Need astronomical assistance

Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:20 am » by **Evildweeb**

As I don't have or know how to access the plethora of solar system satellite information, I was wondering if there's a guru out there who can find something for me.

This is a real poser, folks........

Is it possible there is a second smaller sun on the other side of our sun which follows earth's orbit, and we never see it?

Is there a way to find out?

I have heard a rumor today that this is a two-sun solar system, and that we have been oblivious to it for a long long time.

Let the games begin. :nails:

Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:20 pm » by **Ihasabucket**

Nibiru and Nibiru like things are thought to be, a sort of failed sun, or sun's opposite, or sun's twin on a 36,000 year orbit.
http://www.crystalinks.com/nibiru.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru
http://www.zetatalk.com/theword/tworx534.htm
http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.com/
There is no reputable scientific fact that anything like this exists. That's why pretty much the only place you can find info on it is from conspicary-type websites. There is no evidence supporting this theory, but there is also not enough known to completely disprove it either. As for a smaller sun following Earth's orbital path...no. If there was it would be visible either durring the day, at the same time as the larger sun, or at night...which in that case, there would probably be no night, or a very bright night at that.
EDIT: as far as the binary star system (2 suns), scientists now believe that planets surrounding them are more likely than previously thought.
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/050517_binary_stars.html

Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:49 pm » by **Evildweeb**

Thanks Ihasa, I am quite familiar with all of the Niburu stuff.

This isn't about that.

I make reference to an actual physical burning lit sun of comparably smaller size behind our sun which orbits in such a way that we can't see it.

Theoretically it is possible that a dual star solar system can exist in this plane as such and the subsequent effects on our "visible" star is part of the reason why we see the effects we do, and are currently seeing these effects which would explain quite a bit.

But again , thanks mate for the info.

Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:53 pm » by **Ihasabucket**

hmmm...that's an interesting thought. not sure how likely it is...but i think i see where you're going. Sort of how we can never see the far side of the moon?

Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:02 pm » by **Drextin**

Doubtful. To have a multiple sun system the stars would have to orbit one another from great distances. A second sun could not even be as close as pluto. In fact it would have to be so far away we could see it no matter what its rotation. Now for a red dwarf(dead star) or a brown dwarf(planet that failed to ignite) they could have decaying orbits that would bring them closer into the inner solar system.

Despite the the 2012 crowd who are killing the real science...........there is a very good chance we do have a brown or red dwarf floating around out there. Single star systems are rare when compared to multiple star systems. Most of the single star systems we have observed later turned out to have a brown or red dwarf.

Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:04 pm » by **Lucidlemondrop**

I love the word Plethora~

It's right up there with cacophony and eclectic

Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:37 pm » by **Drextin**

Well slush most of our equipment is not calibrated to find low light objects like red/brown dwarfs within our own system. Now a completely ignited star is for sure bunk science but mathematically it is possible if not probable we do have a dwarf. there is also the possibility that the dwarf over time strayed to far out and broke free from the solar system.

The biggest problem we have is the suns brightness. It illuminates and washes out any distant objects within the system. Which is why we can only so often find planet sized objects beyond jupiter. The sun just overwhelms a telescopes sensors in all wavelengths.

I find it amazing that so many scientists brush aside the galactic alignment and our galactic orbit like its nothing to bother themselves with. They base their assumptions solely on the fact that Sagittarius A is inactive. A black hole does not have to spewing out radiation to have gravitational effects.

Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:01 pm » by **Savwafair2012**

This second foci of Planet X has not been located by your astronomers because it is dark, not lit, and does not happen to block any view your astronomers are particularly interested in. They think it empty space. Unlike the Sun, this dark twin never lit. Although comparable in size and mass, its composition was subtly different, and it has no potential for becoming a lit sun under the present conditions in your part of the Universe. It has no planets of any size to mention, though is orbited by a lot of trash. Should one wish to search for it, it stands at an angle of 11 degrees off the Earth's orbital plane around the Sun, in the same direction we have given for the approach of Planet X. Not being a luminous body, and not giving off any radiation detectable by human devices, you will be unable to locate it, but this does not mean that it is not there.
The Binary Research Institute (BRI) has found that orbital characteristics of the recently discovered planetoid, "Sedna", demonstrate the possibility that our sun might be part of a binary star system. A binary star system consists of two stars gravitationally bound orbiting a common center of mass. Once thought to be highly unusual, such systems are now considered to be common in the Milky Way galaxy. Walter Cruttenden at BRI, Professor Richard Muller at UC Berkeley, Dr. Daniel Whitmire of the University of Louisiana, amongst several others, have long speculated on the possibility that our sun might have an as yet undiscovered companion. Most of the evidence has been statistical rather than physical. The recent discovery of Sedna, a small planet like object first detected by Cal Tech astronomer Dr. Michael Brown, provides what could be indirect physical evidence of a solar companion. Matching the recent findings by Dr. Brown, showing that Sedna moves in a highly unusual elliptical orbit, Cruttenden has determined that Sedna moves in resonance with previously published orbital data for a hypothetical companion star.

In the May 2006 issue of Discover, Dr. Brown stated: "Sedna shouldn't be there. There's no way to put Sedna where it is. It never comes close enough to be affected by the sun, but it never goes far enough away from the sun to be affected by other stars... Sedna is stuck, frozen in place; there's no way to move it, basically there's no way to put it there - unless it formed there. But it's in a very elliptical orbit like that. It simply can't be there. There's no possible way - except it is. So how, then?" "I'm thinking it was placed there in the earliest history of the solar system. I'm thinking it could have gotten there if there used to be stars a lot closer than they are now and those stars affected Sedna on the outer part of its orbit and then later on moved away. So I call Sedna a fossil record of the earliest solar system. Eventually, when other fossil records are found, Sedna will help tell us how the sun formed and the number of stars that were close to the sun when it formed." With Dr. Brown's recent discoveries of Sedna and Xena, (now confirmed to be larger than Pluto), the search for a companion star may be gaining momentum.
Sedna
http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/sedna/
On 15 March 2004, astronomers from Caltech, Gemini Observatory, and Yale University announced the discovery of the coldest, most distant object known to orbit the sun. The object was found at a distance 90 times greater than that from the sun to the earth -- about 3 times further than Pluto, the most distant known planet. Standing on the surface of Sedna, you could block the entire sun with the head of a pin held at arm's length. Even more interestingly, the orbit of Sedna is extreme elliptical, in contrast to all of the much closer planets, and it takes 10,500 years to circle the sun. In March 2004, the location of Sedna is easily found in the evening sky to the southwest just after sunset. It is almost directly below Mars, and forms a triangle with the very bright Venus. The following sky chart was accurate for mid-March 2004 and is only left in place for an historical reference.
Xena (2003 UB313)
http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/planetlila/
The new planet is the most distant object ever seen in orbit around the sun, even more distant than Sedna, the planetoid discovered almost 2 years ago. It is almost 10 billion miles from the sun and more than 3 times more distant than the next closest planet, Pluto and takes more than twice as long to orbit the sun as Pluto.
:sunny:

Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:03 pm » by **Evildweeb**

Ok I see I need to specify my point here.

Thanks guys for your input, its all valid, it really is.

But the orbit of a secondary sun behind the visible sun could very well orbit the known sun without our knowledge. At the proper distance and mass, this second sun could exactly follow the earth's trajectory in orbit without our ever being able to see it.

There were several theories many years ago about an earth-like planet on the other side of the sun that we couldn't see,. Those stories have dried up as well.

I'm not saying that this is true, I'm saying it's possible.

What I'm asking for is some form of valid secondary confirmation there ISNT a second sun.

Exclude NASA footage and films in any form, you think they're gonna tell us anything?

If there is in fact a second sun here, then there is billions of bits of information that will fall like dominoes directly afterwards.

It will change the face and scope of our science, and once and for all BUST the lie of our known universe.

If it isn't there, then no harm, no foul. :lol:

Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:10 pm » by **Drextin**

evil, that wouldn't matter. We have telescopes and instruments that are not bound to earth. They could see what a terrestrial telescope could not. Also any star that close would be noticeable by the light signatures on other planets.