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.

 

Persistent Evidence of a Jovian Mass Solar Companion in the Oort Cloud

page: 1
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Persistent Evidence of a Jovian Mass Solar Companion in the Oort Cloud


lanl.arxiv.org

We present an updated dynamical and statistical analysis of outer Oort cloud cometary evidence suggesting the sun has a wide-binary Jovian mass companion. The results support a conjecture that there exists a companion of mass ~ 1-4 M_Jup orbiting in the innermost region of the outer Oort cloud. Our most restrictive prediction is that the orientation angles of the orbit normal in galactic coordinates are centered on the galactic longitude of the ascending node Omega = 319 degree and the galactic inclination i = 103 degree (or the opposite direction) with an uncertainty in the normal direction s
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   
This is awesome News. Really awesome news!
Our Sun has a TWIN of dimensions 1 to 4 size of Jupiter that is found beyond the Oort Cloud!?
Our solar system is a binary system!?

"The putative companion could be easily detected by the recently launched Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE)!".
Change of Paradigm?

lanl.arxiv.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

Edit To Mod: free to move in Space exploration threads.
Thanks

[edit on 28-4-2010 by Antor]



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
This isn't really a new hypothesis. Nemesis has been talked about for a while.

These guys, in 2006, thought that IRAS should have been able to spot it.

A Wide-binary Solar Companion as a Possible Origin of Sedna-like Objects



A Jupiter mass or larger object on a highly inclined orbit in the inner Oort cloud would most likely have formed as a small, distant binary-star like companion, e.g., by fragmentation during collapse or capture. We conclude that a model of a hypothetical wide-binary solar companion of mass 3e 10MJ orbiting at distances of 10,000 AU is no less cosmogonically plausible than is the stellar impulse scenario.


www.ucs.louisiana.edu...

Maybe these "new guys" have narrowed its current location down enough to be found, if its there, by WISE.


[edit on 4/28/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
This isn't really a new hypothesis. Nemesis has been talked about for a while.

These guys, in 2006, thought that IRAS should have been able to spot it.

A Wide-binary Solar Companion as a Possible Origin of Sedna-like Objects



A Jupiter mass or larger object on a highly inclined orbit in the inner Oort cloud would most likely have formed as a small, distant binary-star like companion, e.g., by fragmentation during collapse or capture. We conclude that a model of a hypothetical wide-binary solar companion of mass ¼ 3 ¡ 10MJ orbiting at distances of ¼ 10; 000 AU is no less cosmogonically plausible than is the stellar impulse scenario.


www.ucs.louisiana.edu...

Maybe these "new guys" have narrowed its current location down enough to be found, if its there, by WISE.

[edit on 4/28/2010 by Phage]


Yeah. Nothing to see here, folks. Just move on along.


Phage, have you lost your mind? LOL...if this is true it would be BIG news. HUGE. Beyond comprehension.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   
this is a little out of context, but I dont believe in Nibiru and all that crap. check my post history.

anyway there were two things I noticed last night while sitting outside, one was maybe Venus or a really bright star with another star real close, to its lower left. the other was the moon not moving or actually seeming to move backwards in the sky.

I know I am wrong, so I just want to know why I think I saw that



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

Of course it would.
But don't start countin' them chickens yet.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   
yeah and you can cal it what you want, but to be this Nibiru and have an orbit that would only bring it past Earth every 3600 years but yet have it beyond the oort cloud right now, means it would be moving so fast that it actually wouldnt be bound to the suns gravity. anything that can get from beyond Pluto to Earth in 2 and a half years would have an orbit so big it would leave the Suns gravity.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Statistic data and new analisys update confirm the presence of a huge celestial body outer Oort Cloud. Maybe a Brown Dwarf.
It would have to aim the telescopes (WISE) in that spece region to detect THE TWIN. Easy.

[edit on 28-4-2010 by Antor]


+3 more 
posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Phage. I love your posts, and respect your opinion, but haven't I seen you dispute the binary star hypothesis a hundred times before? Now you say it isn't anything new and maybe they can spot it with WISE?

Not that I am discounting your opinion, but your posts always come across so authortatively, and are usually interpreted as pure fact. Now we see you wavering on a very hot and controversial topic!

If this binary system were proven true, then Niburu may be real, either directly or indirectly! Also, all of those voodoo math recalculations to change the size of our planets and prove there was no binary system would be prove that scientists manipulate data to fit their hypothesis instead of vice versa! That is very close to fraud!

How many other things have a lot of "evidence" but have been proven wrong by condescending scientists that created new mathematical methods to support a theory? I can think of one very good mathematician and engineer at FSU that proved Einstein's cross, but with a skew that could never be explained. A couple of mathematical "errors" fixed and it matched the theory perfectly. So which one was correct? The original math, or the "corrected" version that gave them the intended result?



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Totalstranger
 


Nibiru, if exist, is a planet, a huge planet.
The celestial body that the data of the scientists assume is its SUN, a dark star.

[edit on 28-4-2010 by Antor]



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Antor
 


A Bayesian statistical analysis suggests that the probability of the companion hypothesis is comparable to or greater than the probability of the null hypothesis of a statistical fluke.


Comparable or greater than a null hypothesis. That means the hypothesis cannot be statistically "confirmed" but that it may be falsifiable with more data.

WISE is performing a whole sky survey (twice). If Nemesis is there, and if it's big enough, it might be found. That would confirm it. The analysis does not.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Antor
 


A Bayesian statistical analysis suggests that the probability of the companion hypothesis is comparable to or greater than the probability of the null hypothesis of a statistical fluke.


Comparable or greater than a null hypothesis. That means the hypothesis cannot be statistically "confirmed" but that it may be falsifiable with more data.

WISE is performing a whole sky survey (twice). If Nemesis is there, and if it's big enough, it might be found. That would confirm it. The analysis does not.


Right.
The scientists have localized, with their data, the exact spatial region where this "object" would have to be found.
Now, Like they said: "The putative companion could be easily detected by the recently launched Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE)!".



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 

No. I haven't "disputed" the hypothesis. I've said there isn't much evidence to support it. This latest analysis (one of several) still has not done anything to confirm it, as stated in the abstract.

This has absolutely nothing to do with "Nibiru". The object they are talking about would be orbiting thousands of AU from the Sun, with a period of millions of years.

What are you talking about, "change the size of our planets"?



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by getreadyalready
 

No. I haven't "disputed" the hypothesis. I've said there isn't much evidence to support it. This latest analysis (one of several) still has not done anything to confirm it, as stated in the abstract.

This has absolutely nothing to do with "Nibiru". The object they are talking about would be orbiting thousands of AU from the Sun, with a period of millions of years.

What are you talking about, "change the size of our planets"?




Right again Phage.
If detected, this is the Nibiru' Sun. The Dark Star.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by getreadyalready
 

No. I haven't "disputed" the hypothesis. I've said there isn't much evidence to support it. This latest analysis (one of several) still has not done anything to confirm it, as stated in the abstract.



As long as you realize that you just used two different bars to measure against in that sentence.

At first there wasn't much evidence to support it. Now that there is evidence to support it, you are changing the bar to "confirm it" from "support it"?

LOL, classic skeptic vernacular deviation.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Antor
 

You've turned this into a "Nibiru" topic?

Goodbye.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
For pete's sake! When will they stop the hypothesizing already?

Show me the Nibiru!

Seriously. Show me this freaking dark planet already. I need to place some bets.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
So can anyone tell me if this is infact related to this thread?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Antor
 

You've turned this into a "Nibiru" topic?

Goodbye.


Don’t leave because of his comment. It would look like you are avoiding the topic because you may not be sure about the opinion you started with. My opinion of course.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Antor
 

You've turned this into a "Nibiru" topic?

Goodbye.


Not at all. Read my posts. This, have nothig to do whit Nibiru. This huge objec, if exist, is a Dark star, a Brown Dwarf.

And, if detected and confirmed by satellite evidence, means ONLY that our solar system is a binary system.

Of course if confirmed as a Dark Star, this star could have also a planetary system, a lot different from ours. But these are only speculations.

[edit on 28-4-2010 by Antor]




top topics



 
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join