I’ve recently gotten involved in a Planet X thread on the GLP forum.

http://godlikeproductions.com/bbs/me...72&topic=3

Thankfully I’ve never gotten involved in such discussions in the past so I knew little about Planet X. Much to my amazement I was told Planet X is currently right in front of the Sun shrouded in a cloud of dust. Of course anyone who knows anything about celestial mechanics, which I do, will tell you it is impossible for a planet to maintain such a position indefinitely. I was also given information about the planet itself, such as orbital period, diameter, and mass. Being an engineering geek I decided to put paper to pencil and perform a few calculations.

Below is a copy of a post I just made to the GLP thread. I’m reproducing a copy of it here in case anyone wants to use the information in a future debate. Sadly, I doubt the data will have much affect on those reading at GLP. The Planet X believers over there have very little grasp on reality. I think some of them deny science even exists.


************************************************** ***********

Here’s something for you to ponder…

According to Zetatalk and other Internet sources, Planet X supposedly has a period of 3,657 years. If true, this gives PX a semi-major axis of about 35 billion kilometers. Based on what I’ve read in this thread, PX is supposedly somewhere near the Sun and inside the orbit of Earth. (It has to be inside Earth’s orbit to appear in front of the Sun as some have claimed.) I don’t know how close PX is supposed to get to the Sun, so I’ll make a guess and say it has a perihelion of 0.5 AU, or 74.8 million kilometers. According to User #78/68, “the Zetas via Nancy say Planet X is 4 times larger than Earth in diameter and is 14 times more in mass”. So here’s what we allegedly know about Planet X:

Diameter = 51,000 km
Mass = 8.36x10^25 kg
Density = 1.20 g/cc
Orbital period = 3,657 years
Semi-major axis = 35,440,000,000 km
Eccentricity = 0.99789

The diameter and mass are nearly the same as the planet Uranus. Uranus is a faint naked eye object in our night sky; however, if you were to move it to, say, the orbit of Mars, it would outshine everything in the sky except the Sun and Moon.

The science of celestial mechanics also tells us that PX would be racing along at nearly 60 kilometers per second as it reaches perihelion (0.5 AU). If we saw it cross the face of the Sun during its perihelion passage, this transit would take less than 4.5 hours. PX would slow little as it speeds through the inner solar system. It would cross Earth’s orbit, swing past the Sun, and then head outward, again crossing Earth’s orbit. The elapsed time between the two Earth orbit crossings would be only 78 days, during which PX would revolve halfway around the Sun.

How do I know all this? Because I’ve committed a great deal of my lifetime to studying the science, and because I’ve performed the calculations. Planet X’s passage through the inner solar system would be very rapid and short lived. This is based on the information provided by Nancy Lieder herself. All this talk of PX loitering around by the Sun is utter lunacy. It is a scientific impossibility.

************************************************** ***********

EDIT: The above has been revised per the following:
1) Orbital period changed from 3,600 years to 3,657 years.
2) Assumed perihelion changed from 1/3 AU to 1/2 AU.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

Well, yeah. 8)

can I just point out that Planet X believers anywhere don't seem to have a very good grip on reality?

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

I guess this just means we're spreading the same disinformation. :wink:

I never paid much attention to the Planet X people before. I just thought it was belief in a 10th planet; I was unaware of Nibiru, the Zetas, all this doom and glom and the end is nigh hogwash. Those people believe some really wacky stuff. I don’t know how to reason with a person who has such far-out delusions.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

According to Nancy, Newton is wrong because the Moon couldn't possibly move as slowly as it does (slower than a Concorde, she points out) and remain in orbit. So don't try arguing with her on a celestial mechanics basis.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

[quote="Bob B."]I don't know. Glom's posts have been pretty positive for the most part lately. He's let up on the anti-environmentalist schtick a bit and has just been promoting the positive aspects of nuclear power.


[edit/typo]

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

According to Nancy, the Zetas can make entire planets stop in their tracks, regress, move faster, change orbits, etc.

So, arguing mechanics with her supporters is pointless. To them, the Zetas are godlike. #-o

__________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
Philip K. Dick, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes."
Mark Twain

Avatar courtesy of Bunny.

I see that now. Unfortunately I had no idea what I was getting into when I started. Even if my arguments fall on deaf ears, it's still good to have an opposing viewpoint on record for the lurkers who drop in.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

oh if I only had that information like 4 years ago when the 2003 date was still strong and causing me a few nasty thoughts for about a week.

Then of course I found this particular website and was relieved.

__________________
I have many of 'em mental powers

I don't believe there can be more than half a dozen people left who still believe her. She has admitted lying since 1995.

__________________
Olsen the moderator.

You can't.....believe me when I tell you, that many of us have tried over the last 10 years. The standard reply is that "our" science is flawed, and it is given without example, reason or discussion.

As you've stated, the only reason to point out the nonsense is to prevent the passionately credulous from becoming Nancy's prey.

At the behest of the Planet X believers at GLP, I paid a visit to Zetatalk.com and skimmed through some of the pages on the alleged Repulsion Force. What garbage!! This one is the first I stumbled across. It is one of the worse written and ridiculous things I’ve ever read, filled factual errors, mathematical mistakes, and a general misunderstanding of the Newtonian physics the authors are arguing against. If I didn’t know people took it seriously I would have found it a very humorous piece of satire.

Here are a few of the errors I found, and I read it so fast I'm sure I missed others:

According to present physics the density of the Sun is 1.41 g/cc, not 0.23 (or 0.25 as quoted elsewhere in the page).

This is completely false. Only the most massive heavyweight stars will end their lives as black holes. Middleweight stars will end up as neutron stars. Lightweight stars will do neither; they will end up as white dwarfs and then eventually black dwarfs. The more massive a star is, the more rare it is. The overwhelming majority of stars in the universe are of the lightweight variety. Proportionately, very few stars will end up as black holes.

According to the authors, SRF is the Stellar Repulsion Force. I’m assuming C is the speed of light, as in Einstein’s E=mc^2 equation. If we are to take what the authors say literally, we can write the equation,

MC^2 = 1,000,000 M

There are two problems here. Firstly, C^2 is equal to 9 X 10^16 m/s, which is way larger than 1,000,000. Secondly, the units do not match. On the left side of the equal sign we have kg-m^2/s^2 and on the right side we have kg. This is impossible because units on both side of an equal sign must match.

First off, I have no idea what “spherical motion” is supposed to be, but that is the least of the problem here. This is supposedly one of the cornerstones of the entire repulsion force theory, yet the authors have committed a MAJOR mathematic blunder. The authors claim that gravitational force, which they say should be equal to G=Mm/d, is reduced by 1/2 because 50% of the gravity is converted to retraction force. Well folks, 1/2 of Mm/d is Mm/2d, not Mm/d^2. If this piece of wisdom was passed down to us by the Zetas, then the Zetas can’t do simple algebra. They are a race of ignoramuses.

I agree with the first sentence here. Centrifugal force is the component of APPARENT force on a body in curvilinear motion, as observed from that body, that is directed away from the center of curvature. When describing the orbits of planets in Newtonian physics there is no such thing as centrifugal force. It is a common layman mistake to believe bodies in orbital motion stay in orbit because an inward force (gravity) exactly balances an outward force (centrifugal force). This is incorrect and the fact these authors, and others, are making such a layman mistake indicates they really don’t understand Newtonian physics.

In several pages I read on the Zetatalk site the authors write about alleged problems with Newtonian physics, specifically a supposed problem with the Moon’s orbit. Newtonian physics explains the Moon’s orbit PERFECTLY. The problem is the authors don’t know what they’re talking about. They try to blame Isaac Newton for their own ignorance; Newton’s laws work just fine.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

Hello Astronomy People,

I don't know much about astronomy, but existence of a tenth planet per se sounds entirely believable to me. I guess we would need to have a formal definition of "planet," since there are many thousands of natural objects in orbit around the sun. This bit about hovering in front of the sun in a cloud of dust sounds rather dodgy though.

Newbie here, making the first post after lurking for a while. So maybe this is well known and a foolish question, but what are Nibiru and the Zetas?

Edited to add: I just found out from the forum description (should have read it, #@#@#%@) what Nibiru is. But I still don't know what Zetas are.

The idea of a tenth planet was very popular for a long time. After the planet Uranus (the 7th planet) was discovered in 1781 it was found that its orbit wasn’t what it should be. There was still something out there perturbing it. A couple astronomers were able to derive from the perturbations where an eighth planet should be located. In 1846 this eighth planet, Neptune, was discovered as predicted.

After studying the orbits of Uranus and Neptune, it was found that there were still unexplained perturbations. This lead to the belief there was a ninth undiscovered planet. Percival Lowell was one of the astronomers who attempted to calculate a position of the ninth planet. In 1930 Pluto was discovered near his calculated position, but Pluto was far too small to be the cause of the perturbations. Its discovery was just a coincidence. This led to speculation a tenth planet was still out there somewhere.

As far as I know, the supposed perturbations of Uranus and Neptune have largely been explained as more accurate data has been obtained from the Voyager space probes. I don’t think any serious scientists still believe a tenth planet of any appreciable size exists.

Don’t feel bad, I’ve just learned about this stuff in the last few days. Supposedly, Nibiru is the name of a mythical planet that makes its appearance every 3,600 years, though I’m not familiar with the origin of the myth. According to the Planet X people it was suppose to appear in 2003. The fact it didn’t appear hasn’t stopped them from believing in it however.

Before I tell you about the Zetas you better make sure you’re sitting down. It’s also advisable to put down any beverages you may be drinking. The Zetas are an alien race that is communicating telepathically with their human emissary, Nancy Lieder. Nancy is the one who has been providing all information about Planet X as it is communicated to her by the Zetas. Apparently this Planet X is a pretty nasty character and has been responsible for global changes on Earth, such as pole shifts, every 3,600 years when it makes its appearance.

Planet X, about the size of Uranus Nancy tells us, is also capable of mind-numbing orbital maneuvers that are impossible to explain by our current Newtonian physics. This is because our current physics is wrong. The Zetas tells us a repulsive force that modern humans have yet to discover dominates the Universe. As best as I can tell, Earth is currently stopped in its orbit around the Sun and Planet X has parked itself directly between the Sun and us. Planet X remains hidden inside a cloud of dust.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

This is not sounding good!

I see! Just a guess - does Ms. Lieder have some nice books and DVDs for sale that explain all of this?

There are certain aspects of this which I do find "repulsive," but that's a different matter.

I was wondering why I was just sitting in my office chair the other day, minding my own business, and was suddenly and inexplicably hurled into the wall at 30,000 m/s. Now I know.

Well, I think scientists should really study the amazing diffusive properties of that dust which cause the light to bend around the planet perfectly and continue around the other side as if nothing were there.

Thanks for the info. I understand the quality of content is not your responsibility

You may be a first time poster here but you already know a great deal about how these hucksters work. Please see here.

Oh yes, please forgive my manners, welcome to BABB.

I’m still trying to figure out how the Zetas managed to get the entire universe rotating around the Earth to keep up the appearance of the regular seasonal progression of the heavens. Quite a feat don’t you think?

I suspect the Pentagon would certainly be interested. This stuff could advance our stealth technology by at least decades.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

Well, such information is too important to keep private

Thanks! Good to be here. Although I still haven't figured out why everything (and everyone, apparently including myself) is "bad" around here.

That would indeed be truly remarkable, but did you consider the possibility that a cloud of the same dust that surrounds Planet X is also swirling around Earth, distorting the light from the stars and creating the illusion of the seasonal progression?

Are the Zetas somehow responsible for the movement of Planet X, or do they only report on it (through their intermediary)? Or do I need to buy a book or DVD to find out?

I'm not sure what the answer to this one is, nor do I know why the Zetas have bothered to contact us. Perhaps somebody with more Planet X experience can answer for us.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

From the BA's (Bad Astronomer's) website
It is also a little bit of a play on "bad" meaning good.

And yes, welcome to BABB montebianco.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

Just to clarify a point to lessen the confusion. Generally on the PX forum we use "Planet X" to refer to Nancy and her delusions, and it was supposed to be here in 2003. "Nibiru" is a 10th planet proposed by Zacharia Sitchin that comes close to Earth every 3,600 years (but isn't due for centuries). Nancy stole a lot of her stuff from Sitchin when she created her 2003 doomsday scenario. A year or two ago there were a lot of Sitchin threads so it got confusing trying to sort out whether someone was referring to Nancy's imaginary planet or Sitchen's so many of us tried to use Nibiru only when referring to Sitchen.

Hope that helps!

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.

Thanks, TriangleMan.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

I have some vague recollection of a teacher in primary school (several decades ago) talking about a Planet X. But this incarnation was a rather well-behaved and quite shy intra-mercurial planet which quietly went about its business and allowed the other planets to go about theirs. It did not much resemble the Planet X being described here. He presented it as a possibility, not a fact, IIRC. Didn't much care for this teacher, for reasons having nothing to do with his discussion of Planet X.

Certainly! Thanks!

And as far as the referenced G(u)LP thread? Us Dayton boyz gotta represent, y'know, Bob? CiDney has arrived...I gotcher back, man...

My specialty in all this isn't planetary sizes or orbits or gravitational effects or any of the like. It's simply 'what it would take to see PX'. I have numerous levels of optics at home, with homemade (but made of professional material) filters for most of them. I have access to optics up to 20" diameter (and 7500mm f/l). Let's face it -- if you can't see something about 32,000 miles across that's somewhere between us and the Sun, it ain't there...let's split the difference and say it's halfway between us and the Sun, making it 46,500,000 miles away. That would make it better than 2 degrees across in the sky...which is 4x+ the size of the full moon!!! (If I've screwed up the math here, please feel free to correct me...it's been awhile since exercised the trigonometric functions). Any way you look at it, we should have been looking at it for a long long time...and while we've been looking for it, we've never looked at it...

I couldn't resist...just hadda chime in.

__________________
"If a tree is cut down in the rainforest, and is used to make paper to print a book, and the book is really bad, and there's nobody that will read it, do you still hear a sucking sound?"
Charlie in Dayton, A.AsC.

I seem to recall a lot of 1950s sci-fi mentioning Planet X, usually a place where the inhabitants needed Earth women! That Planet X was generally referring to an unknown planet somewhere in the solar system, probably past Pluto, but I don't think those versions had the planet coming close to Earth.

There was also the Planet X in the 1930s to 60s. Astronomers thought there was a slight problem with Neptune's orbit and this indicated that there was a large planet further out that was affecting Neptune. Better data on Neptune's orbit and mass from the Voyager probes dispelled that notion.

Oddly enough there probably are large rocky bodies in the Oort Cloud as large as a planet, which means that there actually are undiscovered planets in the solar system. Unfortunately for doomsayers such bodies do not come close to Earth every 3,600 years, nor do they have telepathic aliens on them (but the jury is still out as to whether they need our women) :wink:

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.

So per Hollywood Planet X is Mars!

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

Hi, Charlie! I wondered who CiDney was; nice post at GLP.

By the way, I love your advertisement.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

I’d like to add to the above. I know an astronautical engineer who did quite a bit of work on the Planet X problem, at least into the 1990s. He used a sophisticated computer program to analyze residuals in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune to see if they could be explained by a yet undiscovered tenth planet. I asked him yesterday if he believes the residual problem has gone away. Here’s what he said:

I don't know how widespread this belief is, but to at least some, it’s not an entirely dead issue.

edit grammar

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

Yes that is true, there is no evidence that a tenth planet exists and it is not possible for a tenth planet which visits the inner solar system to exist. However it is not impossible for a tenth planet to lie at a distance of a couple of thousand AU, there is however no evidence to suggest it does.

__________________
Its better tae meddle wi the deil............

How do we know this? Is the answer that, in order to avoid direct observation or gravitational effects on the other planets, it would have to be so small that we wouldn't call it a planet? Also, should this be interpreted to mean "which has visited the inner solar system in the last few hundred years"? Might there be an object which is currently very distant, but which has a highly elliptical orbit? Or can we rule that out based on some argument?

Just in case it isn't clear, I am in no way advocating any theory for the existence of a tenth planet, just trying to understand the arguments.

That is interesting to know, any chance you can get some more information? If you can you should post it in the General Astronomy or ATM forum since, IIRC, most people here thought the 'Neptune problem' was resolved long ago so you should give them a heads-up about your friend's work.

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.