Re: Planet X: (Science News) A Comet's Odd Orbit Hints at Hidden Planet
In Article <[email protected]> Sam Wormley wrote:
> Readers are encouraged to read the paper at:
> http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0103435
> ABSTRACT
> By telescopic tracking, we have established that the orbit of the
> trans-neptunian object (2000 CR105) has a perihelion of about 44 au,
> and is thus outside the domain controlled by strong gravitational
> close encounters with Neptune. Because this object is on a very large,
> eccentric orbit (with semimajor axis a about 216 au and eccentricity e
> of 0.8) this object must have been placed on this orbit by a gravitational
> perturbation which is NOT direct gravitational scattering off
> of any of the giant planets (on their current orbits).
The Zetas wish to comment:
The gravitational perturbation, indeed, is outside your
solar system but affecting ALL your planets steadily,
and by more than a gravitational pull. There is confusion,
in understanding the nature of the Planet X eccentric
orbit and the effect it and your Sun's dark binary twin,
because man is struggling to reconcile this new
information with existing astrophysics theories and the
math formulas used to describe them. Somehow they all
MUST fit, and they don't. The problem lies with the
theories and formulas, though few throw them aside as
then they feel adrift, without an anchor. The insecure
slam shut the doors, close out new information, and
develop the closed-mind syndrome recently under
discussion here on sci.astro.
For those not closed minded, we will describe the
eccentric orbit of Planet X, between your Sun and its
dark twin. This unlit binary sun lies some 18.74 times
the distance from your Sun to Pluto, at a 11 degree
angle from the ecliptic, in the direction of the
constellation of Orion. Though farther away, twice the
distance or more, from where Planet X rides at the
moment, it is a large gravitational giant, and thus
between these two binaries Planet X is caught in a
highly elliptical orbit. This orbit does NOT fit into
man's astrophysics theories, and thus it cannot be
described by the math used by man to describe comet
or orbit behavior. Yet the orbit makes sense, if one
puts the dictates of man's current theories aside.
There is a desk-top toy composed of several metal
balls hung in a line from a wooden frame, which
when set in motion causes the end balls to swing out,
then return to bump all the balls in the row until the
ball on the OPPOSITE end swings out in an equal
manner, thence continuing until gravity wears the
motion down to a stop. This toy is a simple example
that an object WILL stop, when "escaping" a gravity
pull, and return toward that gravity pull by reversing
its course. That most known planets or moons go
AROUND their gravitational giants is due to a
phenomena of gravity we have termed the Repulsion
Force, though it is simply gravity particles spurting
out from large bodies such that they are kept apart
like two fire hoses turned on one another.
Planet X, like the balls in the desk-top toy described,
slings back and forth between its two gravitational
foci, returning on almost exactly the same path. Its
momentum causes it to overshoot a focus, then like
the balls in the toy, to return on the same path after
coming to a full stop. Why would it NOT do that,
when both foci are directly behind it? This is
equivalent to the end ball in the toy, dropping back
toward Earth due to gravity. When approaching one
of its suns, Planet X picks up speed, as the end ball
does when dropping, and thus acts like a comet when
coming through the solar system. It shoots
THROUGH the solar system, its speed causing it to
bypass the sun. Once past, with both gravitational
pulls behind it, it stops, as the end ball in the toy
does, and then returns on the same path, as the end
ball does.
This is not a curved orbit, it is a sling orbit,
and for those who would argue that such an orbit
cannot exist, we would point to the desk-top toy,
where the end ball returns SO PRECISELY that it
connects with the other balls in the toy line-up so
that the motion repeats itself with only gravity
bringing it to an eventual halt. The back and forth
sling is a return trip, as the toy demonstrates. The
difference between Planet X and the desk-top toy
is that the toy had its major gravity pull in the center,
bringing the motion to a stop, where Planet X has
dual gravitaional pulls at the ends of its sling orbit,
which keeps the slinging motion going.
ZetaTalk