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.
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.
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"!
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.
Since everything, are waves ... even the motion of photons, it's slightly more complicated than that, isn't it Phage?
I have no idea what the Big Bang has to do with the possibility of the Sun having a companion.
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.
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 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
No. There are other possible explanations for things which some think may be caused by a large unknown body. www.abovetopsecret.com...
if not, one has to concurr that current models ... of gravitational pull, are incomplete.
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)
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.....
You see when you suck the public teat for a living you have to appear all powerful.
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.
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`