2 Suns you say? I offer proof.

reply to post by yets777


Absolutely incorrect:

... a brown dwarf is only detectable in infrared ...

(and the fact that at least one person agreed, is disturbing...).

A "brown" dwarf is basically just a very, very big "gas giant" planet. A "failed star", in the sense that it did not have sufficient mass, gravity, and thus internal pressures to initiate a sustained fusion reaction.

However, except for being larger in diameter, and greater in mass...a "brown" dwarf is essentially the same as Jupiter!! Can we see Jupiter? Yes, of course. But, does Jupiter shine on its own?? NO, of course not.

Then, why can we see Jupiter?

Class? Anyone??

Yes, that's right....for the same reason we can see the Moon, and the other planets, that also have no light source of their own. The reflect the Sun's light. A "brown" dwarf, IF one were to be within our Solar System (there ISN'T, obviously, as anyone who understands astronomy, and orbital mechanics and gravity, will realize) ... even a "brown" dwarf would also reflect a great deal of sunlight, being in proximity to the Sun, and thus, be VERY visible.


Basic science education seems to be getting worse and worse.....

So if there is some"brown dwarf" out there by the sun then,
by God if the can spot this tiny comet why can't you see this thing?
sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...
sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...
So where is it,?

Originally posted by Under Water
Proof that there isn't 2 suns anyway. Or anything else near the sun like a planet or (cough) nibiru.

I couldn't help but notice the large amount of 2 suns videos and threads popping up here. Now I don't know what people are seeing. I can say this much. I am a professional photographer by trade. I can shoot the sun without flare. Today I decided to take out my 70-200 lens and a #10 welders shield to act as a super nd filter so i could photograph the sun. If there was something next to it, I would have seen it. This is the sun and just the sun. No other objects in the sky.



This is the equipment used along with the d700 nikon.


This is the sun, originally shot from further back but i've cropped it close so you could see it. Notice the sky looks black? That's because i've stopped it down as much as i could to show you as much of the sun as possible.

So what is everyone seeing?
Well, some are sun dogs.
Some are sun flare.
Some are probably something I can't explain but maybe someone else can. But I can only assume that if there is an object viewable during the day near the sun, why can't everyone see it? Why just some? I'm sure some of these vids are hoaxes, and some aren't but are instead accidental captures of effects caused in the atmosphere, OR flare caused by poor glass quality since almost none of these images are taken with pro glass.... and if there is one thing i know all too well, the worse the glass quality of your lens, the worse the FLARE.

Have you seen a sundog its pretty easy to tell the difference between one and what looks like a real sun, or universe is so mysterious we dont know what could be making this objext visable only certrain days certain times and certain places I rememeber when the first vid of 2 suns came out some on the news I just feel its weirder for everyone to be filming a sundog and saying its two suns

I think that what you are presenting is evidence, not proof as stated in your title, but I agree 100%. Nothing there. There are dozens of high powered devices looking at the sun and our planetary neighborhood all day/night, 24/7. They are run by people that know enough about astronomy, remote sensing, and the equipment they are using to know where to look. If world class devices haven't seen something that big and close then A) its probably not there, and B) somebody with a camera phone certainly wont see it if it is.

What I do see is a lot of people going to the SOSO or other similar sights, looking at images, seeing a big dot and proclaiming "Nibru! Proof". In reality these people have no knowledge of astronomy and orbital dynamics, no knowledge about how the imaging sensors function and what their capabilities/limitations are or technical aspects about any other part of the mission. They're readiness to jump to conclusions instead of to do some basic research shows me that they know nothing about science at all.

I had a friend bugging me about Nibiru a while back so we went over the math and spent several days/nights on and off looking through the telescope (a 13.1" Newt) in the optical band, optical/NIR band and even the short thermal band (7.5-14um) with of course no result.

I think that what you are presenting is evidence, not proof as stated in your title, but I agree 100%.

I'm sorry, if I knew how to change it, i would.

Can you post the exif info from the shots please?

Respects

Originally posted by Under Water
Proof that there isn't 2 suns anyway.

Do some people believe we have two suns?
I wasn't aware of that fact.

Where was the other Sun supposed to be?

- Lee

While you offer professional photographic support for this topic I salute your welcome talent.

While everyone here endlessly debates the thoughts and feelings behind a binary companion to our star that historical evidence via Earth's discerneable geologic record shows a posibility of, Astrophysicists have speculated a possibility of, historical records kept by ancient human civiliztions seem to indicate posibiities of an existance of, and recent anomalous 'slips' in media has show the indication of, One thing seems to slip people's mind about it:

THERE ARE NO EXPERTS IN THE FIELD OF SCIENCE...

How do we ~KNOW~ if this thing exists or not?

How do we ~KNOW~ what it exists as? (black hole, planetary body, dark matter, dark energy, alternate dimention, wormhole anomaly, alternate universe, antimatter spheroid, God, Satan...)

The BEST advice possible on this matter is live in the now, for it is a present. Prepare for tomorrow as if it will never come, and let the past serve as a reminder that today did indeed arrive, and the abundance of surplus you now have due to yesterday's preparations is continuing to enrich your life and the lives of those around you.

Do this on a daily basis, I promise you will find satisfaction.

What was the time when the "second son" appeared ? I would like to see how the solar activity looked back then. Just thinking, what if the "second son" is just an optical effect on a solar mass ejection ?

In regards to the binary star - it should be visible on the large infrared telescope. A planet the size of Jupiter would definitely provide an infrared signature, and maybe some other radiation signatures too. If the companion is 4 times the size of Jupiter as speculated on some threads, the core would provide enough signal to reveal the location of this planet/star within 1 light year. Unless it is blocked by some dust cloud of course...

reply to post by captiva


Sure, the ir wide angle image without the filter:
1/3200
f/22
17mm

The closeup ir sun with filter:
1/150
f2.8
70mm

The first sun pic with filter:
1/8000
f/22
200mm

This is what I used as a "filter":
replacement protective lens

nikon d700 was used in the first pic with the 70-200 2.8 vr lens, picture of lens and filter were posted as well.
nikon d100 ir converted camera was used in the ir pics. Conversion was with a standard 720nm filter with color channels converted. (This is why the image looks more blue than red, this is how I use it in my photography since i shoot people for a living.)

Oh and I missed the sunset tonight. I can't see the sun setting very well at my house because of the trees and that large building in the way. But I was busy with dinner and didn't have a chance to take a drive to get a good sunset shot. I'll try later, i'm sure this topic isn't going anywhere anyway, with the amount of threads that insist on popping up every day..................

reply to post by Under Water


I, too, don't think there's anything going on up there; I'm a sky watcher and have seen nothing strange. But more to the point, I'm commenting to say "Thank you." It's so important for the ATS community to be successful in denying ignorance when folks like you contribute firsthand evidence to the thread, such as done with your photos.

It's when members get off the Internet cycle/re-cycle of information and get out into the world to document its strangeness that really interesting threads arise. So again thank you for using your professional skills to help end this crazy Nibiru/second sun fad.

Thanks for your efforts.

it might be there tomorrow, or the next day etc..... etc....

THANK YOU !!!!!! for the closure!!! was tired of the holly books matching this paradygm...good proff.

After saying in the "when was the last time you saw the sun" thread, that I'd not seen it for a few weeks. I saw it yesterday, behind some cloud, which gave a good oppertunity to see the outine of the sun, with nothing next to it. The sun is alone, with no companion, or little friends next to it. I'm happy with what I've seen with my own eyes for this to be a fact.

reply to post by Under Water


Clearly you must be in on the cover up.
Good work. I wish more people would start looking out their windows instead of youtube.
Lots of uneducated fools in the world today.

S+F.

wait a minute....we need one more picture posted
one of a shot at an angle through a double paned window, please....that would show us

Originally posted by cluckerspud
reply to post by Under Water

 

Clearly you must be in on the cover up.

Good work. I wish more people would start looking out their windows instead of youtube.
Lots of uneducated fools in the world today.

S+F.

While i agree with you that people should not only rely on youtube, please research Richard A. Muller's (Professor, Department of Physics, University of California) and his U.S. government commissioned report on the Solar Companion. Granted, im sure the argument against this will be that it was in 1984 when he wrote it. He does write at the end of his report that it is a 2.8 LY axis is speculative and that it should be found "in the next few years". What year did NASA start saying something about a tenth planet again? Seems to be a "few years" after 1984, no?

reply to post by derst1988


The object Muller was hypothesizing was Nemesis, which has a ton of evidence going against it. In fact, original proponent of the Nemesis hypothesis, John Matese, has abandoned the Nemesis hypothesis for the Tyche hypothesis.