Okay, I'll bite. The computers I build are used for (among other things) n-body Kuiper belt gravimetrics. Point me at some of the models you're talking about.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Hi Jay.

The computer model I refer to is the one from Lykawka at Kobe University.

The recent discoveries are those by Matese, Whitmire, Brown and others (cometary wake, Sedna, CR105, 2003DW, etc).

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Why don't we wait until the OP comes back before this thread continues?

Pete

__________________
PJE

There's so much I don't know about astrophysics. I wish I had read that book by that wheelchair guy.

Which is arguing for another world .3 to .7 the mass of Earth. For comparison, a brown dwarf (what the OP is talking about) would be over 4000 times the mass of earth. There is no evidence for a closely orbiting brown dwarf, or a planet heading into the inner solar system.

As I said before, it would be great if something like that was found, but we'll have to wait and see.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Tenths of Earth-masses. Not relevant. Further, the model runs in this study were about an order of magnitude less complex than the state of the art in 2003, when I looked at the Kuiper belt gravitation problem. Lykawka's runs were considerably coarsely discretized by the mass of the hypothesized objects. This is all probably due to limited resources availability, but the nature of the models makes coarse discretization an issue.

Good research, for what it is, but not in the least persuasive of a massive object headed this way.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Maybe relevant, maybe not:

A popular misconception about Philolaus is that he supposed that a sphere of the fixed stars, the five planets, the Sun, Moon and Earth, all moved round his Central Fire, but as these made up only nine revolving bodies, he conceived in accordance with his number theory a tenth, which he called Counter-Earth. This fallacy grows largely out of Aristotle's attempt to lampoon his ideas in his book, Metaphysics.

In reality, Philolaus' ideas predated the idea of spheres by hundreds of years, and the Counter-Earth was conceived to explain his revolutionary ideas about the lack of up or down in space to the Pythagorean community.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philolaus

I agree, all we can do is wait and see.
If it's there, WISE should find it; as a matter of fact, one of the mission goals is to locate Brown Dwarfs between our sun and the nearest stars.

But the OP states, "Whatever it may be, a brown dwarf, a large planet, an unidentified body that may be invading our solar system." so I don't the s/he was speaking of a brown dwarf exclusively.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Is there any research you know of which persuasively explains the cometary "wake", the kuiper "cliff", the odd orbits of some TNOs etc. (those things cited as evidence of a perturber body)?

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Is there any research you know of which persuasively explains the cometary "wake", the kuiper "cliff", the odd orbits of some TNOs etc. (those things cited as evidence of a perturber body)?

None that I know of. Lykawka's hypothesis is as good as any to explain that, although it would need more work and some observational validation. It just doesn't fit the brown dwarf scenario for Nibiru.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

What, according to you, is the "brown dwarf scenario for Nibiru"?


And what would be your best guess at an explanation for the observations cited as evidence for a perturber body in our system?

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

The scenario is a supposed brown dwarf with a period of thousands of years, on a highly elliptical orbit which takes it from beyond the orbit of Pluto to within the orbit of Earth.

Such a scenario is impossible because if an event like a brown dwarf cruising through our system had ever happened the orbits of all the planets would be very elliptical and they're not. They're nearly circular.

Not entirely so; the nearest it is supposed to come is the asteroid belt, from below the ecliptic.

There was an orbital modeller we had here some time ago that showed a body up to .08Mj entering the system and did not disrupt the circular orbits.

I'll see if I can locate it.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Still, .08 Mj is still 14 times too small to be a brown dwarf.

And the Nibiru freakout involves thinking that the object will come close enough to Earth to severely affect us, and I don't see that happening from a distance of approximately 200 million miles.

Well, the Nibiru freakout, as you say, comes from people with partial knowledge or insight into what Sitchin wrote.

Then again, it could well have come from Carl Sagan and his hypothetical "death star."

But you're right, .08 Mj is too small to be a brown dwarf, which is why I suspect that if such a perturber body exists and enters the solar system, it will be a satellite (planet?) which orbits the brown dwarf, not the brown dwarf itself.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

And it still wouldn't apply. It wouldn't be a large planet, and it wouldn't be invading our solar system.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

How is an object orbiting something the size of Jupiter doing so with such huge eccentricity that it can pass through our solar system while the brown dwarf remains outside at sufficient distance to be undetectable and not getting captured by the many other massive objects (like the Sun) it encounters on the way?

__________________
"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common: They don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views." The Doctor, Doctor Who: The Face of Evil.

Well, that's a reliable source.

__________________
All Moderation in Purple
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

What brown dwarf are you referring to?

What distance from the sun do you mean by "entering the solar system"?

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

What, according to you, is the "brown dwarf scenario for Nibiru"?

That Nibiru is a brown dwarf.

And what would be your best guess at an explanation for the observations cited as evidence for a perturber body in our system?

I don't have a guess. However, the observations you referred to do not allow for a perturbing body of anywhere near the mass of the hypothetical Niburu. Mass matters in gravitational simulations. A lot.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

But you're right, .08 Mj is too small to be a brown dwarf, which is why I suspect that if such a perturber body exists and enters the solar system, it will be a satellite (planet?) which orbits the brown dwarf, not the brown dwarf itself.

So the gravity of the brown dwarf's satellite is significant on TNOs, but not the gravity of the brown dwarf itself...

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Rogue Star?
http://janus.astro.umd.edu/orbits/rstar.html

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

How is this possible? Are you saying the perturber is orbiting something other than the sun? Am I correct you are saying it is a massive planet orbiting another nearby star which we have not found?

A.Dim there are only so many ways to "interpret" what Sitchin wrote and a quick visit to his 'official' website demonstrates that the man is barely on the fringe of orthodoxy.

http://www.sitchin.com/
He makes many other claims which are outside the scope of this thread so we need not discuss them here, but I'm not understanding your defense of his ideas other than, you and he share a belief in a planet-x scenario and you and he believe that earth has been visited by aliens in the past.

All we can do is wait and see.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Hi Jason.

I don't know, I'm guessing.
Perturber hypotheses vary widely from having it with an extremely distant circular orbit to it having a much less distant yet elliptical inclined orbit.
I merely speculate on what might account for both.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

The alleged brown dwarf binary companion to our sun.
3-5AU is entering our solar system but there again, I consider the kuiper cliff as "in" the solar system at what, 50some AU?

I'm speculating how we might reconcile the various distances given for its orbit which vary from 90,000AU to 20,000AU to 50someAU to 3-5AU.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Certainly, and just as with the distance issues so too are there issues with its suggested sizes.
I don't mind guessing, a little.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Great question; I don't know.
If the alleged perturber is a brown dwarf in orbit around the sun, engaged in an elliptical binary dance, and has a "planetary" system of its own, I wonder if the brown dwarf isn't responsible for the most distant observations suggestive of a perturber while its satellites responsible for the nearest.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

That's it; thanks, Jim!

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Yes, just as most known stars are in a binary, or more, system, I think ours may be as well.

I agree and have never said otherwise.

Thanks!

Yes, I think it entirely plausible, I daresay probable, the Earth has been visited (if not colonized )by ETs.

But I'm not so much defending Sitchin's ideas as correcting misinfo and errant assumptions about his work, and proffering insight as to why refutations & criticisms have failed to disprove his theory.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

I wonder if the brown dwarf isn't responsible for the most distant observations suggestive of a perturber while its satellites responsible for the nearest.

Except that the best model so far (or at least the one you're referring to) that explains the observable TNO behavior (Lykawka's) also narrowly requires a single perturber circling our sun in order for the model to work at all. You can't just replace one perturber with two, change what they orbit, and fiddle with their masses by orders of magnitude and remain faithful to the data or model, any more than you can replace a violinist with a sumo wrestler in a concert and call them both equivalent performers.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base