Massive partner flips hot Jupiter

This does make me wonder just how close one of these objects would need to get in order to verify catastrophic geology theorists. I mean, come on...one in four exo-solar systems have been disturbed enough to send a planet into reverse orbit around it's sun? It just seems reasonable to assume an encounter at a greater distance would happen more often.

You know, I don't know much about this Nbiru stuff...

But I'm taking an astronomy course right now and we've covered eliptical orbits of the planets and eccentricity. According to Kepler's laws, our solar system's objects revolve around two focuses; the physics instructor explained that one focus is the sun, and the other (further away) doesn't exist.

I find that pretty ironic that we can spend a week going over the history of human astronomical findings and overcoming ignorant observations over the ages, to only come to a point where we say that our planets orbit two focuses and one of them apparently doesn't exist

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
You know, I don't know much about this Nbiru stuff...

But I'm taking an astronomy course right now and we've covered eliptical orbits of the planets and eccentricity. According to Kepler's laws, our solar system's objects revolve around two focuses; the physics instructor explained that one focus is the sun, and the other (further away) doesn't exist.

I find that pretty ironic that we can spend a week going over the history of human astronomical findings and overcoming ignorant observations over the ages, to only come to a point where we say that our planets orbit two focuses and one of them apparently doesn't exist

Lol... This is reffering to the star/nibiru/planet x/ whatever.... eh?

very misleading title.

But anywho... this is what I understood from the article...

that if a body orbiting a sun and brown dwarf that is even further, that its perturbation of the hot Jupiter SLOWLY switches its rotation.

does NOT mean planet X exists.

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
only come to a point where we say that our planets orbit two focuses and one of them apparently doesn't exist

Not just the earth around the sun, but ANY orbit of anything.
The moon around the earth, any satellites around the moon, a rock orbiting an asteroid, any orbit at all.
Its not a new finding. Kepler knew this in 1605.

Originally posted by You2Two2AreSpecial

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
You know, I don't know much about this Nbiru stuff...

But I'm taking an astronomy course right now and we've covered eliptical orbits of the planets and eccentricity. According to Kepler's laws, our solar system's objects revolve around two focuses; the physics instructor explained that one focus is the sun, and the other (further away) doesn't exist.

I find that pretty ironic that we can spend a week going over the history of human astronomical findings and overcoming ignorant observations over the ages, to only come to a point where we say that our planets orbit two focuses and one of them apparently doesn't exist

Lol... This is reffering to the star/nibiru/planet x/ whatever.... eh?

Not really. I have my own opinions of what it could be. My point is that it just seems lame to say that a planet's eclipitical orbit revolves around two points in our solar system, and the one further away from the sun doesn't exist.

I guess I'm a rookie when it comes to this stuff. However, I just don't buy the argument of two foci, with one being non-existant but still relevant.

it's amazing . I wish I can be able to go to all of the planets in the future . I hope people can invent a thing called "portal" or a thing to use for teleportation. haha!

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


the earth orbits the sun but not the center of the sun all the gravity and mass of the entire soloar system gets put together and we actually rotate 1 degree off of the center of the sun. my numbers are all wrong I was just putting the idea out there. So there doesn't have to be an unkown object out there because we already have many known objects that we can account for and do the proper math with.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

You (or your professor) are confusing orbital mechanics with geometry.

Planets do not actually revolve around two points. (Well, if they do they don't have nice, neat elliptical orbit.) It is the shape of an ellipse which can be defined by two points.

As has been pointed out, the Sun is not exactly at the center of mass so is not exactly at one of the focii either.

reply to post by Phage


Alright, I understand what you mean.

In all honesty, we're using an American textbook which doesn't seem to take astronomy all that seriously, so it gets confusing sometimes.

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by Blazer
I've always found it interesting how Jupiter moves the opposite direction and how this could have happened.

You've always been mistaken then.
There is nothing unusual about Jupiter's orbit, or rotation.

Thanks for pointing out this poor choice of wording on my part. This is what happens when I make a post right before I got to bed