Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Scientific Research on Solar System Brown Dwarf and Planet X.

page: 7
118
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 03:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


I see you got Phage struggling here, good job


Seriously though, scientists have struggled for many years to find the source of these anomalies, and so far, have been unsuccessful. Unless Phage can somehow explain these anomalies, i don´t see him winning this argument.

I agree, the most likely suspect is a brown dwarf, of the theoretical Y-class, however it should have been spotted by WISE, so the question is, will NASA publish or censor this, if/when they find it. The data from WISE may still take awhile to analyze, (or so they say), however, what would happen in the public mind if they anounced they had found a brown dwarf heading our direction?

My guess is many people would panic and stop going to their jobs, which is nothing desireable from the government standpoint, so my guess is they would keep quiet about this as long as possible.

Maybe they would even hire some disinfo agents to suppress this information as long as possible, to keep the public at ease. They would probably act pretty similar to certain people in this thread
edit on 12-9-2011 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Four (and a few more). Out of how many systems?
...


BTW, first of all, who says that the percentage of brown dwarves orbiting sun-like stars MUST be high in order for one to exist in our Solar System?...

I found several such brown dwarves, "that we have identified so far", orbiting Sun-like stars, but I don't want to clutter the thread.

BTW, another interesting fact I did find is the following.



...
Based on the 3 new detections of sub-stellar companions in the sub-sample of 101 young stars, and following a careful estimate of the survey incompleteness, a Bayesian statistical analysis shows that the frequency of 0.012–0.072 solar-mass brown dwarfs in 30–1600 AU orbits around young solar analogs is 6.8+8.3
−4.9% (2 limits). While this is a factor of 3 lower than the frequency of stellar companions to G-dwarfs in the same orbital range, it is significantly higher than the frequency of brown dwarfs in 0–3 AU orbits, discovered through precision radial velocity surveys.
...

www.lpi.usra.edu...

The point I wanted to emphasize is the fact that such brown dwarf companions can have orbits within 30 AU - 1,600 AU, which is within the range that some astronomers say the companion brown dwarf to our Sun could exist within our Solar System according to their calculations of the Solar System anomalies.

Brown dwarves also don't have to have formed with the Solar System, they could be captured rogue stellar objects.

This reminds me of a thread I did some time ago about a rogue ultracool sub-dwarf that was discovered some years back.

Here is that thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Ultracool subdwarves were first recognized back in 2003, and can also be brown dwarves.


..
Ultracool subdwarfs were first recognized as a unique class of stars in 2003, and are distinguished by their low temperatures (“ultracool”) and low concentrations of elements other than hydrogen and helium (“subdwarf”). They sit at the bottom end of the size range for stars, and some are so small that they are closer to the planet-like objects called brown dwarfs. Only a few dozen ultracool subdwarfs are known today, as they are both very faintup to 10,000 times fainter than the Sunand extremely rare.[/size=4]
...

www.universetoday.com...

I wonder how rare they really are when we just recognized them not that long ago. There could be many more we just haven't identified yet.

In the above link you can also find a projected orbit of ultracool sub-dwarves orbiting outside the Milky Way.


Credit MIT and
www.universetoday.com...

I also found a diagram from viewzone.com of what COULD be the orbit of the brown dwarf companion to our sun.


edit on 12-9-2011 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
I firmly believe in PLANET X



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 

Read your quote:

We estimate that roughly half of all stars in the sky are indeed members of binaries.


All stars are not like the Sun. 33% of sun-like stars are found to have binary companions. Most of those companions are sun-like stars. Few sun-like stars have been found with brown dwarf companions.

edit on 9/12/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 




BTW, first of all, who says that the percentage of brown dwarves orbiting sun-like stars MUST be high in order for one to exist in our Solar System?...

I don't know who said that. It certainly wasn't me.
All I said was that it would be unusual if it turns out that the Sun has a brown dwarf companion. How many times do I have to repeat myself on this?

edit on 9/12/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Phage, seriously......

What do you not understand about the FACT that there are MORE stars in binary systems than not???

As soon as proof has been presented, you try to force it to be untrue somehow.

You said, all the stars are not sun-like.

They don't have to be. The scientific fact is that more than HALF OF THE STARS in the SKY are in binary star-systems.

Be mature and accept that, instead of looking foolish trying to argue against something that has been proven.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 

No, it has not been proven. It has been supposed and disputed by recent work.

This comparison indicates that most stellar systems formed in the Galaxy are likely single and not binary, as has been often asserted. Indeed, in the current epoch two-thirds of all main-sequence stellar systems in the Galactic disk are composed of single stars.
iopscience.iop.org...


We consider the multiplicity of stellar systems with (combined) magnitude brighter than 6.00 in Hipparcos magnitudes. We identify 4555 such bright systems, and the frequencies of multiplicities 1, 2, . . . , 7 are found to be 2722, 1412, 299, 86, 22, 12 and 2.
journals.cambridge.org...


Combined with the fact that about 85 percent of all stars that exist in the Milky Way are red dwarfs, the inescapable conclusion is that upwards of two-thirds of all star systems in the Galaxy consist of single, red dwarf stars.
www.redorbit.com...


For this discussion it matters that sun-like stars are discussed because the Sun is sun-like. It does no good to consider O type stars, almost all of which are binary because they have no similarity to the Sun.
edit on 9/12/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

I don't know who said that. It certainly wasn't me.
All I said was that it would be unusual if it turns out that the Sun has a brown dwarf companion. How many times do I have to repeat myself on this?


Phage, you seemed to imply that our current knowledge about the existance of brown dwarfs being companions to Sun-like stars was some sort of proof that the Sun couldn't have a companion brown dwarf.

Phage, with all the evidence and the anomalies pointing to a large unknown gravitational field existing in our Solar System, what would be unusual is that there is no brown dwarf companion to our Sun.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 

No.
I did not say or imply that it is proof that the Sun couldn't have a companion brown dwarf. I have been pointing out that contrary to what some people believe binary systems are not prevalent in the Galaxy and far from being prevalent when sun-like stars are considered. I said that if the Sun were found to have a brown dwarf companion it would not be the norm. Some people believe it is. It is not. What is your problem with that?

The "anomalies" you bring up are interesting but it is a leap to attribute them to a single cause, much less a giant planet. There are many astronomers who do not believe that there is a brown dwarf companion to the Sun, just as there are those that do. You also include theories (i.e. Nemesis) which have been abandoned by those who proposed them.
www.foxnews.com...

As I said, if it is there, it should be found in the data from WISE.

edit on 9/13/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 06:15 AM
link   
Basically Phage, I see the universe as the following.

Originally plasma bubbles were created, and are being created, that get more and more dense. As they dense, they form an outer shell, with dense inner liqifuid plasma. Unfortunately, I have to skip frames here ... as I'd have to skip towards where there is an outer shell, and inner magnetic liqifuid plasma core, with out acredited dust. As the heavier materials sink to the core, more of the plasma seeks to the exterior, creating an ever greater gaseous exterior.

In other words, there is a possibility for a theory of everything, where every planetal structure is a work in progress, expanding.

No, I don't think we have a binary system, because the planets rotation around the sun, is far too systematic, to have any real outer influence. As I undersand they are close to spherical. However if you look at the fields, the asteroid field, kuper field and oort cloud. There is a symmetry here, and it does suggest, that there are objects between the kuper field and oort cloud, that may orbit around the sun. If there is, these objects mass, must be significant, no?

I am also one, not to totally ignore old superstitions, although I know they are mostly wrong assumptions of natural events. They however, do refer to natural events, and that man on earth early started to look at the skies, does suggest that there are anomalies there. So, I perhaps there is something to this theory of a "black" object, although the nemesis and nibiru theories don't make much sense in themselves.



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 06:49 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
...
I said that if the Sun were found to have a brown dwarf companion it would not be the norm. Some people believe it is. It is not. What is your problem with that?


I am not going to get into an argument with you about what you said, or you didn't. However, i find it extremely ironic that even in this last response of yours you seem to once again "imply" our current knowledge about other star systems is impeccable, and you seem to think we know everything there is to know about star systems. How can you be certain that it is not the norm?

How many star systems exist that we have been able to detect whether or not they have a companion star, or failed star Phage? Out of the billions, upon billions of them... Yet you are certain it is not a norm?

You have been wrong about many things pertaining to astronomy and astrophysics, such as your claim that the Sun could not possibly cause earthquakes, among others, and you even made your own conclusions from your own flawed claims despite dozens upon dozens of peer-review papers from scientists who say the contrary.

Have you not considered you might be wrong? And yes Phage, even in your last response you seemed to "imply" that what YOU believe must be right, meanwhile what we think could be possible is wrong according to you. You might not say it outright, but your sentences do imply so.



Originally posted by Phage
The "anomalies" you bring up are interesting but it is a leap to attribute them to a single cause, much less a giant planet. There are many astronomers who do not believe that there is a brown dwarf companion to the Sun, just as there are those that do. You also include theories (i.e. Nemesis) which have been abandoned by those who proposed them.
www.foxnews.com...


Even in that link you gave those astronomers you talk about even confess that they haven't looked at the most recent findings and evidence, yet you think that their BELIEF must be right?... What about what the EVIDENCE says Phage?

I am not going to re-post every piece of evidence, but this one speaks volumes.



...
The reason for this is totally unclear. One may speculate that an unknown gravitational field within the Solar system slightly redirects the incoming cosmic microwave radiation (in the similar way as a motion with a certain velocity with respect to the rest frame of the cosmological background redirects the cosmic background radiation and leads to modifications of the dipole and quadrupole parts). Such a redirection should be more pronounced for low–l components of the radiation. It should be possible to calculate the gravitational field needed for such a redirection and then to compare that with the observational data of the Solar system and the other observed anomalies.
...

arxiv.org...



Originally posted by Phage
As I said, if it is there, it should be found in the data from WISE.


It could find it, or it could not. If it doesn't find it, can you tell us what else could cause an unknown gravitational field in our Solar System that is very difficult to find, yet it is strong enough to affect planets, possibly the Sun, comets, and even incoming cosmic microwave radiation?

If WISE does not find it, would this make the anomalies or the unknown gravitational field in our Solar System disappear?

BTW, even NASA thinks, and I quote:


Astronomers study brown dwarfs to better understand how stars form, and to understand the atmospheres of planets beyond our solar system. The atmospheres of brown dwarfs are similar to those of gas-giant planets like Jupiter, but they are easier to observe because they are alone in space, away from the blinding light of a parent star.

www.nasa.gov...

But a companion star to our Sun would be harder to see even with WISE because we are in the Solar System, and the blinding light, and infrared signature from our own Sun would make it a lot harder to find such a brown dwarf, more so if it is a type "Y" brown dwarf.


Discovered: Stars as Cool as the Human Body August 24, 2011: Scientists using data from NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) have discovered six "Y dwarfs"-- star-like bodies with temperatures as cool as the human body.
...

science.nasa.gov...

Shall we look at an image from WISE which supposedly shows a type "T" brown dwarf which are 8-10 times hotter than type "Y" brown dwarfs?

For some reason I can't access my pictures features on my account in ATS, it just brings up a blank page, so i will have to link directly from where i got the photo.


www.astronomynow.com...

I can't even make out anything, and if they hadn't photoshopped the Sun-like icon to show where this brown dwarf is I doubt anyone would know it is there.

Is it impossible that the brown dwarf companion to our Sun could be a similar type or even a "Y" type which is cooler and can have almost the same infrared signature as a human body?
edit on 16-9-2011 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Look Phage, I am willing to admit that there might be something else which has a large gravitational field and might not be a brown dwarf in our Solar System, although I am not sure what else it could be, but I accept the possibility despite the evidence seemingly pointing to such a brown dwarf or/and even possibly another large planet existing in our Solar System.

Are you willing to admit you could be wrong?
edit on 16-9-2011 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 

Wrong when I say that if a brown dwarf companion to the Sun is found to exist it would be unusual? Sorry, I can't say that because according to what we know about sun-like stars it would be unusual. That does not mean it can't be true. Unusual does not mean impossible. It means unlikely.

I am open to the remote possibility that there may be a distant brown dwarf companion to the Sun. I haven't said otherwise.


edit on 9/16/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

Wrong when I say that if a brown dwarf companion to the Sun is found to exist it would be unusual? Sorry, I can't say that because according to what we know about sun-like stars it would be unusual. That does not mean it can't be true. Unusual does not mean impossible. It means unlikely.

I am open to the remote possibility that there may be a distant brown dwarf companion to the Sun. I haven't said otherwise.


If you read my post before this one I asked you how many star systems have we been able to detect/observe and whether we can conclusively say that we know for certain what is a norm or not among star systems among the billions, upon billions of them.

What we know now about what is the norm among star systems could very well be wrong.



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 



Could the Sun have brown dwarf companion? Yes, but current observations indicate that it is unlikely. This is what I said in my first post in this thread. Please do not imply that I said it was not possible. Unlikely does not mean impossible.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
...
Could these conclusions change with further observations? Yes.
Could the Sun have brown dwarf companion? Yes, but current observations indicate that it is unlikely. This is what I said in my first post in this thread. Please do not imply that I said it was not possible. Unlikely does not mean impossible.


Unlikely does not include having evidence that there is an unknown large gravitational field/source in the Solar System. It is likely that it does exist, as well as it is likely that it could be something else we haven't detected yet.

As to what it is, all the evidence imo would point to it being a brown dwarf and or a large planet because we know of nothing else that could be so elusive and still cause these anomalies. So the most likely candidate is a brown dwarf and/or large planet. That does not make it unlikely.

edit on 16-9-2011 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   

But a companion star to our Sun would be harder to see even with WISE because we are in the Solar System, and the blinding light, and infrared signature from our own Sun would make it a lot harder to find such a brown dwarf, more so if it is a type "Y" brown dwarf


You are comparing apples with oranges. The reason that a brown dwarf companion to a distant star would be so difficult to detect is because it would be exceptionally close to the star as viewed from Earth. That's why it is easier to detect them if they are on their own in space. However, any brown dwarf companion of the Sun could be anywhere in the night sky. If WISE can detect the heat signature of tiny Kuiper Belt objects beyond the orbit of Neptune, then it should have no trouble detecting a massive object larger than Jupiter at immense distances.......and those single brown dwarfs that have already been detected are proof of that. Those "Y" brown dwarfs may have extremely low surface temperatures, but compared to the temperatures of typical Kuiper Belt objects they are RED HOT!
edit on 16-9-2011 by Mogget because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mogget
If WISE can detect the heat signature of tiny Kuiper Belt objects beyond the orbit of Neptune, then it should...


WISE cannot detect kuiper belt objects, unfortunately.


How about Kuiper belt objects? Unfortunately, anything that doesn't have its own internal heat source will be too cold for WISE to detect. The objects need to be 70 to 100 Kelvin to be detectable; even another Earth, if there was such a body in the Kuiper belt, would be a frigid 35 Kelvin, too cold to spot.


Source

Also from wikipedia


Targets within the Solar system WISE was not able to detect Kuiper belt objects, as their temperature is too low....[18]

Wikipedia


So basically, it is very possible that this object is too cold to be detected even by WISE, unless it is hotter than the Earth.
edit on 17-9-2011 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 05:59 AM
link   
Thanks for the clarification, NeoVain. However, if a "Y" type brown dwarf can be detected at tens of light years, then it can be detected at the distance of the Oort Cloud.





new topics

top topics



 
118
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join