I Have Proven That G1.9 is a Brown Dwarf: The Inconsistencies Tell The Story!!

Originally posted by trueperspective
So 60 AU is the current suspected distance

If this object was only 60 AU away, it would exhibit significant parallax.

reply to post by Dashdragon


Whoa Thread Etiquette Nazi. I do believe I sourced all my work. Maybe you should address my questions instead of trying to throw this thread off course.

1) G1.9 is different from other supernovas which have been studied because it is the youngest yet discovered. No other supernova remnants have been observed at this stage of development

2) Why would there be more images of G1.9?

3) NASA didn't have much to do with studying G1.9 but no one was "confused" about its rate of growth. It grew fast because it was very young.

4) Please show evidence that G1.9 does not fit models.


You're putting a bit too much weight on the conclusions of the "Spanish astronomers".
Here is their document:
docs.google.com...

In it they run through the Nemesis hypothesis and claim that the supernova remnant G1.9 is actually a brown dwarf about 60AU from the Sun. They base the claim on two pieces of evidence.

First they say that between 1984 and 2008, G1.9 displayed too much angular movement to be a very distant object.

Así pues tenemos dos posiciones estelares de G1.9+0.3 perfectamente diferenciadas en el transcurso de 24 años:
a. 1984 - RA 17h 45m 37s, Dec. -27:09
b. 2008 - RA 17h 48m 45s, Dec. -27:10

They are right, a change in right ascension of slightly more than 3 arcminutes in 24 years is far too great for an object 24,000 light years away. But there is a problem. The "astronomers" got their 1984 data from The MOST Galactic Centre Survey - II. New results on published supernova remnants and G2.4 + 1.4. The description of the table they used:

Table 1. This table lists (1) The Galactic cooridinates, (2) and (3) the right ascension and declination for epoch and equinox B1950.0

articles.adsabs.harvard.edu...

I cannot find the source in the "astronomers'" document for the 2008 location but if you look for yourself you will see that "Figura 7" shows that Epoch J2000 coordinates are used. So what's the problem? The problem is that two different coordinate systems are used. The difference between the coordinates amounts to slightly more than 3 arcminutes of right ascension. G1.9 is in the same place it was in 1984. What "moved" was Earth's axis, it's called precession and it has nothing to do with Nibiru or Nemesis. Quite an obvious thing for the "Spanish astronomers" to miss.


Next, they present evidence from an article titled A 20 Year Radio Light Curve for the Young Supernova Remnant G1.9+0.3. They present radio telescope observations and claim that the fluctuations in the size of G.19 demonstrate that it cannot possibly be a supernova remnant. It gets smaller, then larger, then smaller. The problem? The MOST radio telescope is not capable of determining the size of G1.9.

The MOST observations are not at high enough resolution to detect significant changes in the size or mophology of G1.9+0.3 with time.

What was observed? The brightness of G1.9. And what did it find?

Twenty years of observations with the Molonglo Observatory Synthesis Telescope show that the young supernova remnant G1.9+0.3 has increased in brightness by 1.22 ± 0.24 0.16 per cent yr−1 between 1998 and 2007

arxiv.org...

It found that G1.9 fits the profile of a young supernova remnant.

The "Spanish astronomers" are not astronomers or, if they are, they are very bad ones.

reply to post by trueperspective


60 AU? Seriously? Even an Earth sized planet would be readily apparent farther out than that, but you expect a brown dwarf to go completely unnoticed? Also, to use your own quote, "No other object in the Galaxy has properties like this" So, it's a brown dwarf which are relatively abundant in our galaxy, but at the same time it doesn't have properties of a brown dwarf? Isn't that the same reasoning your using to prove that it's not a supernova remnant?

reply to post by Xcalibur254

60 AU? Seriously? Even an Earth sized planet would be readily apparent farther out than that, but you expect a brown dwarf to go completely unnoticed?

Nemesis theory describes exactly why detecting a Brown Dwarf companion to our Sun would be very difficult.

BTW, it looks like the OP's Nemesis has arrived. Good luck trueperspective.

reply to post by Dashdragon

This whole theory seems based upon the data from a group of Spanish astronomers calling themselves The StarViewer Team. What happened to The StarViewer Team?

Of course there is controversy. The Spanish asrtonomers, who call themselves the "Starviewer Team" must still convince the scientific community that G.19 is not a supernova, but rather a brown dwarf star inside our Solar System. This is not an easy task

When we previewed this article to the Starviewer Team, we asked them to send us a rebuttal...
We waited for an answer and received the following statement, which was translated for us:

1.-Some self-motivated International committee of astronomers, by their own innitiative, are presently calculating the exact orbit for the Brown Dwarf Sagitarius-Oort-Kuiper perturbation, using the StarViewerTeam's work sheets based on Lissauer, Murray and Matese's original drafts. A final report, will be published by Feb 2010.
...
It appears the evidence is inferential and based on mathematics. So we must wait until February.

UPDATE FEBRUARY 19, 2010: -- We patiently waited and monitored the StarViewer Team's web site for the "proof" that claimed would be forthcoming. Needless to say, it never materialized.

Source.

maybe its just me but,,

g19 ,,,,,,g19,,,,,g19,,,,g19,,,,,,,,,,,,,g19,,,,,,,,,,,,,,g19,,,,, went supernova,

g1903 is a remnant,,,
heading this way,

g1903,,,g1903,,,,,,,,,g1903,,,,,,,,,,,g1903,,,,,,,,,,,,g1903,,,,remnant,,,,

see the difference?,,people cant read anymore i guess.

reply to post by trueperspective


I believe I and others did, some more so than others.

I just happened to include a passing mention of the misleading nature of your title and contents - IE that you say You have proven when your article is cut together pieces from other articles by other people. That does not invalidate or erase my other remarks on the content unless you simply chose to ignore it, which is not my fault in the least.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


Nemesis hypothesis proposes a brown dwarf that is 50,000 AU away in the outer reaches of the Oort Cloud. Too far away to really reflect any light from the Sun. A brown dwarf 60 AU would be very apparent. As has been explained numerous times, a brown dwarf would reflect light from the Sun in the same way that Jupiter does, with the exception of the brown dwarf being bigger than Jupiter and thus more visible. Also, it is worth noting that even the astronomers that originally hypothesized Nemesis don't believe it exists.

reply to post by Phage


Very Good Phage. I know you have alot of fans. i will rebutal one thing right now which is "Why should they have more photos?"

Well what about this one...
Tycho's Observation Time Release Date April 26, 2011
Constellation Cassiopeia
Observation Date 2 pointings between April 29, 2003 and May 3, 2009
Observation Time 283 hours

Ok Now G1.9...
Constellation Sagittarius
Observation Dates 2 pointings between 02/10/2007 & 03/03/2007
Observation Time 14 hours

Really... 14 hours in 2008 of the "youngest" "Unprecedented" object discovered.
ISN"T THAT ODD??
How about this one...
G292.0 Release Date December 17, 2009
Constellation Centaurus
Observation Dates 6 observations between September - October 2006
Observation Time 144 hours

Im sorry I would watch this thing all day if it was something special
Source: chandra.harvard.edu...

reply to post by Xcalibur254


I know exactly what Nemesis theory proposes. It also proposes a mechanism by which it would be virtually impossible to detect if our Sun was part of a binary system. Do some research. If it's moving along with our Sun we wouldn't detect the parallax, and if it were something like a Red Dwarf it wouldn't be exceptionally bright unless reasonably close to us.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


Just something to ponder...you're saying that even though we can see all these red dwarf stars (the most common due to their long lifespans) that are thousands of ly away, we somehow overlooked one within 1ly? That's a ton of radiation to just not notice...

reply to post by trueperspective

No, it's not odd. Do you think that they are taking movies of it? "Watching" it all day would accomplish nothing, paint dries faster than any changes can be observed.

How many "photos" of Tyco's are there? How many of G292.0? Did you notice the wavelengths at which the observations were made? Do you know what the requirements are for the different wavelengths, the exposure times?

There are thousands of interesting and unique objects out there. Thousands of astronomers who want their pet object observed. Data on G1.9 was gathered by Chandra, time to move on. G1.9 is changing but it's not going anywhere (it's in the same place it was in 1984 and it will be in the same place in 2030, more or less) and it's not changing all that fast. It will be observed again when the time is again allotted to it, when someone wants more data.
cxc.harvard.edu...

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Xcalibur254

 

I know exactly what Nemesis theory proposes. It also proposes a mechanism by which it would be virtually impossible to detect if our Sun was part of a binary system. Do some research. If it's moving along with our Sun we wouldn't detect the parallax, and if it were something like a Red Dwarf it wouldn't be exceptionally bright unless reasonably close to us.

edit on 24-8-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)

In a binary system the stars don't "move along" with each other. One orbits the other (or they sort of orbit each other).

Parallax is not used to detect objects. It is used to determine how far away they are, using the apparent movement against background stars as the Earth revolves around the Sun.

Proxima Centauri is a red dwarf. It is 4.2 light years from Earth. It's not difficult to spot with a half way decent telescope.

Well I have to hand it to the OP (if it's his genuine work), that this thread is one of the more belabored creative doom scenarios but sadly, this young supernova is like 20,000 light years away and it can never ruin one of my evening cookout parties. G1.9 will have less effect on earth than comet elenin.

BTW, a brown dwarf could never accumulate the mass to supernova, and neither can our sun.

The following 2 posts = check + mate.

Originally posted by Devino
reply to post by Dashdragon

 

This whole theory seems based upon the data from a group of Spanish astronomers calling themselves The StarViewer Team. What happened to The StarViewer Team?

Of course there is controversy. The Spanish asrtonomers, who call themselves the "Starviewer Team" must still convince the scientific community that G.19 is not a supernova, but rather a brown dwarf star inside our Solar System. This is not an easy task

When we previewed this article to the Starviewer Team, we asked them to send us a rebuttal...
We waited for an answer and received the following statement, which was translated for us:

1.-Some self-motivated International committee of astronomers, by their own innitiative, are presently calculating the exact orbit for the Brown Dwarf Sagitarius-Oort-Kuiper perturbation, using the StarViewerTeam's work sheets based on Lissauer, Murray and Matese's original drafts. A final report, will be published by Feb 2010.
...
It appears the evidence is inferential and based on mathematics. So we must wait until February.

UPDATE FEBRUARY 19, 2010: -- We patiently waited and monitored the StarViewer Team's web site for the "proof" that claimed would be forthcoming. Needless to say, it never materialized.

Source.

Whoopsa-daisy!

Originally posted by Phage

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Xcalibur254

 

I know exactly what Nemesis theory proposes. It also proposes a mechanism by which it would be virtually impossible to detect if our Sun was part of a binary system. Do some research. If it's moving along with our Sun we wouldn't detect the parallax, and if it were something like a Red Dwarf it wouldn't be exceptionally bright unless reasonably close to us.

edit on 24-8-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)

In a binary system the stars don't "move along" with each other. One orbits the other (or they sort of orbit each other).

Parallax is not used to detect objects. It is used to determine how far away they are, using the apparent movement against background stars as the Earth revolves around the Sun.

Proxima Centauri is a red dwarf. It is 4.2 light years from Earth. It's not difficult to spot with a half way decent telescope.

Nuthin', but brain nuggets, there.

Im confused when you speak of the object expanding. Wouldnt that already contradict it being a brown dwarf. It is my understanding that the volumes of brown dwarf are equal to that of jupiter and remain constant?

so lets say for arguements sake that this is a brown dwarf planet type thing at 60au how fast is it traveling and long until we could see it?

reply to post by thefulleffect

It depends.
Give me its semi-major axis and I can give you some numbers.
Perihelion would be helpful as well.

alright phage best numbers i could get omega=319 degrees and galactic inclination 103is degress