Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
2012 Nibiru

2012 Nibiru

Ratings: (0)|Views: 98 |Likes:
Published by starmania831
will Nibiru return in 2012
will Nibiru return in 2012

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: starmania831 on May 31, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nNZOjDi_dQ&feature=player_embeddedNibiruhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpN_KD7b0NQ&feature=player_embeddedINTRODUCTIONDoes our solar system contain a tenth planet on an extremely long and ellipticalorbit? Does an elusive tenth planet still lurk undiscovered in the distant darkdepths of space?Astronomers are indeed sufficiently certain of such a planet's existence that they have already given it a name - 'Planet X', i.e. the Tenth Planet.But does this mysterious planet still exist or was it long ago ejected from our solar systemor else destroyed?And what possible connection might there be between Planet X and ancient legendsof a god named Marduk or Nibiru?THE SEARCH FOR PLANET XIn 1978, the theory of Planet X took a giant leap forward when Robert Harringtonand Tom Van Flandern from the US Naval Observatory in Washington DC began to study new scientific data on the mass of Pluto and its satellite Charon. With thisnew data, the two astronomers were able to determine that the orbits of Uranusand Neptune had been disturbed by the gravitational pull of an as yet unidentified celestial body. In short, the two scientists had found new evidence for the old idea of the Tenth Planet.Harrington and Van Flandern went on to use sophisticated computer modelling to propose that the Tenth Planet, named Planet X, had somehow ejected Pluto and Charon from their previous positions as satellites of Neptune.[2] They proposed thatPlanet X might have been an 'intruder planet' which had been captured in orbitaround the Sun 'in a highly eccentric and inclined solar orbit with a long period'. Harrington and Van Flandern's calculations suggested that Planet X would have been 3-4 times the size of the EarthIn 1982, NASA themselves officially recognised the possibility of Planet X, withan announcement that 'some kind of mystery object is really there - far beyondthe outermost planets'.One year later, the newly launched IRAS (Infrared Astronomical Satellite) spotted a large mysterious object in the depths of space. The Washington Post summarised an interview with the chief IRAS scientist from JPL, California, as follows:A heavenly body possibly as large as the giant planet Jupiter and possibly so close to Earth that it would be part of this solar system has been found in the direction of the constellation Orion by an orbiting telescope... 'All I can tell you is that we don't know what it is', said Gerry Neugebauer, chief IRAS scientist.Subsequent years saw little new information in the search for Planet X. Scientists, however, continued to carry out mathematical modelling of its characteristics. Their experiments suggested that Planet X was three to four times the size ofEarth and had an orbit inclined to the ecliptic by a massive 30 degrees; also that its position was three times farther from the Sun than Pluto.In 1987, NASA made an official announcement to recognise the possible existenceof Planet X. The American journal 'Newsweek' reported that: NASA held a press conference at its Ames Research Center in California last week to make a rather strange announcement: an eccentric 10th planet may - or may not - be orbiting theSun. John Anderson, a NASA research scientist who was the principal speaker, has
a hunch Planet X is out there, though nowhere near the other nine. If he is right, two of the most intriguing puzzles of space science might be solved: what caused mysterious irregularities in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune during the nineteenth century? And what killed off the dinosaurs 26 million years ago ?But as the 1980s drew to a close, the scientific journals began to witness a Planet X debunking campaign and now, as we enter the new millennium, few astronomers are willing to admit the possibility that a tenth planet might have existed ormight still exist. They prefer to think that the old records of the deviationsin the orbits of Uranus and Neptune were somehow incorrect.MY OWN SEARCH FOR PLANET XIt was in 1989 that I was first made aware of the Planet X theory, thanks to theAmerican author Zecharia Sitchin and his book 'The Twelfth Planet'.In 'The Twelfth Planet', Sitchin cited the modern search for Planet X in order to provide scientific backing for his interpretation of certain Mesopotamian legends. According to Sitchin's interpretation of these legends, Earth had been visited long ago by a race of extraterrestrial gods known as the Anunnaki, whose home planet had been involved in a catastrophic encounter with the proto-Earth billions of years ago. In Sitchin's opinion, the home planet of these gods was noneother than the elusive Planet X which was being sought by modern astronomers.Intrigued by Sitchin's research, I devoted an entire chapter to Planet X in my 1996 book 'Gods of the New Millennium' and I suggested that the planet was currently at the most distant point (the apogee) in its highly elliptical orbit. The big question was when Planet X would return. It was a question made all the moreimportant by Sitchin's claim that the planet was populated by an intelligent, human-like race of 'gods'.With hindsight, many of my comments in 'Gods of the New Millennium' (1996) wereill-conceived. More pertinent by far are my remarks in 'The Phoenix Solution' (1998), which benefit substantially from the input of the American astronomer TomVan Flandern - the man at the heart of the search for Planet X.IS 'PLANET X' A 'PLANET EX'?According to Tom Van Flandern, it is entirely possible that Planet X began its career in our solar system as a distant outer planet, which was disturbed from its orbit by the force of a passing dwarf star. This interaction would have causedPlanet X to veer into the heart of the solar system, towards a fateful encounter with one of the inner planets.In his book 'Dark Matter, Missing Planets & New Comets', Van Flandern wroteas follows: 'Statistically, a few passing stars would approach within 40 times Pluto's distance of the Sun over the life of the solar system. They would tend toperturb the outermost planets... into planet-crossing orbits. Eventually the crossings would result in close encounters between planets.'According to Van Flandern, this perturbation process was not only feasible but inevitable, given the existence of planets in such distant orbits.Van Flandern noted, however, that once Planet X had been forced inwards, it would suffer repeated encounters with the other planets, eventually leading to its ejection from the solar system. Van Flandern confirmed that such a planet-crossing orbit was highly unstable and unlikely to last for more than 100,000 years, mainly due to the powerful influence of Jupiter, by far the largest planet of thesolar system:If Planet X crosses Jupiter's orbit, it is a goner, either by collision with Jupiter or ejection from the solar system, within 100,000 years... The encounters with Jupiter are not merely potential, but inevitable, because of forced precessi
on of the orbit by Jupiter... Jupiter's gravity is so strong that it can eliminate another body in a single close approach.Might it be the case, then, that Planet X is no longer part of our solar systembut was long ago ejected into the depths of space?But there is yet a further twist to the Planet X story. In his 1995 paper 'Origins of Trans-Neptunian Asteroids', Van Flandern reacted to the recent discovery of a new asteroid belt lying deep in space beyond the planet Neptune by suggesting that Planet X might have exploded - the asteroids being its fragments.Four years later, in the September 1999 edition of 'Meta Research Bulletin', VanFlandern reacted to the discovery of yet more Trans-Neptunian asteroids by issuing the following statement:'[The discovery of] Three more trans-Neptunian objects confirm the presence of asecond asteroid belt in the region beyond Neptune. This probably indicates thatthe hypothetical Planet X is now an asteroid belt rather than an intact planet.'Might Planet X now be a 'Planet Ex'?MARDUK AND PLANET XIn his book 'The Twelfth Planet' (1976), Zecharia Sitchin added a new dimensionto the Planet X debate with his contention that ancient astronomers had referredto the intruder planet using the names 'Marduk' and 'Nibiru'.To deal with Marduk first, Sitchin rested his case upon the ancient Babylonian Epic of Creation known as 'Enuma Elish'. In Sitchin's view, the Epic has Marduk originate from the abyss of space as an intruder planet. This planet Marduk thenunderwent various encounters with the outer planets of our solar system, followed by a climactic and catastrophic encounter with a planet named Tiamat. According to Sitchin's interpretation of the Enuma Elish, the scarred planet Tiamat wasshifted by the impact of Marduk's satellites into a new orbit to become the Earth, acquiring in the process a Moon (named 'Kingu' in the Epic) which was previously the moon of Tiamat. Marduk, meanwhile, sailed off into space to begin a vastelliptical orbit which would bring it back to the site of the celestial battleevery 3,600 years.In 1997, I wrote to Tom Van Flandern in an attempt to correlate Sitchin's theorywith what appeared to be a similar myth in the ancient Egyptian texts. But VanFlandern stopped me in my tracks by informing me that Sitchin's interpretation of Enuma Elish was in total discord with the laws of celestial dynamics.In response to Sitchin's proposal that the Earth had had its orbit changed physically as a result of a collision with another planet in the vicinity of the asteroid belt, Van Flandern pointed out to me that:A major collision must change theorbit because it changes the momentum of the planet. The new and old orbits must share a common point at the site of the encounter. So a collision cannot takea planet from one circular orbit to another because such orbits have no points in common.In other words, it was impossible according to the laws of celestial dynamics for Planet X to have shunted Earth from an orbit in the asteroid belt to her present orbit,because the new orbit does not share a common point with an old orbit in the asteroid belt. Van Flandern also commented that:The least probable orbit to result from a random momentum change [i.e. a collision] is the circular orbit, which in a sense is the most relaxed, least energeticorbit for that distance from the Sun.Since the Earth's orbit was almost perfectly circular, Van Flandern ruled out an

Activity (10)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
martian2002 liked this
Abhijit Juvekar liked this
donneperth liked this
zacx zamx liked this
hoseinsho liked this
hoseinsho liked this
newmanvr liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->