Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Its not Nibiru but high eccentricities can exist in the sola

  1. #1
    Guest

    Its not Nibiru but high eccentricities can exist in the sola

    Note: This is not an argument in favor of Nirbiru ... I know that we are not being visited every 3600 years by Px. I know that the Lieder orbit around a dark star at the other focus is absurd on its face.

    A while ago I asserted that we could not simply dismiss woo woo theories about Nibiru by saying that such orbits were unstable and could not exist in the solar system. My point was (and is) that we must have our own facts straight when we argue with these folks. A recent set of observations provide a case in point. Object 2003 WT42 appears to have a semimajor axis of 566 AUs, a period of 13479 years, and an eccentricity of 0.9908. Such an orbit is probably not stable for billions of years but could well be stable for at least a few dozen orbits so for much longer than the historical record. Note again, this is not Px, Nibiru, etc.
    ************************************************** *****
    FROM THE MINOR PLANET MAILING LIST [Nov 25, 2003]. For the full text or to subscribe, please visit:
    MPML Home page: http://www.bitnik.com/mp
    MPML FAQ: http://www.bitnik.com/mp/MPML-FAQ.html
    MPML's Yahoogroups page: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/mpml
    ---------------------------------------------------
    Orbital elements: 2003 WT42
    Epoch 2003 Oct. 28.0 TT = JDT 2452940.5 MPC
    M 359.93442 (2000.0) P Q
    n 0.00007312 Peri. 92.03620 -0.66204400 -0.64110580
    a 566.3900241 Node 48.37718 +0.28968510 -0.69658126
    e 0.9907593 Incl. 31.28374 +0.69121653 -0.32211474
    P 13479 H 9.2 G 0.15
    >From 81 observations 2003 Oct. 30-Nov. 24.

    2003 WT42 a,e,i =566.39, 0.99, 31 q = 5.2339

    -->some time in the future, the object will perhaps be captured on a low-q / low-Q orbit (such as P/Lexell, although, since the inclination is not small --I surmise that if Q can take a high value, it can also be modified the other way around--, one may question the possibility to ezxchange q and Q), thus becoming a short period comet of the size of comet Hale-Bopp! Too bad that we have to wait at least 13,500 years to know!

    M. Festou.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    MPML is supported in part via the 2002 Shoemaker NEO Grant Program of The Planetary Society (http://www.planetary.org)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    205
    Yes, the idea to have one's facts straight is a good one. A full bore
    SuperWooWoo will never be convinced by such silly things as facts,science, hard evidence etc. But for those who are sincerely
    seeking answers, the truth will be quite sufficent and well borne
    out by hard facts. These can be dicovered by a person on their own
    by doing some simple research/fact checking at any good bookstore
    or public library.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    3,108
    I think one of the major arguments against the orbital parameters of Nibiru had to do with it's violation of celestial mechanics. JS Princeton addressed the technical aspects of this along with foxd on a neighboring thread. I don't dispute there can be "rocks" out there with eccentric orbits, my major beef with Nibiru is the size of this mythical planet and the lack of evidence for it's existence and past actions. Nibiru supposedly penetrated the solar system to such a degree that it was cited for causing things like the Great Flood, etc on Earth and yet didn't seem to affect the orbits of other planets based on current observations. Besides, my skeptical woowoo alarm goes off when only a small handful of people claim to know the real truth about things whether it's Planet X, Nibiru, the Face on Mars, Pyramid Power, or (substitute any woowooism here).

    Regarding Nibiru's orbit, I did some net-searching of Nibiru's supposed orbital track and came across this from here . I know those sympathetic to Sitchin could claim this was gleaned from a non-sympathetic source, and based on the discussions I've read, it is. My purpose is to showcase the orbit Nibiru supposedly must have according to Sitchin, and only added the source of this link to credit the author. I don't know about the rest of you, but this orbit ascribed to a planet the size of Nibiru looks pretty far out (pun intended) to me.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    11,227
    Of course objects can have high eccentricities; many comets have them very close to 1 (parabolic orbits).

    But they can't have them for long. That's my point.

    A comet can come in with high e, but over many orbits it will eventually interact with Jupiter or other planets and get its orbit modified. It will either drop into a lower e, smaller orbit or get ejected from the solar system.

    Now, that's for a low mass comet. A planet with a high-e would do a lot of damage as well. It would interact with the inner planets, changing orbits and making a mess of things. Venus has an orbit that is virtually 0 eccentricity-- a circle. That is an excellent indication that no large object has passed near it for many millions of years.

    That is the main reason (besides simply not seeing it) that a planet as described by McCanney and Lieder cannot exist.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by Archer17
    Regarding Nibiru's orbit, I did some net-searching of Nibiru's supposed orbital track and came across this from here . I know those sympathetic to Sitchin could claim this was gleaned from a non-sympathetic source, and based on the discussions I've read, it is. My purpose is to showcase the orbit Nibiru supposedly must have according to Sitchin, and only added the source of this link to credit the author. I don't know about the rest of you, but this orbit ascribed to a planet the size of Nibiru looks pretty far out (pun intended) to me.
    Looking at this shows that if Nibiru existed and was going to pass in 2012 then it should already be inside the orbit of Neptune and visible. I suppose we will hear the usual round of claims of government coverup. (Unless the woo-woos think they actually did something to get government attention. )

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    554
    Can you imagine the shock on the Anunnanki's faces when their plans for the reconquering of Earth are thwarted by their planet and moon system being ejected into interstellar space?

    No?

    Well neither can I since they are fictious anyhow.

    Heh.

Similar Threads

  1. Nibiru
    By red supergiant in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 113
    Last Post: 2010-Apr-14, 01:18 PM
  2. Ebay Eccentricities
    By DippyHippy in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 2004-Sep-29, 01:07 AM
  3. MARS : High quality, High-res retouched Pano (Color)
    By majic in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 2004-Jan-25, 05:25 AM
  4. UFO's & Nibiru
    By HankSolo in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 168
    Last Post: 2003-Mar-22, 06:52 AM
  5. There is no Nibiru
    By Zap in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 172
    Last Post: 2003-Feb-26, 03:57 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •