PDA

View Full Version : G1.9 and the Oort cloud anomaly



malm1987
2010-Jul-16, 05:22 AM
So, I've wasted far too many hours looking into the search for Nemesis/Planet X (No, this isn't going to be about the Nibiru nonsense)

I've found that there are in fact some indications, as of today, that points to the existence of a Jovian massed planet residing in the Oort cloud. Since I know that there are quite a few bright minds here I thought I would run some things by you. I'm having a hard time separating science from fiction (in some cases)

Here are some articles, and a Journal, that talks about the potential of finding Nemesis/Planet X:
First off, the Journal (which is perhaps the most credible source): http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.4584v1.pdf

Here are some articles that talks about how NASA "mislabeled" G1.9 as a supernova remnant when it in fact is a brown dwarf or some sort of binary companion to our sun:
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fstarviewer.wordpress.com%2F%3Fs %3Dg1.9%252B3&lp=es_en&btnTrUrl=Translate
http://www.viewzone.com/nemesis.html
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/nemesis_010320-3.html
http://viewzone2.com/browndwarfx.html
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/2/407/Russia_Prepares_For_Asteroid_Strike_As_New_Comet_N ears_Sun.html

If someone could look through these links and give me some thoughts of it I would be forever grateful=) Is anything "of use" in these article (i.e. to be considered credible) I know that most, perhaps even all, is pure rubbish and lack even the slightest credibility (Journal excl.)

Cougar
2010-Jul-16, 02:07 PM
Here are some articles, and a Journal, that talks about the potential of finding Nemesis/Planet X:
First off, the Journal (which is perhaps the most credible source): http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.4584v1.pdf

I don't know if I'd call this a "journal article," but nevertheless, the article states:








A Bayesian statistical analysis suggests that the probability of the companion hypothesis is comparable to or greater than the probability of the null hypothesis of a statistical fluke.

That's not very convincing!

Nereid
2010-Jul-16, 02:22 PM
So, I've wasted far too many hours looking into the search for Nemesis/Planet X (No, this isn't going to be about the Nibiru nonsense)

I've found that there are in fact some indications, as of today, that points to the existence of a Jovian massed planet residing in the Oort cloud. Since I know that there are quite a few bright minds here I thought I would run some things by you. I'm having a hard time separating science from fiction (in some cases)

Here are some articles, and a Journal, that talks about the potential of finding Nemesis/Planet X:
First off, the Journal (which is perhaps the most credible source): http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.4584v1.pdf

Here are some articles that talks about how NASA "mislabeled" G1.9 as a supernova remnant when it in fact is a brown dwarf or some sort of binary companion to our sun:
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fstarviewer.wordpress.com%2F%3Fs %3Dg1.9%252B3&lp=es_en&btnTrUrl=Translate
http://www.viewzone.com/nemesis.html
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/nemesis_010320-3.html
http://viewzone2.com/browndwarfx.html
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/2/407/Russia_Prepares_For_Asteroid_Strike_As_New_Comet_N ears_Sun.html

If someone could look through these links and give me some thoughts of it I would be forever grateful=) Is anything "of use" in these article (i.e. to be considered credible) I know that most, perhaps even all, is pure rubbish and lack even the slightest credibility (Journal excl.)
A good way to investigate things like this is to go to the actual papers, published in relevant, peer-reviewed journals.

For example, the SDC (Space.com) article is based on this paper: "Lunar Impact History from 40Ar/39Ar Dating of Glass Spherules (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000Sci...287.1785C)" (link to ADS entry), which has been cited 52 times, subsequently. Reading this paper, and the ones which cite it, should give you a pretty good idea of how much of a scientific basis this particular claim has.

malm1987
2010-Jul-16, 11:46 PM
I realize now that I didn't have the most scientific approach towards the subject, and will look through the relevant papers. But I was mainly wondering what you think causes the Oort cloud anomaly and whats your take on the claims made by the Starviewer team (that G1.9 isn't a supernova remnant, more liike a brown dwarf that is getting closer)? Is there any, even the slightest, chance that they could be right? I had some hard time figuering out how they managed to place G1.9 within 60 AU from here, but then realized that it's most likelly sensationalism at its finest. I figuered they had to place it close to make it appear more omnious than it really is.

formulaterp
2010-Jul-17, 03:43 AM
If someone could look through these links and give me some thoughts of it I would be forever grateful=) Is anything "of use" in these article (i.e. to be considered credible) I know that most, perhaps even all, is pure rubbish and lack even the slightest credibility (Journal excl.)

Taken from your fourth link regarding the G1.9 "controversy":

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. Also, the initial popularity of their claim appears to have been nothing more than a way to attract a large viewership. The web site now is full of ridiculous claims, including some satirical stories taken from "the onion" (a very funny site) which the SV Team promoted as "real." There is no mention of the mathematical validation that was expected with regards to the G1.9 object. Perhaps the validation disproved their theory... perhaps it was never going to be validated by anyone... I think it is safe to take this theory of object G1.9 being a brown dwarf down to ZERO possibility!

Nereid
2010-Jul-17, 07:28 AM
I realize now that I didn't have the most scientific approach towards the subject, and will look through the relevant papers. But I was mainly wondering what you think causes the Oort cloud anomaly and whats your take on the claims made by the Starviewer team (that G1.9 isn't a supernova remnant, more liike a brown dwarf that is getting closer)? Is there any, even the slightest, chance that they could be right? I had some hard time figuering out how they managed to place G1.9 within 60 AU from here, but then realized that it's most likelly sensationalism at its finest. I figuered they had to place it close to make it appear more omnious than it really is.(bold added)

Would you please state, as clearly as you can, what you think is "the Oort cloud anomaly"?

That might help readers here, who would like to try to answer your question.

WayneFrancis
2010-Jul-17, 08:01 AM
Thankfully in the next 10-15 years this question should be completely put to rest. Even if we had some very low luminosity companion the various sky surveys should catch these objects.

neilzero
2010-Jul-17, 01:35 PM
If it is out there a billion miles, and Earth size, it should be detected by armature astronomers daily, even if it reflects very little light = black. It would occult = eclipse stars. If it is getting closer by a million miles per day, average (slower approach is much more probable, if it orbits the sun) it will take 1000 days to get here, thus arriving after 2012. Neil

malm1987
2010-Jul-20, 09:05 PM
(bold added)

Would you please state, as clearly as you can, what you think is "the Oort cloud anomaly"?

That might help readers here, who would like to try to answer your question.

I'm sorry if I used a misleading labeling of what I really meant. I was thinking about the discrepencies they talk about in the article, that led to the conclusion that there could be a Jovian massed object residing in the Oort cloud.

dgavin
2010-Jul-22, 07:53 PM
I realize now that I didn't have the most scientific approach towards the subject, and will look through the relevant papers. But I was mainly wondering what you think causes the Oort cloud anomaly and whats your take on the claims made by the Starviewer team (that G1.9 isn't a supernova remnant, more liike a brown dwarf that is getting closer)? Is there any, even the slightest, chance that they could be right? I had some hard time figuering out how they managed to place G1.9 within 60 AU from here, but then realized that it's most likelly sensationalism at its finest. I figuered they had to place it close to make it appear more omnious than it really is.

Nasa had a web page a few years ago on the Oort cloud, where part of it talked about it being very likely that Sol's Oort cloud and the Centari Oort cloud intersect each other. I'd be more inclinded to think this was the cause of the Oort cloud anomolies, then some sort of undiscovered brown dwarf or rogue planet.

astromark
2010-Jul-22, 08:29 PM
I suspect that to say the Centari Oort cloud and the Sol's Oort cloud are intersecting might be stretching the facts a little...

Many astronomers and enthusiasts are and have looked for that as yet unfound object... Not yet found...

Much new equipment ('KnowledgeStorm') are being brought online... If its there, we will find it... Wait.

fifelad55
2010-Jul-23, 11:05 AM
A search of this site produces several articles in scientific journals on the possibility of some large object existing in the outer solar system.

http://adswww.harvard.edu/

Some of the articles require a paid subscription or an institutional log-in from a University but many others can be accessed free of charge. One article suggested that it would not be possible (at least with current technology) to detect a Neptune sized object by reflected sunlight much beyond 800 AU. Gravitational lensing would therefore seem to be required to detect more distant objects.

Personally, I doubt whether the companion object, if indeed such an object exists, is a red dwarf star as I feel certain that at least one of the all sky surveys that have been carried out would have identified it. I would also be inclined to rule out a brown dwarf for a similar reason.

Further, if a large planetary object does exist, how would it have formed at such a distance from the Sun? Did it form closer to the Sun and was thrown into the outer solar system due to the gravitational effects of Jupiter?

Alan

antoniseb
2010-Jul-23, 12:27 PM
... to detect a Neptune sized object by reflected sunlight much beyond 800 AU. Gravitational lensing would therefore seem to be required to detect more distant objects.
...

In the Infrared, such an object would still be radiating its heat of formation. This would permit finding Earth-sized and larger objects pretty far out there. I don't have an estimate for the size that WISE should have picked up at different distances, but that is worth checking on before claiming Gravitational lensing as the only alternative.

dgavin
2010-Jul-23, 01:19 PM
I suspect that to say the Centari Oort cloud and the Sol's Oort cloud are intersecting might be stretching the facts a little...

Many astronomers and enthusiasts are and have looked for that as yet unfound object... Not yet found...

Much new equipment ('KnowledgeStorm') are being brought online... If its there, we will find it... Wait.

I distinctly remember it being mentioned at Nasa. They had estimated edge of our Oort cloud at 2.3 LY distance from sol and Centari's edge at 2.4 from it's stars giving roughly a .4 LY span of overlap. I checked but that web page doesn't exist any more; howevers it's been quoted on this forum before. I'll try to locate it later.