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 libertytoall
I'm going to have to completely disagree with you. The black hole's singularity IS outside our solar system and
it alone is the cause of gravity / EM / and time itself. It's much more difficult for me to believe a planet or star could effect our solar system in the way you describe when a black hole explains just as easily the phenomenon you're talking of. There's also much more evidence of a black hole then a second star in our solar system. The black hole would discredit the second star possibilty which is why I'm hardly convinced.
So far, WISE data have revealed 100 new brown dwarfs. More discoveries are expected as scientists continue to examine the enormous quantity of data from WISE. The telescope performed the most advanced survey of the sky at infrared wavelengths to date, from Jan. 2010 to Feb. 2011, scanning the entire sky about 1.5 times.
Of the 100 brown dwarfs, six are classified as cool Y's. One of the Y dwarfs, called WISE 1828+2650, is the record holder for the coldest brown dwarf, with an estimated atmospheric temperature cooler than room temperature, or less than about 80 degrees Fahrenheit (25 degrees Celsius).
The Y dwarfs are in our sun's neighborhood, from approximately nine to 40 light-years away. The Y dwarf approximately nine light-years away, WISE 1541-2250, may become the seventh closest star system, bumping Ross 154 back to eighth. By comparison, the star closest to our solar system, Proxima Centauri, is about four light-years away. "Finding brown dwarfs near our sun is like discovering there's a hidden house on your block that you didn't know about," Cushing said. "It's thrilling to me to know we've got neighbors out there yet to be discovered. With WISE, we may even find a brown dwarf closer to us than our closest known star."
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Originally posted by libertytoall
I'm going to have to completely disagree with you. The black hole's singularity IS outside our solar system and
it alone is the cause of gravity / EM / and time itself. It's much more difficult for me to believe a planet or star could effect our solar system in the way you describe when a black hole explains just as easily the phenomenon you're talking of. There's also much more evidence of a black hole then a second star in our solar system. The black hole would discredit the second star possibilty which is why I'm hardly convinced.
It couldn't be possible imo. If the anomalies found in the Solar System were caused by a singularity, energy, interstellar dust, ect from outside the Solar System, and from the direction of the galactic center wouldn't be reaching us, and it is.
If the anomalies were being caused by a singularity from the galactic center, coming from the center of our galaxy, then for example Sedna would be slingshot away from the Sun and out of the Solar system.
Yes, I know there is a supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy, but if the anomalies were being caused by that singularity we wouldn't be receiving energy, or getting closer to the interstellar cloud that is coming from that same direction.
Here is a NASA video which talks about the interstellar cloud which is coming relatively from the direction of the galactic center. They talk about other things as well in the video.
Remember that NOTHING can escape a singularity, not energy, and not even light, which is a form of energy.
We are luckily at the outskirts of our galaxy, hence the supermassive black hole still is not affecting us as you say it is.
Not to mention that so far I haven't seen any astronomer stipulate that the anomalies in the Solar System are being caused by the supermassive singularity at the center of our galaxy.
As the cited article by Bill Owen states.
Bottom line -- it's much ado about very little, a classic case of speculation being treated as the most likely scenario.
I don't think Wolfenz read his source.
3. How can you deny the existence of Nibiru when discovered it in 1983 and the story appeared in leading newspapers? At that time you called it Planet X, and later it was named Xena or Eris.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
reply to post by borutp
Don't know about that. But for whatever reason, this topic was used as the target. Several hundred requests for that topic every second.
Originally posted by libertytoall
This video to me looks strikingly like the black hole model I'm talking about. This doesn't show me existence of a star or rougue planet at all, in fact, what I see is the accretian disc of a black hole and time flowing out of it creating a solar wind due to our velocity inside this black hole.
Originally posted by libertytoall
ElectricUniverse
Remember that NOTHING can escape a singularity, not energy, and not even light, which is a form of energy.
This is incorrect.
Originally posted by libertytoall
Are we in a galactic orbit? Yes the black hole is effecting us..
The Spiral Structure
The spiral structure is associated with active star-forming regions. As already noted in conjunction with the Milky Way, This is in fact why the spiral arms of these galaxies are so prominent: because they are regions of active star formation, there are many hot young blue and blue-white stars there, making the spiral arms extremely visible.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
....
However, if it 50,000 AU away and stays that far away, as the science states, then enough sunlight probably wouldn't reach to be able to see. That's the problem with Nibiru believers they try to use science to support their beliefs, but it's clear that they don't read anything behind the titles of articles.
...
...
Within the Newtonian framework, we considered the action of a circular massive ring modeling the Edgeworth-Kuiper belt of Trans-Neptunian Objects, but it does not induce secular variations of e. In principle, a viable candidate would be a putative trans-Plutonian massive object (PlanetX/Nemesis/Tyche), recently revamped to accommodate certain features of the architecture of the Kuiper belt and of the distribution of the comets in the Oort cloud, since it would cause a non-vanishing long-term variation of the eccentricity.Actually, the values for its mass and distance needed to explain the empirically determined increase of the lunar eccentricity would be highly unrealistic and in contrast with the most recent viable theoretical scenarios for the existence of such a body. For example, a terrestrial-sized body should be located at just 30 au, while an object with the mass of Jupiter should be at 200 au.
...
Constraints on planet X/Nemesis from Solar System's inner dynamics
Author: Iorio, L.
Source: Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 400, Number 1, November 2009 , pp. 346-353(8)
Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
Abstract:
We use the corrections to the standard Newtonian/Einsteinian perihelion precessions of the inner planets of the Solar system, recently estimated by E.V. Pitjeva by fitting a huge planetary data set with the dynamical models of the EPM ephemerides, to put constraints on the position of a putative, yet undiscovered large body X of mass MX, not modelled in the EPM software. The direct action of X on the inner planets can be approximated by a elastic Hooke-type radial acceleration plus a term of comparable magnitude having a fixed direction in space pointing towards X. The perihelion precessions induced by them can be analytically worked out only for some particular positions of X in the sky; in general, numerical calculations are used. We show that the indirect effects of X on the inner planets through its action on the outer ones can be neglected, given the present-day level of accuracy in knowing . As a result, we find that Mars yields the tightest constraints, with the tidal parameter . To constrain rX we consider the case of a rock-ice planet with the mass of Mars and the Earth, a giant planet with the mass of Jupiter, a brown dwarf with MX= 80mJupiter , a red dwarf with M= 0.5 M⊙ and a Sun-mass body. For each of them we plot rminX as a function of the heliocentric latitude β and longitude λ. We also determine the forbidden spatial region for X by plotting its boundary surface in the three-dimensional space; it shows significant departures from spherical symmetry. A Mars-sized body can be found at not less than 70-85 au: such bounds are 147-175 au, 1006-1200 au, 4334-5170 au, 8113-9524 au and 10 222-12 000 au for a body with a mass equal to that of the Earth, Jupiter, a brown dwarf, red dwarf and the Sun, respectively.
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Originally posted by libertytoall
This video to me looks strikingly like the black hole model I'm talking about. This doesn't show me existence of a star or rougue planet at all, in fact, what I see is the accretian disc of a black hole and time flowing out of it creating a solar wind due to our velocity inside this black hole.
I never wrote/said the video shows the existance of a star or rogue planet, read again what I said.
What I wrote is that that video shows the interstellar cloud is coming from the direction of galactic center. It could be possible that our Solar System is travelling faster than that interstellar cloud and we are catching up to it, or our Solar System and the interstellar cloud are attracting each other.
But this shows clearly we are not trapped yet in the singularity. Not to mention that we are far away even from the accretion disk of the singularity.
If the insterstellar cloud is not being attracted faster, being closer to the galactic center, then the singularity, and it's accretion disk cannot be the causes of the Solar System anomalies. But yes I could be wrong. Are you willing to admit that you are wrong?
So far i still haven't seen any astronomers present any peer-reviewed paper stipulating that the anomalies in the Solar System are being caused by a singularity.
THERE IS NO PHYSICAL SINGULARITY.. Why start at 3:23? Is that because 3:17 on explains black holes blowing stuff out? Like the gas or cloud you say is comeing from the center of the galaxy? So you think an invisible brown dwarf is more likely to be the cause over every logically proven aspect of science? You are never going to convince me the sky is green or that 4+4 = 11. People who understand black holes and REAL SCIENCE know of hundreds of better explanations then a planet x mysteriously cloaked and unmeasurable simply materializing in the solar system and causing havok...
Originally posted by libertytoall
ElectricUniverse
Remember that NOTHING can escape a singularity, not energy, and not even light, which is a form of energy.
This is incorrect.
Watch that video you gave starting at around 3:23
You can hear the narrator clearly state that nothing can escape once it is within the radius of the singularity.
I still haven't seen you present any evidence that would corroborate what you say, if you have it I am interested in seeing it. So far you have only made claims.