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.

 

Behind the NASA Iron Curtain: Spanish Astronomers Claim Dwarf Sun Beyond Pluto

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   
This 2009 article will be attacked by the usual suspects, but I just want to show there are other astronomers and sources of information in the world that are every bit as credible -- if not more -- than NASA, who refuses to acknowledge any of it:


Spanish Astronomers Claim Dwarf Sun Beyond Pluto
by Gary Vey for Viewzone

The idea of a new planet being discovered in our Solar System is pretty exciting. Even more so because of the many theories about "Planet-x" or "Nibiru" being associated with space aliens and the doomsday prophecies of 2012.

Scientists at places like NASA and famous observatories have deflected inquiries about the discovery for a few years now, mainly because they feared being associated with these "fringe" theories. But like it or not -- it has happened. Well... according to a team of Spanish astronomers who call themselves the StarViewer Team.

The group made the rounds of all the news web sites in the past two weeks, claiming they discovered something very significant. It's almost twice the size of Jupiter and just beyond our furthest planetoid, Pluto. Although it's not a planet, it appears to have planets or large satellites encircling it. It's what astronomers call a "brown dwarf star" and its official name is "G1.9".

What's a Brown Dwarf Star?

First we'll explain WHAT these astronomers have discovered. Then we'll discuss HOW they discovered it.

At the risk of being scientifically vague, I'll try to explain the current understanding of how stars and planets form in space.

All matter attracts other matter. A larger mass will attract smaller masses towards it. In space this results in growing clouds of matter that tend to clump together and attract more matter. Since most of the matter in space is gaseous, these clouds eventually get so dense that they collapse into dense gaseous spheres. When they do this there is usually some "left over" matter that forms a ring around the sphere.

If there is enough matter in a sphere of hydrogen, for example, it can cause so much compression at the sphere's core that the hydrogen atoms begin to fuse together and a fusion-reaction ignites a new born star. In this reaction two hydrogen atoms join together to form one helium atom and release extra energy as radiation.

Scientists believe that the minimum mass needed to ignite a sun is about 13 times the known mass of the planet Jupiter -- written as "13MJ." If the mass is lower than this, the pressure in the core is not enough to ignite and the sphere will be hot ball of gas called a "brown dwarf."

As a new star spins, the disk surrounding it gradually cools and the matter forms heavier elements like metals and minerals. These "rocks" eventually clump together and form solid spheres called planets.

Sometimes a solid sphere will attract some of the gas that is in the disk and this will result in a gaseous giant, like Jupiter and Saturn, which has a solid core but a thick gaseous atmosphere. These "gas giant" planets can be very massive but, because of their solid cores, they will never ignite and become stars.

This Brown Dwarf

This newly discovered "brown dwarf" is believed to have formed from the same condensed matter that gave birth to our Sun. It is believed that, after the large planets formed around the Sun, they pushed it to the edge of the Solar system where it formed a sphere about 1.9MJ -- well below the mass needed to ignite it as a "sun."

Nemesis

The theory of a companion sun is not new. It has often been described as Nemesis, after the Greek figure in mythology.

The mythological Nemesis was the spirit of divine retribution against those who succumb to hubris, vengeful fate personified as a remorseless goddess. The name Nemesis is related to the Greek word meaning "to give what is due".

Nemesis is now often used as a term to describe one's worst enemy, normally someone or something that is the exact opposite of oneself but is also somehow similar. For example, Professor Moriarty is frequently described as the nemesis of Sherlock Holmes.

"Opposite yet similar" is the perfect description for a companion to our Sun. But the name Nemesis also implies a sinister nature. Will this new Nemesis be beneficial or harmful to our lives?

Many suns that we observe in the galaxy are part of binary systems or double stars. There is debate about how two suns form from a single condensed cloud of matter. Some believe that they both form at the same time; others believe they split following the creation of one huge sun.

Sometimes both spheres are capable of fusion and both suns shine brightly, encircling each other around an imaginary point call the barycenter. Sometimes only one sun attains 13MJ and ignites, while its smaller companion, the brown dwarf, glows dimly and radiates heat. Astronomers usually can only see the brightest of the two, but because they both circle around a common barycenter, the wobble reveals the mass of the unseen companion.

How it was discovered... the controversy

You might well ask why astronomers have never detected this object before. In fact they did. G1.9 was first identified as a "supernova remnant" in 1984 by Dave Green of the University of Cambridge and later studied in greater detail with NRAO's Very Large Array radio telescope in 1985. Because it was unusually small for a supernova it was thought to be young -- less than about 1000 years old.

But in 2007, X-ray observations made with NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory revealed that the object was much larger than the last time it was observed! It had grown in size by 16%. Puzzled by this observation, the Very Large Array repeated its observations of 23 years ago and verified that it had increased in size considerably. Knowing that supernova do not expand this quickly, unless they have just exploded, they explained that G1.9 must be a "very young" supernova -- perhaps not more than 150 years old. But no record of a visible supernova has been found corresponding to that historical period (about the time of the American Civil War).

Spanish astronomers have tracked this object with great interest because they were anticipating its appearance. Gravitational anomalies have been appearing in the Oort Cloud for some time, suggesting the perturbations were caused by a nearby object with considerable mass. The announcement that G1.9 had increased in size was no mystery to them. It is exactly what they would expect as the object moved closer to Earth...

More with photos and illustrations




posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   
Thankyou for posting, OP! I am always interested in seeing different perspectives on things. Flagged



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Interesting stuff I am still on the fence surely we would be able to see the gravitational effects a body like this would have on Pluto and Jupiter. I just feel for this all to kick off next year there would be no way that the governments would be able to cover it up.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 





UPDATE FEBRUARY 19, 2010: -- We patiently waited and monitored the StarViewer Team's web site for the "proof" that claimed would be forthcoming. Needless to say, it never materialized. Also, the initial popularity of their claim appears to have been nothing more than a way to attract a large viewership. The web site now is full of ridiculous claims, including some satirical stories taken from "the onion" (a very funny site) which the SV Team promoted as "real." There is no mention of the mathematical validation that was expected with regards to the G1.9 object. Perhaps the validation disproved their theory... perhaps it was never going to be validated by anyone... I think it is safe to take this theory of object G1.9 being a brown dwarf down to ZERO possibility!



Is someone actualy looking at the scources before posting replys? oO

edit on 28-2-2011 by InDeMioN because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Are there any pictures that demonstrates the potential orbit of this "dwarf"?



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   




Ok, I am interest to look more, but would be nice to have some links, ref's, ect, so we can check the claims to find out if this is not some mad doomer trying to start another fire



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   
I thought G1.9 was located near the galactic center at around 25000 light years from us. What evidence is there to indicate otherwise?



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by InDeMioN
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 





UPDATE FEBRUARY 19, 2010: -- We patiently waited and monitored the StarViewer Team's web site for the "proof" that claimed would be forthcoming. Needless to say, it never materialized. Also, the initial popularity of their claim appears to have been nothing more than a way to attract a large viewership. The web site now is full of ridiculous claims, including some satirical stories taken from "the onion" (a very funny site) which the SV Team promoted as "real." There is no mention of the mathematical validation that was expected with regards to the G1.9 object. Perhaps the validation disproved their theory... perhaps it was never going to be validated by anyone... I think it is safe to take this theory of object G1.9 being a brown dwarf down to ZERO possibility!









Thanks, this is why I asked for links and that, looks like a another ghost story, but keep watching we never know!
edit on 28-2-2011 by outerlimits because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
, Charles Forts, book New Lands, lists hundreds of astronomical observations of worlds that have been seen by (at the time) reputable astronomers, migrant worlds, objects that come and go from our solar system, like it was some sort of drop in shop

another observation that cannot be verified to a very long list. amongst the large body of mindsets that is the embodiment of astronomy things are observed that do not merge with the whole and set to unsettle it.

fruitless ambition really given that chaos is natured the way it is, imh

funbox



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Well heres what I have found out about it: all are open to pick the bones out of this joint:




www.viewzone.com...
edit on 28-2-2011 by outerlimits because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by outerlimits
 




Ok, I am claiming nothing here, just posting something I find very interesting.

WHAT DO YOU THINK????????

www.youtube.com...



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
NASA's Chandra and Very Large Array astronomers have previously identified G1.9 as a supernova, but lead Chandra X-ray Observatory researcher Stephen Reynolds says, "No other object in the galaxy has properties like this."


...The tracking of this object began in 1985, when astronomers, led by Green, used the Very Large Array to identify the remnant of a supernova explosion near the center of our galaxy. Based on its small size, it was thought to have resulted from a supernova that exploded about 400 to 1000 years ago.

Twenty-two years later, Chandra observations revealed the remnant had expanded by a surprisingly large amount, about 16 percent, since 1985. This indicates the supernova remnant is much younger than previously thought.

That young age was confirmed in recent weeks when the Very Large Array made new radio observations. This comparison of data pinpoints the age of the remnant at 140 years - possibly less if it has been slowing down - making it the youngest on record in the Milky Way.

Besides being the record holder for youngest supernova, the object is of considerable interest for other reasons. The high expansion velocities and extreme particle energies that have been generated are unprecedented and should stimulate deeper studies of the object with Chandra and the Very Large Array.

"No other object in the galaxy has properties like this," Reynolds said. "This find is extremely important for learning more about how some stars explode and what happens in the aftermath."

www.nasa.gov...


edit on 2/28/2011 by GoldenFleece because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Well if this article is a reliable source it certainly seems to correlate with what NASA said last week about the potential discovery of a planet four times the size of Jupiter!

This planet / dwarf star wont come any were near earth by 2012 but there is still the possibility that the Annunaki will return in space ships a. of their planet like Stichin hypothesised!

S&F



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by InDeMioN
 



The mystery body was seen twice by the infrared satellite as it scanned the northern sky from last January to November, when the satellite ran out of the supercold helium that allowed its telescope to see the coldest bodies in the heavens. The second observation took place six months after the first and suggested the mystery body had not moved from its spot in the sky near the western edge of the constellation Orion in that time.

"This suggests it's not a comet because a comet would not be as large as the one we've observed and a comet would probably have moved," Houck said. "A planet may have moved if it were as close as 50 trillion miles but it could still be a more distant planet and not have moved in six months time."

I could go on and on about why this is not true. But a paper published by the same astrophysicists disclosed that the "mysterious object" was a distant galaxy -- one of the first of its kind to emit light in the infrared spectrum. The article, Unidentified IRAS sources -- Ultrahigh-luminosity galaxies appeared in the Astrophysical Journal. Here is the abstract:


Abstract
Optical imaging and spectroscopy measurements were obtained for six of the high galactic latitude infrared sources reported by Houck, et al. (1984) from the IRAS survey to have no obvious optical counterparts on the POSS prints. All are identified with visually faint galaxies that have total luminosities in the range 5 x 10 to the 11th power stellar luminosity to 5 x 10 to the 12th power stellar luminosity. This luminosity emerges virtually entirely in the infrared. The origin of the luminosity, which is one to two orders of magnitude greater than that of normal galaxies, is not known at this time.


Doesn't seem so..



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 

I'm sorry, but any astronomer who couldn't tell the difference between a "mystery heavenly body" that's as close as 50 billion miles from Earth and a galaxy should be drummed out of the business.

Can ANYONE give me the names of these "newly discovered galaxies" that were originally thought to be in our solar system?

Anyone?



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 

Don't you consider it strange that this "hypothetical" mystery object has MANY names while the newly-discovered "distant galaxies" have NONE?

It's easy to post snippets of articles that support your beliefs, but does anyone think for themselves?



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
reply to post by Libertygal
 

Don't you consider it strange that this "hypothetical" mystery object has MANY names while the newly-discovered "distant galaxies" have NONE?

It's easy to post snippets of articles that support your beliefs, but does anyone think for themselves?


Really? It's from YOUR OP LINK!

edit on 28-2-2011 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I feel like this starviewer team has been covered here before and found to be lacking.
Here is a link

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Libertygal
Really? It's from YOUR OP LINK!

You're right, I didn't notice it was continued on another page.

Which is fine because they're giving both sides. No problem with that.

But it still doesn't answer my question: how is it that "hypothetical" objects in our solar system are named, but newly-discovered "distant galaxies" aren't?



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SunnyDee
I feel like this starviewer team has been covered here before and found to be lacking.
Here is a link

www.abovetopsecret.com...

My question is, found lacking by who? There's not a single topic on this board that's not found lacking by someone.

So this is your conclusion after reading all 22 pages?



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join