SECOND SUN VISIBLE IN SKY!



Page 1 of 3 [ 37 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page:

hale_bopp
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:00 pm
Posts: 16099
Location: New Zealand

Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:53 am

Anyone seen it yet? There seems to be another star caught in orbit of our sun. It's not just bullsh*t, because I have taken several photos of it to accompany all the videos and photos taken all over the world of the second sun, the "dark star" or the "nemesis star".

If you don't believe me, grab a digi cam and take some pics of the sun on a clear day. You should be able to see the nemsis star in your photos.

Even better, if you have a camera with zoom, you will be able to get a video like this one where the sunlight gets filtered out and the nemesis star is a lot clearer and obviously a seperate entity and NOT a planet.

here are 3 of my shots- two taken yesterday and one today from my outdoor area. The image is of the sun, with the second sun visible very close to it and very small:

Image
Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Image
Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Image
Uploaded with ImageShack.us

And here is a video taken with a camera with zoom:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsAOsKoMl84[/youtube]

Ignore the planet x part I have yet to see solid proof of that yet but All the proof is there on the second sun. It would surely explain global warming over the past couple of decades - its approach.



Todesking
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:00 pm
Posts: 3088
Location: Depew NY

Thu Nov 25, 2010 3:04 am

hale_bopp wrote:
Ignore the planet x part I have yet to see solid proof of that yet but All the proof is there on the second sun. It would surely explain global warming over the past couple of decades - its approach.


If it was approaching us would we not have seen it larger in the sky one season and smaller in another as we come closer to our sun then away from the sun? I think it might be some kind of camera reflection. Amatuer star gazer would have spotted by now. :wink:


_________________
There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die -Hunter S. Thompson


hale_bopp
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:00 pm
Posts: 16099
Location: New Zealand

Thu Nov 25, 2010 3:09 am

Todesking wrote:
hale_bopp wrote:
Ignore the planet x part I have yet to see solid proof of that yet but All the proof is there on the second sun. It would surely explain global warming over the past couple of decades - its approach.


If it was approaching us would we not have seen it larger in the sky one season and smaller in another as we come closer to our sun then away from the sun? I think it might be some kind of camera reflection. Amatuer star gazer would have spotted by now. :wink:


Its certainly not a camera reflection, I can tell you 100%. I walked upto the local observatory (and god was that a hike!) and talked to some astronomy phd's there. They don't know what it is, but they too know that its NOT a reflection or camera trick. I even took the same sort of photos last year. Even try to take your own photos - I beg you to do it.

Also, to answer your question, I believe its been approaching us for a while hence global warming. Remember - Its orbiting the sun, its not THE sun, and we are not orbiting IT. Seasons don't apply to it. I'm leaning towards it being the suns brown dwarf binary partner.

And astronomers have seen it, its all over the internet. But what bothers me is why its not widely known.



miserylovescompany
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 7:00 pm
Posts: 506
Location: UK

Thu Nov 25, 2010 3:50 am

As someone who likes taking photos, I've seen many lens flares in my time, and this is not one of them.

I just find it hard to believe that if something is orbiting the sun, then why haven't NASA, or even many other amature astronomers reported on it? I can understand NASA not, but anyone with a telesope should be able to detect an anomaly like this.



OrderAndChaos30
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 7:00 pm
Posts: 192
Location: Beaverton/Portland Oregon

Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:06 am

Sorry to burst your conspiracy theory bubble but . . .
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKYYzDhj3Bw[/youtube]


_________________
Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works.
- Carl Sagan


hale_bopp
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:00 pm
Posts: 16099
Location: New Zealand

Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:35 am

Yes thats quite interesting. My orb wasn't large like that though. Perhaps I need to try this myself.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:00 pm
Posts: 31552
Location: New Jersey

Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:53 am

hale_bopp wrote:
Anyone seen it yet? There seems to be another star caught in orbit of our sun. It's not just bullsh*t, because I have taken several photos of it to accompany all the videos and photos taken all over the world of the second sun, the "dark star" or the "nemesis star".

If you don't believe me, grab a digi cam and take some pics of the sun on a clear day. You should be able to see the nemsis star in your photos.

Even better, if you have a camera with zoom, you will be able to get a video like this one where the sunlight gets filtered out and the nemesis star is a lot clearer and obviously a seperate entity and NOT a planet.

here are 3 of my shots- two taken yesterday and one today from my outdoor area. The image is of the sun, with the second sun visible very close to it and very small:

Image
Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Image
Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Image
Uploaded with ImageShack.us

And here is a video taken with a camera with zoom:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsAOsKoMl84[/youtube]

Ignore the planet x part I have yet to see solid proof of that yet but All the proof is there on the second sun. It would surely explain global warming over the past couple of decades - its approach.


You don't say? Then why hasn't every other astronomical observatory verified your finding?

ruveyn



Aimless
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:00 pm
Posts: 8190

Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:03 am

I found this explanation.
http://www.exitmundi.nl/Nemesis.htm



aspi-rant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:00 pm
Posts: 1449
Location: denmark

Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:19 am

the explanation of those video examples is very easy to explain:

it is the reflection of the sun inside the glass of the window - it has double glazing, so it reflects from the inside glass layer to the outside glass layer and then back again into the camera.

in the first video the person who films is standing a bit to the left side of the reflection, hence the second sun on the right. also... the sun is angled a little bit above the reflection, that's why the second sun sets a bit before the other as if it stand a little lower..

in the second video the opposite is true: the camera is a little to the right side of the of the suns reflection, hence the reflection is on the left side of the sun.

when the camera gets turned around it reveals exactly how and why this happens.

it doesn't explain though the little light source or reflection in hale_bopps pictures, since they are not taken indoors behind glass (as far as i understand)...



b9
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:00 pm
Posts: 10115
Location: australia

Thu Nov 25, 2010 9:48 am

i will not repeat any of the other observations presented here (i hope), but i will add some of my own reasoning.

if it is a brown dwarf, then it would not be visible in the daytime, therefore it must be a star if the pictures are authentic. (i know i do not even have to say this)

if it was a star, then it would have to be more than about 75 times the mass of jupiter which would seriously affect the orbits of the planets (let alone the other objects) as it passed through the solar system.

because it's supposed orbital period is 25-35 million years, and its apoapsis (furthest point away from the sun) is about 3 light years, then it must be almost stationary at it's apoapsis, and it would be moving with extreme velocity at it's periapsis (closest point to the sun).

since the earth is only 8 light minutes way from the sun, and the apoapsis of the nemesis object is 3 light years, then (forgetting the laws of physics) it would circle the sun in a very short time and shoot back out of the inner solar system on its way back to its apoapsis rather quickly.

if this were the case, then it would have to pass rather close to earth due to the fact that no matter whether it approached from the far side of the sun (relative to us) or the near side (depending on our season), it's orbit would have to place it in our side of the sun at some point because it (extremely eccentrically) circles the sun.

if it passed the earth at the greatest distance possible, then there would be lord tides (as in greater than king tides) that may reach 1000 ft above sea level.

if it passed closer to us, there would be catastrophic upheaval of the earths crust and the tectonic boundaries would be torn apart allowing the mantle to spill out over the surface of the earth extinguishing all traces of life (more than any mass extinction(there would be the possibility that life would never recommence)), and boiling the oceans away as it passed.

our moon affects our tides to approx average .5 meters and it's mass is about 73 quintillion tonnes at 238,000 miles away.

the earth's mass is about 5.7 sextillion tonnes which is about 80 times the mass of the moon.

the mass of jupiter is about 1.8 octillion tonnes which is about 328 times the mass of the earth, and 26,240 times the mass of the moon.

the smallest size of a mass of hydrogen that can collapse under it's gravity to permit thermonuclear reaction is about 75 times the mass of jupiter. this is around 142 nonillion tonnnes or 1.94 million times the weight of the moon.

if this type of object passes around the sun and traverses our side of the sun in it's orbit, then it is "good afternoon" to all life on earth.

but the sun does not have the required gravitational pull to snare an object of that mass traveling at that speed at that shallow angular approach, so it would just fling on through the solar system and continue on it's way to never return.

to return to more basal reasoning, i propose that when the nemesis object is on it's way into the solar system and at distance greater than an astronomical unit from the sun (1 astronomical unit is the distance from the earth to the sun), then it would be visible in the night sky to even fruit flies with compound eyes.

i hate the smell of fish.



hale_bopp
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:00 pm
Posts: 16099
Location: New Zealand

Thu Nov 25, 2010 10:36 am

Yes If it is a large body an close it would have had more effect by now.

I'm still going to try and take pics of the dot rotating around the sun. I appreciate all well thought out replies here.



b9
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:00 pm
Posts: 10115
Location: australia

Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:09 am

hale_bopp wrote:
Yes If it is a large body an close it would have had more effect by now.

I'm still going to try and take pics of the dot rotating around the sun. I appreciate all well thought out replies here.

i will be interested to see your new pics and even though my reply may not be well thought out, i liked to think about the information you provided as it brought my mind to seriousness which is a hard thing to do.

thanks for alerting me to this situation which i was oblivious to.



Zara
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 7:00 pm
Posts: 3133
Location: Deep Dungeon, VA

Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:35 am

Interesting.
I'd try myself but it's overcast today.

I'm still not going to rule out some kind of optical effect either from the camera's glass elements or an atmospheric effect.

Fiona, if you can, try using a faster shutter speed/higher aperture on your camera and see if that clears up some the glare from the sun. I'd be curious if this is still visible at different camera settings. (Might want to set the date on your camera since I checked the meta-data and it's telling you took these in December of 04... )

I might try taking some shots myself once it's become clear again. Ideally I'd like to have a neutral density filter for this sort of thing but I might be able to make do with high aperture/high shutter speed.


_________________
Current obsessions: Miatas, Investing
Currently playing: Amnesia: The Dark Descent
Currently watching: SRW OG2: The Inspectors

Come check out my photography!
http://dmausf.deviantart.com/


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:00 pm
Posts: 31552
Location: New Jersey

Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:39 pm

Zara wrote:
Interesting.
I'd try myself but it's overcast today.

I'm still not going to rule out some kind of optical effect either from the camera's glass elements or an atmospheric effect.



You had best do so. Several billions of $$$$ of equipment in orbit that directly measure the particulate output sun have not detected a "second sun". In addition to which if there were a second Sun the earth would be orbiting about the center of gravity of the two "suns" not meandering in between.

ruveyn



Chronos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:00 pm
Posts: 5234

Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:57 pm

I think I have an explanation for your photos.

1. (The most likely) There is a bunch of bits of dust and debris in the atmosphere. Some fairly large bits, and even plastic bags, can get caught floating around, rather high up. When you look in the vicinity of the sun, the light reflecting off of these bits can sometimes make them appear as bright points of light.

Frequently the bits will drift in the general direction of the wind on the ground, but other times, the air currents higher up are stagnant making the points of light appear stationary, or making them appear to move in a different direction than the air on the ground.

If you block the sun with say a porch and carefully look in the vicinity with some binoculars (be very careful) you may occasionally see "slivers" of stuff which appear only for a few seconds, and disappear. These are spiderweb filaments, and strands of human hair that have been caught up into the atmosphere.


2. The planet Venus. It can occasionally be seen during the day if you know where to look. You can download a trial version of an astronomy program to figure out if that could have been it.

3. A nova/super nova. While it's not impossible, it's unlikely at the moment because we actually have many telescopes trained on the sun to observe the sun and the sun's atmosphere. Some of the telescopes are ground based and others are in space. For
SOHOS, which has been used to find comets coming from the direction of the sun, and to observe that portion of the sky that is not visible from Earth out time of year, is one of them and you can help find comets with it by downloading the photos it takes. This would see a nova or supernova that occurred "near" the sun. It may also detect the occasional asteroid.

This is also one reason there is not a second sun. Another reason is, we would detect such a massive object by it's gravitational effect alone.

4. Not likely, but some type of satellite. Satellites generally appear to move quickly across the sky but some are in "tidal lock" and are geostationary.


Concerning the video of the second sun, at the time this came out it seemed to be the opinion on the astronomy forums that this was an artifact of the camera. An internal reflection back onto the CCD (you might be aware that some said this of the comet who's name sake you bare, when in fact something WAS following it....a piece that had broken off). If you notice, there is a contrail in front of the sun in the video and it appears that the second sun could also have been light reflecting off of this an perceived as a point by the camera due to the optical system and the diffraction of the bright light through the camera's aperture.



Display posts from previous:  Sort by  


Page 1 of 3 [ 37 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page:




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Jump to: