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.

 

WISE makes startling "Brown Dwarf" discovery

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
There is far more "invisible" than visible in our Universe. What humans can perceive in the visible spectrum is ridiculous, we are blinder than bats.



That's why we create instruments such as WISE, which can make those invisible wavelengths visible to us humans.




posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by SunnyDee

Originally posted by DJW001

The practical upshot of this is that it is now even less likely that the Sun has an "invisible companion."


I am kind of surprised you even bring up Nibiru or whatever you want to call it. You being a scientific mind and all, I would think it beneath you, but it will get your thread rolling I suppose.

With that said, it's not like your article says there are no brown dwarfs out there, just less than they thought. It only takes one for the sun to have a "companion"!



He said "Invisible Companion" to the Sun. That wouldn't necessarily be Sitchin's "Nibiru" but rather could be the hypothesized body some astronomers call "Nemesis", which is a different thing altogether.

The problem with the idea that a body comes ramming through the inner solar system every 3600 years is that the orbital mechanics of the planets show that that does not happen. The tell-tale effects of it -- even 3600 years ago -- would still be visible in the orbits today.

Now -- if you say that our Sun may have some brown dwarf companion sitting out there, say, within 2 light years of the Sun, then I would say it may be possible. However, that would not be Nibiru.


edit on 6/9/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by bjarneorn
 


Since everything, are waves ... even the motion of photons, it's slightly more complicated than that, isn't it Phage?
No. What you said was that the infrared and visible wavelengths were not enough. I answered that surveys over a very wide range of the electromagnetic spectrum have been done.


The entire subject of photons travelling through space, without being able to be diverted, and giving us the possibility of seeing Big Bang, isn't really accurate is it.
I have no idea what the Big Bang has to do with the possibility of the Sun having a companion.


if there is an anomaly in the elipsis of the planets. Than it is perfectly legitimate, to see if another object in the kupler field explains it
There are no anomalies in the orbits of the planets but yes, astronomers (Matese and Whitmire in particular) are looking for an unknown large object, a very distant one.


if not, one has to concurr that current models ... of gravitational pull, are incomplete.
No. There are other possible explanations for things which some think may be caused by a large unknown body. www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 6/9/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
So we already had the facts that in our galaxy single star systems are most prevalent and that yellow dwarfs are more likely to pair with other yellow dwarfs. Now we have the fact that brown dwarfs are actually uncommon. So why do Nibiruphiles keep claiming that the odds are on their side?



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 05:06 PM
link   
1 in 6 is still a very considerable percentage. It's not as if they are "rare" or "uncommon", just less common then we initially thought.
edit on 9-6-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:51 PM
link   
If nasa knew even half of what they pretend to know.....

there wouldnt be any surprise asteroids that have a one day or a couple day notice now would there.....

You see when you suck the public teat for a living you have to appear all powerful. Stay away from that curtain toto.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
1 in 6 is still a very considerable percentage. It's not as if they are "rare" or "uncommon", just less common then we initially thought.
edit on 9-6-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)


The odds are not 1 in 6. Statistically speaking the odds are 1 in 6 on average, our specific system, with our sun type, in our galaxy, puts the odds much, much lower.



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowalker
If nasa knew even half of what they pretend to know.....

there wouldnt be any surprise asteroids that have a one day or a couple day notice now would there.....

Since when does NASA pretend to know the location of every potentially hazardous asteroid? For that matter, since when does NASA pretend to be able to detect small asteroids long before they pass close to earth?


You see when you suck the public teat for a living you have to appear all powerful.

Show me where NASA pretends to be "all powerful."



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
There is far more "invisible" than visible in our Universe. What humans can perceive in the visible spectrum is ridiculous, we are blinder than bats.



well, then ask yourself "How would we go about identifying the existence of something that didn't interact with electromagnetic energy?" Because without this, we cannot see it. We cannot detect its XRays. There is no light. emitted by it. It isn't interactive with other light, so it isn't reflective.

Of course, this theoretical stuff may or may not exist. But the whole dark matter question is, currently, the 50 million dollar question, to use a lame cliche`



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
So that leaves 16 666 666 666 brown dwarfs in the milky way



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:31 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
There is far more "invisible" than visible in our Universe. What humans can perceive in the visible spectrum is ridiculous, we are blinder than bats.



well, then ask yourself "How would we go about identifying the existence of something that didn't interact with electromagnetic energy?" Because without this, we cannot see it. We cannot detect its XRays. There is no light. emitted by it. It isn't interactive with other light, so it isn't reflective.

Of course, this theoretical stuff may or may not exist. But the whole dark matter question is, currently, the 50 million dollar question, to use a lame cliche`


If it does exist, it can be indirectly detected by the way it interacts gravitationally with the normal matter in the universe. Dark matter still has a gravitational effect.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join