Planet X

Feelgood

Right guys,

Trying to settle an argument here, was in the boozer with a mate of mine over the xmas period and he started harping on about something known only as Planet X and apparently it only passes through the earths atmosphere every 36000 years or something and when it does we are all rightly fu*ked.

Apparently its due to pass around 2009.....

Anyone ever heard of this at all?. I've wiki'd it and it seems to be have disproven but then there are a series of websites that claim Nasa are hiding the information about it so that we don't get global panic etc..

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

are these the same websites that say men never landed on the moon?

Feelgood

Mordeth wrote: »

are these the same websites that say men never landed on the moon?

Not really, the websites are claiming that yes it does exist and that Nasa know about it though its all a bit hush hush....

I even managed to find a website that has top 10 Planet X survival tips....I rather liked tip no.7....Ensure you have an ample amount of batteries and a flashlamp.....

Feelgood

Have a look at the following book....

http://www.amazon.com/Planet-Forecast-2012-Survival-Guide/dp/1597720755

mike65

Planet X is part of the Kuiper Belt/Oort Cloud

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/29jul_planetx.htm

Mike.

Feelgood

mike65 wrote: »

Planet X is part of the Kuiper Belt/Oort Cloud

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/29jul_planetx.htm

Mike.

Cheers Mike,

Have you heard anything about how its gonna kill us all off??.

mike65

Er its not. Larger celestial bodies have defined orbits that can be calculated into infinity basicly
and if a planet-type object were "on the move" no-one could keep it secret as any good amature astronomer could spot the movement and plot its course these days.

Mike.

Feelgood

mike65 wrote: »

Er its not.

Mike.

Exactly the answer I was looking for thank you!.

mike65

http://star.arm.ac.uk/impact-hazard/

Mike.

Spear

mike65 wrote: »

Planet X is part of the Kuiper Belt/Oort Cloud

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/29jul_planetx.htm

Mike.

I suspect he's referring to the crank version

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planetx/

slade_x

Planet X refers to a hypothetical planet beyond neptune

Pluto was thought to be planet x upon discovery.

Note: I have linked some words to wikipedia for a better explanation

The belief in planet x came from a discrepancy between Neptune and Uranus's orbit

At the beginning of the 20th century, many astronomers speculated about the existence of a planet beyond Neptune. The discovery of Neptune resulted from calculations of the mathematicians John Couch Adams and Urbain Le Verrier to explain discrepancies between the calculated and observed orbits of Uranus, Saturn, and Jupiter.
After the discovery of Neptune, however there still were some slight discrepancies in those orbits, and also in the orbit of Neptune itself. These were taken to indicate the existence of yet another planet orbiting beyond Neptune.

Percival Lowell, who is most well known for his claims of having observed canals on Mars, called this hypothetical planet "Planet X". He performed two searches for it without success, the first ending in 1909, and after revising his prediction for where it should be found, the second from 1913 to 1915, after which Lowell published his mathematical hypothesis of the parameters for Planet X. Ironically, at his observatory that year, two faint images of Pluto were recorded, but were not recognized as planets at the time.

Data from Voyager 2's flyby of Neptune, which had revised the planet's total mass downward by 0.5 percent, to recalculate its gravitational effect on Uranus. This explained the discrepancies. There is no Planet X

Eris (2003 UB313) was found in 2003 and is located in the scattered disc which is a region of space that lies just beyond the kuiper belt and slightly overlaps

Eris has a moon called Dysnomia


There are 8 known planets in our solar system:
Mercury
Venus
Earth
Mars
Jupiter
Saturn
Uranus
Neptune

and 2 dwarf planets
Pluto
Eris

You may also want to read up on a hypothetical dwarf star called Nemesis, As this may be what you think you are referring too

Nemesis is a hypothetical red dwarf or brown dwarf star, orbiting the Sun at a distance of about 50,000 to 100,000 AU, somewhat beyond the Oort cloud. The existence of this star was postulated in an attempt to explain an inferred periodicity in the rate of biological extinction in the geological record.

In 1984 paleontologists David Raup and Jack Sepkoski published a paper claiming that they had identified a statistical periodicity in extinction rates over the last 250 million years using various forms of time series analysis.[1] They focused on the extinction intensity of fossil families of marine vertebrates, invertebrates, and protozoans, identifying 12 extinction events over the time period in question. The average time interval between extinction events was determined as 26 million years. At the time, two of the identified extinction events (Cretaceous-Tertiary and Late Eocene) could be shown to coincide with large impact events. Although Raup and Sepkoski could not identify the cause of their supposed periodicity, they suggested that there might be a non-terrestrial connection. The challenge to propose a mechanism was quickly addressed by several teams of astronomers.

Two teams of astronomers, Whitmire and Jackson, and Davis, Hut and Muller, independently published a similar hypothesis to explain Raup and Sepkoski's supposed extinction periodicity in the same issue of the journal Nature.[2][3] This hypothesis proposes that the sun may have an as yet undetected companion star that periodically disturbs comets in the Oort cloud, causing a large increase in the number of comets visiting the inner solar system with a consequential increase in impact events on Earth. This became known as the Nemesis (death star) hypothesis.
If it does exist, the exact nature of Nemesis is uncertain. Richard A. Muller suggests that the most likely object is a red dwarf with magnitude between 7 and 12,[4] while Daniel P. Whitmire and Albert A. Jackson argue for a brown dwarf. If a red dwarf, it would undoubtedly already exist in star catalogs, but its true nature would only be detectable by measuring its parallax; due to orbiting the Sun it would have a very low proper motion and would escape detection by proper motion surveys that have found stars like the 9th magnitude Barnard's star.
The last major extinction event was about 5 million years ago, so Muller posits that Nemesis is likely 1-1.5 light years away at present, and even has ideas of what area of the sky it might be in (supported by Yarris, 1987), near Hydra, based on a hypothetical orbit derived from original apogees of a number of atypical long period comets that describe an orbital arc meeting the specifications of Muller's hypothesis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemesis_%28star%29


Please dont read to much into conspiracy theories

There is no impending doom and the world is not ending. People really need to get over their fascination with the end of the world and get on with the rest of their life.

Kernel

Nibiru?

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread323689/pg3

User45701

Ive read the theroy on nemesis before its a good idea but i doubt it. I would say its something we dont know about/have never seen, something new and unseen. Dark Matter would expain several asyet unexplained gravational effects.

I watched a show on dark energy and im no scientist but i dont think there is such a thing as dark energy. Not the way the show described it, apparently this dark energy is what is causing the universe to expand and it will evuentlly pull all matter and molocules in the universe apart. I dont see this happending. A collection of dark matter on a outer orbit should explain several gravational effects we have yet to understand

Captain Chaos

Speaking of Planet X there is a new article on Newscientist about it, there seems to be a new big search for it and it is determined that if it does exist that it will be found within the next 5 years and is estimated to be about the same size as Earth.

http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19726381.600-the-mystery-of-planet-x.html

slade_x

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Speaking of Planet X there is a new article on Newscientist about it, there seems to be a new big search for it and it is determined that if it does exist that it will be found within the next 5 years and is estimated to be about the same size as Earth.

http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19726381.600-the-mystery-of-planet-x.html

That isnt about planet x, The famous "planet x" was imagined into existance because scientists had incorrectly estimated neptunes mass

As for the planet proposed in that article that is an entirely different proposed body to try to understand a different situation. I do not think we have enough information/ knowledge on the kuiper belt to come to the conclusion that there is an elusive massive body lerking undetected in the kuiper belt. There may very well be but i just dont know; There has never been a probe sent to the kuiper belt region. I'd say there may even be a lot of inaccurate predictions about that unknown region of our solar system to date.

AtomicHorror

slade_x wrote: »

That isnt about planet x, The famous "planet x" was imagined into existance because scientists had incorrectly estimated neptunes mass

As for the planet proposed in that article that is an entirely different proposed body to try to understand a different situation. I do not think we have enough information/ knowledge on the kuiper belt to come to the conclusion that there is an elusive massive body lerking undetected in the kuiper belt. There may very well be but i just dont know; There has never been a probe sent to the kuiper belt region. I'd say there may even be a lot of inaccurate predictions about that unknown region of our solar system to date.

The revived Planet X hypothesis follows on from observations of the "Kuiper cliff", a sudden drop-off in the frequency of objects in the belt at a radius of about 55AU from the sun. There's primary literature which seems to rule out observational bias. So the suggestion made by some (Alan Stern, I think) is the gravitational influence of a 1 E mass body. If real, it would represent an actual planet by the current definition.

For thoughts on the end of the world, perhaps read Neil Gaiman's "Signal to Noise"