Two papers Claim Super Earth sized planets in the Outer Solar System at 300 AU.

a reply to: Shiloh7
why is it that the skeptics of ATS cant even fathom why their politicians dance before Moloch at Bohemian Grove or erect statues of Shiva at the Large Hadron Collider
why is it they have no qualms of paying their taxes to the corrupt govts that wage war on pretexts of WMD
or take it without a whimper when their leaders bail out crooked too big to fail bankers.
why is that.

a reply to: UnknownEntity

The paper keep mentioning the word centaur so I googled it, apparently that's jargon for a minor planet-hardly a super Earth but maybe small enough to be a brown dwarf.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

www.nasa.gov...

How exciting!!! I knew it would only be a matter of time before we start to discover the unknowns within our very own solar system. Never been any doubt that there is something lying out there waiting to be discovered. The Planet X theory I truly believe however I do not believe that it will eventually crash course with Earth.

I tend to side with Phil Plait on stuff like that: www.slate.com...

Have astronomers found a new solar system planet?!

Well... probably not. A pair of research papers were just made public claiming to have found what may be two largish objects way past Neptune. But there are many problems with the papers (not the least of which is that they haven't been peer reviewed), so don't get too excited just yet. To be clear, the objects *may* be real, and *may* be solar system objects, but that is by no means clear. I explain in this article, which hopefully will restrain the inevitable media nonsense.

An observer driven universe extends only as far as we can see. Bounce a ball, where does it land? As innumerable as grains of sand on a beach. Like ripples in a pond, these words dissipate into nothingness.

#nibiruforpres2016

a reply to: UnknownEntity

The Niburu crowd must be hopping madder than Rumplestiltskin with a bad case of St Vitus dance and Tourrettes.
They are screaming, "See I TOLD YOU!"

This is a crazy discovery.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: UnknownEntity

The Niburu crowd must be hopping madder than Rumplestiltskin with a bad case of St Vitus dance and Tourrettes.
They are screaming, "See I TOLD YOU!"

This is a crazy discovery.

Not really.
Other bodies in the outer solar system ≠ Nibiru.

I mean, the past discoveries of Sedna, Quaoar, Eris (which is larger than Pluto), and the like haven't made the Nibirui crowd yell "I told you so". If an Earth-sized body exists, it wouldn't necessarily be anything like the supposed "Nibiru".

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Well Nibiru is a bit vague.

The Nibiru myth says that a collision or near collision will occur with a large planetary body.

We've only just spotted these objects. And we don't know anything about their orbit.

a reply to: DeepThoughtCriminal

Why are you trying to discredit this by mentioning Lieder?... This has nothing to do with Lieder's claims... There is ample evidence that suggests at least one major planet and a brown dwarf exist within our solar system.

I posted about this topic in the following thread.

Scientific Research on Solar System Brown Dwarf and Planet X.

Notice that i posted that thread on September 7th, 2011, and stated and i quote:

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Despite what your own thoughts are regarding this issue, there is scientific evidence which points to the possibility of a brown dwarf, and at least another planet existing in our Solar System.

This thread is not about 2012, as I have said many times I do not think Nibiru, or any planet or brown dwarf will pass by in 2012, this is about the real evidence that point to the real possibility that a brown dwarf, and at least one other planet exist in our Solar System.

Since 2004 I have been posting information on this website on the possibility of a brown dwarf and another unknown planet existing within our Solar System, probably somewhere within the Oort Cloud.
...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: DeepThoughtCriminal

There is ample evidence that suggests at least one major planet and a brown dwarf exist within our solar system.

Except there isn't. There are hypotheses and "may be" or "may be not's".

originally posted by: wildespace

ETNOS are being bound at an orbit clustered pretty close together at argument of perihelion close to 0◦ by magic then? Is that what you are claiming?...

Extreme trans-Neptunian objects and the Kozai mechanism:
signalling the presence of trans-Plutonian planets
C. de la Fuente Marcos⋆ and R. de la Fuente Marcos
Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria, E-28040 Madrid, Spain
Accepted 2014 June 3. Received 2014 June 3; in original form 2014 April 23
ABSTRACT

The existence of an outer planet beyond Pluto has been a matter of debate for decades and the
recent discovery of 2012 VP113 has just revived the interest for this controversial topic. This Sedna-like object has the most distant perihelion of any known minor planet and the value of its argument of perihelion is close to 0◦. This property appears to be shared by almost all known asteroids with semimajor axis greater than 150 au and perihelion greater than 30 au (the extreme trans-Neptunian objects or ETNOs), and this fact has been interpreted as evidence for the existence of a super-Earth at 250 au. In this scenario, a population of stable asteroids may be shepherded by a distant, undiscovered planet larger than the Earth that keeps the value of their argument of perihelion librating around 0◦as a result of the Kozai mechanism. Here, we study the visibility of these ETNOs and confirm that the observed excess of objects reaching perihelion near the ascending node cannot be explained in terms of any observational biases.
This excess must be a true feature of this population and its possible origin is explored in the framework of the Kozai effect. The analysis of several possible scenarios strongly suggest that at least two trans-Plutonian planets must exist.

Key words: celestialmechanics – minor planets, asteroids: general – minor planets, asteroids:
individual: 2012 VP113 – planets and satellites: individual: Neptune.

arxiv.org...

There has to be something with greater mass out there keeping these ETNOs so clustered together. It's not magic.

You kept claiming the same thing in my thread despite evidence that shows there has to be something there with mass. More and more evidence keeps coming up and you still claim the same thing...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

All those are interpretations and suggestions (the actual words I took from the article), not something I'd consider amounting to ample evidence.

Rather than pointing fingers and saying "I told you so!", we need to wait until more observations, discoveries, analyses, etc. before we can confidently say that, yes, there is a large(ish) planet out there.

And how reliable and credible are articles from arxiv.org, where anyone can post anything without it being peer-reviewed?

Isn't it supposed to be a planet x "system" rather than just Nibiru itself.

Not that i'm sbscribing to the planet x craziness, but thought I'd throw it out there.

Regardless, this is interesting.

originally posted by: MrConspiracy
Isn't it supposed to be a planet x "system" rather than just Nibiru itself.

Not that i'm sbscribing to the planet x craziness, but thought I'd throw it out there.

Regardless, this is interesting.

There really in no "Planet X Craziness". The term Planet X has been used for many decades to simply describe possible unknown planets in the solar system, not necessarily "doom planets" such as the legend of Nibiru. The search for a "Planet X" was what led to the discovery of Pluto back in 1930, and at the time, it was called "Planet X".

Even if another planet is found, there is no reason to equate it to the Nibiru doom story. If another planet that has been out there unnoticed for 4.5 Billion years is discovered, there is no reason to believe that planet is suddenly going to be a doom threat to Earth, just because it was discovered.

ITs not necessarily a good thing that there might be large mass objects at the outer reaches of our solar system. That just means more gravitational turbulence to excite object in or near the kuiper belt. Any shift could mean a slew of debris that could easily be thrown in towards the inner planets. That would not be good for us. There could be a pattern between large impacts in Earths history with the orbit of these objects.

An intriguing set of circumstances. Barring a technical fault, or an error of interpretation, there is an object that has a sky position very near Alpha Centauri, and seems to share its proper motion. Yet, it appears too bright for a planet in that star system. Further, if it's another star in the Alpha C. system, it would have been noticed long ago.

So, an object in our own solar system, it seems. As Phil Plait so ably points out, finding a brown dwarf, or super-Earth planet so readily in the very small field of view of the ALMA telescope is very unlikely in itself. It would also imply an absurdly high number of such objects, relatively nearby. Even a trans-neptunian object, like a smaller version of Pluto is considered unlikely under these circumstances.
Whatever the object might be, we must consider the coincidence of its position in the sky very close to Alpha Centauri. Perhaps this is merely a coincidence, meaning nothing. Such things can and do happen occasionally. The object seems to move with Alpha C, too. If this is borne out by further observations, coincidence will be strained beyond the breaking point.

originally posted by: UnknownEntity
It is interesting to note how quickly the scientific community is discrediting these two papers on twitter.
Although both papers have been published by reputed scientists under international collaboration.
Something is surly wrong here, is it possible these two papers have just touched a raw nerve?

Anything that upsets the status quo and suggests that millions of well-educated and well-intentioned people are wrong is bound to stir up controversy.

Science likes to say that it is open-minded, but it really isn't. It's pretty well entrenched. Every paradigm shift has only come after what amounts to a vicious uphill battle. There definitely is an Orthodoxy built around prevailing scientific ideas. It's not different than any other widespread belief system. It's just human nature.


I say this as someone who loves science.

a reply to: RadioRobert

Science is open-minded. It just needs futher observations/measurements/confirmations on top of these isolated "discoveries" to make it certain enough to be anounced with confidence. Open-mindedness doesn't mean letting just any kind of proposition or idea in and giving it the same validity as the tested and proven tenets.

If you step off a cliff, you have all the confidence that you will fall, receiving injury or even death. We don't have that kind of confidence about any possible planets or brown dwarfs in the outer Solar System. That's why, while these new "discoveries" are interesting, a lot of additional work is due before we can get really excited about it (or realise that it's a dud).