Planet X: The Facts, The Myths

SORRY! Got very busy last night. I wil post tonight for sure!

Aimhigh:I'd still like to know what destroyed the planet that existed between Mars and Jupitor.

The asteroid belt has an estimated total combined mass of less than 1 tenth of the Earth’s moon. Jupiter also has a profound effect on the asteroid belt. Since Jupiter has a semimajor axis of 5.2 AU (I AU is the distance from the Sun to the Earth) it has an orbital period of 11.86 years. Since the asteroids are not all at the same distance from the sun, some of them have an orbital period of one half of Jupiter. This puts that asteroid in a 2:1 orbital resonance with Jupiter. The result of this resonance is gaps called Kirkwood’s gaps. So here is the rub; why did not these asteroids form a planet? The reason is the gravitational force of Jupiter. It perturbs the asteroids giving them random velocities relative to each other. Another effect of both Jupiter and the Sun on the asteroid belt is a group of asteroids that both precede and follow Jupiter in its orbit by 60 degrees. These asteroids are known as the Trojans.

Movemout:There are a lot of inconsistencies present in the size of Luna v.v. Earth. My next guess would be our own moon followed by Io.

One of the more accepted hypothesis for the formation of the moon is that early in the formation of the solar system another body collided with the Earth throwing off “chunks” of debris which later aggregated into the moon.

Some of the evidence for this is that the Earth has an iron core, however the moon does not. This implies that the iron had already “sunk” to the center of the Earth before the collision. Also the oxygen isotope composition is exactly the same for both the Earth and the moon. If the moon had formed from the same cloud as the Earth, i.e. coalesced at the same time the Earth did, the moon should also have an iron core. The isotope ratios also imply that the moon was not captured at a later date from some other part of the solar system. Finally, the total angular momentum of the earth/moon system does not lend to the theory of the moon being spun off from the Earth.

UCANSEE2Regardless, Io must have the same 'energy' source that is causing the volcanic activity. It may be that Io is turning into (or back into) an EARTH LIKE planet (moon?, it is roughly the same size as Earth) which will have it's own life-sustaining atmosphere and life-saving uv-protection.

Your prize is to prove what is the source of Io's volcanic activity? Is it the same as Earth's? (sucky prize, huh?).

Io is very nearly the same size as the Earth’s moon. It is approximately 1.04 times the size of the moon. One of the models for the volcanism found on Io is due to a resonance between Io, Ganymede, and Europa. Io completes four revolutions for every one of Ganymede and two of Europa. This is due to a Laplace Resonance phenomenon. (A Laplace Resonance is when more than two bodies are forced into a minimum energy configuration) The energy driving the Io volcanism is due to the tidal forces between both Jupiter and the other Jovian moons on Io.

Volcanism on the Earth is mainly due to the margins of our tectonic plates such as at the subduction zones. However, some volcanoes are found in the interior of the plates and this is called intraplate volcanism. It is believed that this type of volcanism is due to mantle plumes.

UCANSEE2Mercury, Venus Earth are inside the burning (exosphere?) of the sun. Tell them that, they won't believe you.

The solar corona is the outer layer of the Sun. The dense part of the corona is usually within 1 to 2 solar radii from the surface of the sun. However, there is a stream of energetic particles from the sun, called the solar wind, that extends throughout the entire solar system.

Light speedI'm thinking gravametrics has much more to do with solar system configuration than the accretion theory..with everyone cooling off.

The accepted view of star formation requires that an influx of non-thermal energy (shock wave or turbulence) initiate the collapse of molecular clouds. However, some researchers believe that these clouds can become stellar nurseries simply because cooler temperatures allow matter to move more slowly, allowing tiny gravitational and ionic forces between atoms to form complex molecules, leading to gravitational collapse.

Irrespective of the initial mechanism, areas of accumulated matter grow and coalesce, eventually forming a center of mass around which particulate matter and gases orbit, often colliding with other particles or the center of mass itself. As the mass contracts under continuing gravitational attraction, the core begins to heat and infrared radiation is released. Rotational velocity also increases, conserving outward angular momentum while allowing a continuous inward flow of material. The orbiting mass begins to take on a flattened disk-like shape about the core, which is now more appropriately referred to as a prestellar core or protostar. The protostar may have densities of up to 107 atoms per cubic meter at this stage in its evolution (newly formed stars have observed densities of about1022 atoms per cubic meter). Interior core temperatures may reach 150,000 K, with surface temperatures of about 3500 K as outward thermal pressure increases to compensate for the inward pull of gravity. At this point, the protostar will appear on a Hertzsprung-Russell diagram as a cool but bright star, as luminosity is still dependant upon gravitational collapse.

As contraction continues, particles that are outside the accretion disk, but still under the influence of gravitational attraction from the protostar, will be drawn into more extreme sinusoidal orbits in and out of the plane of the accretion disk. The chance that these extra accretion disk particles will collide with particles within the disk increases not only with increased density and thickness of the disk, but also with a decreased angle of incidence relative to the plane of the disk. Most particles will ultimately become part of the protostar, but some will enter into a variety of orbits within the accretion disk plane depending on their relative velocities, often forming additional regions or bands of increased density from which protoplanets may later accrete.

If I have made any blunders here, please post a correction.

ThinkPlease or Physicist? Any additions?

That's too good, thanks RA!!

Pearls-before-swine placemarker

The scale makes the Giza plateau look like a childs sand box

Thanks for mentioning that. Hancock wrote that Giza Plateau is a star map also, mainly Orion with the Nile being the Milky Way and the 3 big pyramids being the stars in Orion's Belt.

First, I love to say how much I love FR. There are all types here, and that means there is usually someone very well educated in almost every field of endeavor.

Although astronomy and the origin of the solar system is of great interest to me, it is not my forte.

I so much appreciate it when a FR poster provides an intelligent, and very informative reply. It is sooooooo easy to take the low road, to denigrate a poster, to use your own knowledge as a reason to make fun of someone less informed. You did none of this. You provided responses to each of us involved in this theorizing, giving us the experience of your education, giving us the facts straight allowing us to use this info to modify our perceptions, instead of trying to provide what our perception should be.

You have set one of the best examples for how a person responds to another, especially if you see the other person is mis or ill-informed. You took the high road, my friend, and I wish to give you a BIG THANK YOU. You gave me a chance to learn. My way of Thanking you is to do exactly that.

You talked about my proposition that Mercury, Venus, and Earth (and I think Mars) were inside the sun.
What I had read (and this was years ago, so I don't remember the exact source) discussed how, similiar to a candle there is the visible part of the flame, then there is above and outside (or around) that a part of the flame that is burning, but invisible. This part is what I believed was being referred to. Is this way out of line, or is there any likelihood that the comparision is valid?

Pearls-before-swine

Oink. And thanks for the ping.

The effects of the sun's atmosphere extend way out beyond Pluto. There it finally ends, or fades to zero at a point called the heliopause. A couple of the old Voyager [the one with the golden plaque designed by Ms Sagan] spacecraft have reached this point a couple years ago, and one was possibly still taking data at the time.

Bump.

Oink.

Grunt-grunt. (oook-oook! in encrypted form)

The Hazard of the Galactic plane

Our solar system is configured like a sphere..the outlying regions ..the Kuiper belt..and the Oort Cloud containing 100 Billion comets and other bodies.

Our system porpoises up and down..like a carosell..as it transits the galactic plain.

Crossing the dense central core takes roughly 30 million years.
During this transit the Sun will pass thru GMC's[Giant Molecular Clouds] and Spiral arm.
In spiral arm are more comets of untold number..as the regions hot gases condense.... a comet factory.

GMC's are typically 100 light years across and have a mass.
Astronomers have shown that passage thru a GMC has a profound destabilizung effect on the Oort Cloud...the GMC strips away the outer layer of the shell of comets..carrying them off..while its immense gravitational tides propel other comets inward toward our Sun.

Where are we now

The Sun has recently passed through the galaxy's densely crowded mid-plane and is presently skimming just 8 degree's above it.
For the past 100 million years or so the Sun has been visiting the Orion spiral arm,crossing it at a fairly narrow angle to the axis,completeing 2 porpoise like cycles.
The Sun is now poised just above the inner edge of the spiral arm..having penetrated the remains of an old disintergrating giant molecular cloud with young Blue stars..this region is known as the "Gould Belt".

Near the end of the Suns passage thru Goulds belt,some 5 million yrs ago,Astronomers believe a wave of comets were expelled from the Oort Cloud via tidal stress..to begin the slow ,light year long journey toward our inner solar system.

Our Earth has had 3 significant extinction events..at intervals of 94.5,65, and 36.9 million yrs ago,..the Suns passage thru the dense central plain is 30 million years.
So there is a frequency to cometary bombardment episodes.

We are technically at the extreme upper limit of this frequency now..and as hypothesised by some Astronomers may be at the beginning of a major bombardment episode.
Signs it has begun

One such comet of immense size is believed to have entered our solar system 50,000 yrs ago...being kicked into a steeply elliptical orbit with a perihelion very close to the Sun.
Such an orbit is an Earth crosser and Mars crosser.
The sungrazing orbit and Aphelion beyond Jupiter have torn the comet to pieces several times over in evolution...this is a long drawn out process.
Our Earth was locked in a ice age lasting 100,000 years..then to suddenly warm up around 17,000 yrs ago with ice retreating..then a cooling phase..then a retreat again at 13,000-10,000 yrs..by 9,000 the earth was freed from the world of ice sheets.

The suspiscion is that impactors thru up large volumes of water into the atmosphere..the margin needed to generate a green house heating event.
13,000 yrs ago New York state was covered by several hundred meters of ice..then the temperatures shot up from 8 degrees celsius to 18.
2 Ocean impact sites are known..and dated to around 10,000 yrs ago...the first in the Tasman sea off Australia..the 2nd in the China sea near Vietnam.

Many of the planets and their moons bear scaring from impacts that could be recent to this period of 50,000 yrs until today.
***Some of the data info comes from Graham Hancocks book..the Mars mystery

What an interesting thread! Thanks to all

Great Thread - thanks! A couple of random thoughts at this hour.

1. With all the issues that are hacked-about on FR, it's great to "kick it up a level" and look at the "really big picture" (the cosmos). Puts things in perspective.

2. For me, the cosmos lead right back to God (I'm not terribly religious, but can pretty much prove scientifically that Man didn't create the Universe).

3. Any more info on the solar map carved into the mountains - links? books? Very cool.

4. The B-52's mention Planet X in their song B-52's/Whammy! album/Trism song/"...On Planet X, wo-o-o(sic), it won't be long now..."

5. I'm going to go out now and look at the sky.

Oink.

lol...nevertheless, dinner is still on! :^)

(oook-oook! in encrypted form)

Is that pre- or post-modern?

You gave me a chance to learn. My way of Thanking you is to do exactly that.

Many thanks for the kind words! :-) I am very honored. I have another post for this thread on galactic dynamics and will get it posted tomorrow.

The effects of the sun's atmosphere extend way out beyond Pluto. There it finally ends, or fades to zero at a point called the heliopause. A couple of the old Voyager [the one with the golden plaque designed by Ms Sagan] spacecraft have reached this point a couple years ago, and one was possibly still taking data at the time.

I do not believe this is the case. As far as I know, neither of the Pioneer or Voyager spacecraft have yet reached the heliopause.

Forgot to ping you to this thread! Sorry.

You are most welcome :-)

No such planet, or at least if there is (or ever was), Sitchin's scenario was invalid based on the described orbit (which he made up, rather than uncovering it in Sumerian texts). Coast to Coast AM, which is the successor to the Art Bell show (he retired), asked Heiser to debate Sitchin on the show, just as Art Bell had asked. Heiser agreed, Sitchin did not respond:

Zecharia Sitchin's Errors: An Overview
by Michael S. Heiser
The study shows - from the texts themselves, not my opinion - that "Nibiru" is not a planet beyond Pluto and that the Anunnaki gods are never associated with it. These ideas are fabrications... This study details the impossibility of Sitchin's translations of "nephilim" as "those who came down" or "people of the fiery rockets" in light of Hebrew vocabulary and grammar. I know it sounds mind- numbing, but again I have tried to illustrate the concepts and problems. It also contains a scan of a page from one of Sitchin's books where he could not tell the difference between Aramaic and Hebrew - an amazing mistake if he's an expert... Mr. Sitchin contends that the word "Nephilim" means "those who came down from above" or "those who descended to earth" or "people of the fiery rockets" (see The Twelfth Planet, pp. vii, 128ff.). These translations, of course, serve his purpose - to see the Nephilim as ancient astronauts. As such it is hard to over-estimate the importance of Sitchin's work here - if he's wrong about the meaning of "nephilim," much of his overall thesis falls... Sitchin assumes "Nephilim" comes from the Hebrew word "naphal" (as opposed to ARAMAIC - see below) which usually means "to fall." He then forces the meaning "to come down" onto the word, creating his "to come down from above" translation. "Nephilim" - in the form we find it in the Hebrew Bible - COULD come from Hebrew "naphal," but it could ONLY mean be translated one way in light of the spelling - "those who are fallen" (i.e., either "fallen in battle" - which is out of the question given the context of Genesis 6 - or "spiritually fallen" / evil - which fits the context IF the sons of God are evil)... In short, if you care about the grammar of Hebrew, Sitchin's word meanings CAN'T be correct. The above file also discusses Sitchin's confusion of the sons of God and the nephilim - and evidence from his own book, Stairway to Heaven, that he cannot distinguish between Hebrew and Aramaic! My suspicion behind this apparent blunder is that Sitchin wants to distance the Annunaki from the evil Watchers of ancient Jewish literature (Hebrew Bible, Enoch, and some Dead Sea Scrolls).

Sitchin claims that a planet Nibiru is in a 3600 year orbit around the Earth. In a review of The Twelfth Planet C. Leroy Ellenberger pointed out that Sitchin apparently sync'ed this such that the most recent pass of the planet was in the late centuries B.C., an event for which there is no testimony. Ellenberger also pointed out that the supposed information from the aliens regarding the extent of the orbit was incompatible with Kepler's laws.

More to the point, this eccentric orbit would carry the planet into potential conflict with the other planets, particularly Jupiter, making such an orbit unsustainable over the millions of years required for the evolution of the intelligent alien species supposedly native to the hypothetical planet. Also, this species would have to have developed their biological characteristics, society, and technology in a way analogous to the old tale of Brigadoon -- where a fictional town lived one day each one hundred years.

In the meanwhile, the intelligent species on Earth was genetically engineered by these absentee owners, who never considered just moving the hell out of their own weirdo world. Clearly they have no use for our supposed slave labor, since their own world is frozen over. And if it isn't frozen over, what the hell is the atmosphere made out of? Nothing, because Sitchin made up the entire thing whether or not he sincerely believes it.

Sometimes I wonder if Sitchin and his associates are just putting us on, trying to see how long the marks who buy the books and attend the lectures will tolerate ever more grandiose claims. AFAIC, Sitchin's "theory" is just one gigantic crock. I've got no comment on whether he's delusional.