so, we can meet on a different thread if you wish.
Cheers, WW
[add] I hope I didn't appear to take the thread off topic with the Apollo reference, I just don't edit myself well sometimes!!!
[edit on 30-3-2008 by weedwhacker]
. 
.) 
perhaps I just didn't have the heart in
it to try and win the argument, or maybe I'm just to tired. Either way, Go at it. 
