Everything Science Forum

To all members: I have transferred all relevent posts from Space.com my ongoing theory of multiple intrusions by rogue planetoids and brown dwarfs from the thread on Space.com of  "Yales, you are being paged".
Due to number of questions and comments within that discussion, a little editing will be done before hand.  Basicly removal of posts that had no barring on the topic.  All questions that had been asked will be included, along with my answers.  I will admit, it is a bit of reading, but lets have the questions flow
Thank you
Dingo1

dingo1
Member

 Basic theory...sorry I will not post my supporting documentation and data...too lengthy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Nemesis actually exists. It is a rogue brown dwarf approx 3 Jovean masses (sorry for the spelling) It passed the outer edge of our solar system approximately 26 million years ago, and currently is 8.9 lys away travelling at 150 km/s in recession.
2. When Nemesis passed by, it tilted Uranus on it's side. It also disrupted Pluto from it's orbit. It effected the Oort cloud sending comets and asteroids into the inner solar system. Some of this disrupted material impacted on the Earth, and on the Moon.

3. Backtracking Nemesis's path at said speed, I come up with a direct correlation of Nemesis and Bernard Star being at the same general location at the same time.

Ok, now for everyone's comment  
=============================================================
 Yevaud
Member

 Ha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Talking to your self, are we?
Hmmm. I thought Barnard's Star was more like 4-5 light years away...interesting theory. Dare I ask how this could be 'Nemesis?' ('Cause inquiring minds have to know!).
--Yev
"When you're Schizophrenic, you're NEVER alone."
"I'm Schizophrenic - and So am I!"  
==============================================================
fromahzi
Member

 Well,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's truly a rogue, it doesn't qualify for Nemesis. It would be just a passing disaster.
Nemesis needs to recurr at regular intervals to create the periodic mass die-offs.

Except for that, theory sounds good as a cause of the event 65M/yr ago.

F

Please don't bother trying to find her
she's not therrrre.
The Zombies, "She's Not There"
 ==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Calli,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I could post my supporting data and model on the net, I have a web site that might have enough room on it. But I am reluctant to do so until I can finish more of my research. Please remimber Barnard Star is moving, and at a good clip, The conjunction of Nemisis and Barnard Star, is just a mathimatical computation at this point, the two could be related or not. I have a lot more research to go through to get a better possibility of the possible location in the sky where Nemisis could be located. I do have a search area in mind, I am trying to narrow it down more. I have been doing some mainframe processing, but unfortunately I can not get one on a dedicated bases to further refine the equations.
Yevand,
Most people assume that Nemesis is a repeating phenomenon. If I can find this rogue, it will help bring to light that the probibility of other
rogue masses exist in our general area of space, and that in the course of our orbit around the center of the galaxy, the probibilities of close encounters with them increases dramaticly. I feel that Nemesis is not just one brown dwarf, but instead has been several over the course of time. According to geolocal history the mass extinctions that have occured have accually not been on a regular pattern of 26 million years between major events, even though it seems like it. The geological record shows many gaps to that theory
 ==============================================================

dingo1
Member

 PLC questions that help explain my theory??
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will do what I can. Please understand, I have months of research to do, but I will keep it in mind. What I really hope for is if I can develope the theory, and the numbers keep coming out as they have been, to the point I am able to publish, all I would want would be some dedicated time on one of the large telescopes to see if I can find the rogue. I know what would really help would be to do some plate comparisions when I reach that point. At the calculated speed, and direction, there just might be enough of a shift on a plate to find it. Please understand, that something that small, does not give off it's own light, but might reflect enough star light to be spotted. Only things I am sure of is the mass of the object, and the speed it passed by Uranus to cause it to tilt like it did. It also explains several questions cuased by the pictures of the moons of Uranus. Something fragged the heck out of them, and the only thing I can think of is something massive passed by Uranus, and because of gravitational pull, pulled out some of Uranus's atmosphere into the path of the moons. It kind of explains why they are still in line, and is a possible explination of the rings, and the fact that some of the rings are incomplete and fragmented. I did come up with the following conclusions. If the mass that flew by were much bigger, the moon's orbits would be completely disrupted, and Uranus's orbit would have been majorly changed. If it were much smaller, then the tilt would not have been as dramatic as it is, or to get that kind of tilt would have entitled a collision, of major proportion. And there would still be major traces left of such a collision. When the event happened a lot of speculation has been proposed. A lot of astronomers place the collision a few billion years ago. But the question raised by that is, why are the moons in orbit to such a degree off of the axis of rotation? Would not the rules governing centrifical force slowly redirect the moons onto the axis of rotation??
 ==============================================================

yevaud
Member

 A brief thought on that
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, if you have some clue as to the particular trajectory of 'Nemesis' - given by the 'fossils' of it's effects, then that'd at least give you a small 'slice' of space to scrutinize. If you can do *that*, simple stellar obect occultation might just reveal it, yes?
--Yev
"So whattaya wanna do tonight, Brain."
"Why take over the world..."
"Ooohhhhh. We're on *that* again, are we?"
 ==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

  Now, getting time on one of the big scopes isn't something I can wangle for you, I'm afraid. Ain't no breakin' line, and the lines are years long.
However, we might be able to back-door something.
 
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Simple stellar object occulation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yevand, thank you!!! I am hoping that I can use stellar occulation might pinpoint exactly the object in question, but it will be very time consuming even for a computer verification of plates. An object that small, and at the speed and distance calculated so far, stellar occulation would more likely be found in an unsual change in variation of the light from a star who's path was crossed. I will have to calculate some numbers to be able to possibly come up with how minute the variation to look for. Thank you for the idea. It gives me a clue to help me locate it. You might ask how I came up with the direction it came from, and this is where Pluto does come into effect. It might not be related, but I am going to assume it is. As I was running the model, coming up with the differnt angles from which it could cause the tilt on Uranus, one of the models showed that the rogue would have passed close enought by Pluto, to disrupt it's orbit from the solar plain, and change it's eliptical orbit as well towards it current orbital path.
==============================================================
  dingo1
Member

 PLC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will not back door something. I know how long the lines are. Before I would ever concider doing a backdoor on something like that, I will need to almost be certain of where it is located. I do have access to a 20" scope here, and if I find enough evidence to justify a larger scope, that would be a good time to publish, and I might be able to bump up on the queue. You know what the review process is going to be like, I will have to have all my little duckies in line, and supporting data to be able to pass pear review  
==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

 no, no, no
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back dooring isn't cheating or anything. What I mean is, once you have some coordinates to search, we will see if anyone I know is scheduled to do any observing at Kitt Peak or somewhere, and ask for a few plates or CCD frames or something, tagged onto his observing run. As a favor, images to be appropriately credited in the paper.
 ==============================================================

david01
Member

 speaking of back dooring...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dingo1, you said "It also explains several questions caused by the pictures of the moons of Uranus. Something fragged the heck out of them, and the only thing I can think of is something massive passed by Uranus, and because of gravitational pull, pulled out some of Uranus's atmosphere into the path of the moons"
Where, o where, is Butswana when we need a rebuttal?!
 
==============================================================
david01
Member

 seriously, though
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think this is a fascinating theory that is worth exploring further.
While I do not have the knowledge or the tools to comment on your theory's validity, questions come to mind that would offer a good testing ground:

Does the orbital information we have about Kuiper-belt objects (other than Pluto and Charon) also fit the theory? What about the Oort cloud? Is it as you would expect if such an object had passed by? And, if effects are seen as far as Uranus, are they also seen further in? Are the orbits of Saturn and the inner planets consistent with the theory?

I regret that I only have questions but no answers.

 ==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 And also
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
speaking of the Kuiper Belt and whatnot, have you considered looking at earth-crossing objects with long periods? You might want to consider running their orbits back a few tens of thousands of regressions, and see if there's some sort of correlation. Did something perturb these objects into their new long period orbits, and if so, can they be traced back to a single event? Might back up your inference of a particular trajectory...if they match up, that is.
--Yev
"Get a Life!"
William Shatner to all Star Trek fans  
==============================================================
betelguese
Member

 Very interesting theory Dingo! Just playing Devil's advocate here. I am having a hard time concepualizing how a body could have so much influence on Uranus' rotational axis but not on it's orbit or the orbit of its moons. Most of its 21 moons have circular orbits with the exception of the outer 4. Also, if the object your looking for is one of many that have come through and the object had that much of an effect on Uranus, wouldn't the outer solar system be a much more chaotic place?
How could the gravity of an object be so much stronger than Uranus' that it pulled solid mass (not gases) away from the planet but the orbit of the moons and planet itself remained rather stable?
==============================================================
 yevaud
Member

 Just a point
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, good points. But it's been, what? 60-odd million years since it's last (theoretical) pass through our solar system. Orbits would've renormalized long since. As well, there could've been much gas pulled off of the various bodies, but this would be unknown to us in any event. These could've been larger sub-jovian gas-giants back then...and we'd have no way to know it at this point in time. Still and all, good, good.
--Yev
"The military: long periods of profound boredom interspersed with moments of sheer terror."  
==============================================================
fromahzi
Member

 Scope Time
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you know where you're looking and you're looking for occultation, do you need scope time?
Seems like someone might already have plates covering the area of interest, possibly several someones far enuff apart to make detection even easier than backdoor time.

That makes computer time starting *now* the question.

Just a thought

F

I'm not an astronomer, I'm a writer, Jim.
 
==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 True
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come to think of it, several institutes have large collections of plates...Harvard here in Boston, for starters. Carnegie-Mellon for another.
And as the joke goes, "what do I need computer time for? Whaddaya think Undergrads are for?"
--Yev  
==============================================================
betelguese
Member

 Again let me reiterate that I like the theory, just trying to understand some perceived complications. Also, this might help Dingo formulate and answer to questions he may be asked in the future.
Yev..I thought we were talking on the order of 23 million years (give or take), not 60 million.

I keep thinking how much energy is required to lift a large amount (relative to humans) of matter off of the surface of the earth. The gravity on Uranus is much higher and the matter to be ripped off, in order to make the implied impacts, would need to be very massive indeed. Wouldn't this require a VERY large body to come VERY close to Uranus? Wouldn't this have significantly influenced the orbit of Uranus itself. What about Uranus' atmosphere? If solid matter is flying off, wouldn't huge amounts of gas and dust have been striped away too? Wouldn't the ring system rival Saturns?

On the flipside Dingo, your theory might explain why Uranus has the most moons. A Nemesis sized object would through many chunks towards Uranus.
==============================================================
 yevaud
Member

 Oops
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"D'oh!"
Yeah, right you are...I gave the total orbital period for Nemesis. Gotta stop posting on the fly from work...
--Yev
"No, our mutants have flippers."
Montgomery Burns  
==============================================================
betelguese
Member

 s'ok...also Dingo is theorizing multiple rogue Nemisis', not a single orbiting Nemesis. That is, if I understand it correctly.  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Some possible answers to questions asked
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many questions were brought up on my theory, questions that do need to be addressed it help with the development. I will do my best to answer them in order. Please keep the questions coming.
 
David01: You brought up the point of the orbital information of the Kuiper belt. I have given some thought on this, and have done some coding to some of the objects into the model, but I need more orbital data on the objects found so far, and plug them into my model. If you can provide me a link, to where I can access some of this data, I would appreciate this. I do not have unlimited time to work on this theory 100% no matter if I wanted to or not. I wish I could, but things like work do come into play. But so far what data I have used in the model has helped me come to the conclusions I have so far. More data I can bring into the picture, a clearer understanding of what did occur. Please understand, that this model is not static, but has been changing as more information and data is applied. And unlike a lot of people, I do not pick and choose what hard data I use to support my theory, I have been modifying the theory instead.
The effects on the Kuiper belt objects mainly depends on where they were during the passing. Most were not effected, but some were in accordance with the model. Same with the Oort cloud, but to a lesser extent, due to the trajectory of the object. If we had more orbital data on the Oort cloud, it would help, but we have a lot to learn about it.
Yevaud: You asked the question on orbital effects on the inner planets, if any. To answer that question is easy. For the most part the answer is no. From my working model, Nemesis passed through the outer part of the solar system, between the orbit's of Saturan and Jupiter, in it's closest approch to our sun.
It was not a straight line crossing, but on a slight curve due to the gravitation influence of our sun. It's trajectory was also modified from it's path with it's close encounter with Uranus.
Beleguese: You asked a very good question. Why were the moon's of Uranus orbits not disrupted. That was one of the most surprising results I came across. When the close encounter occured, some of the atmospear of Uranus was also pulled out a great deal along the path of the object crossing. This atmospearic bulge slammed into the moons of Uranus, and brought them back into orbital alinement when it gravitaionally collapsed back onto the surface of Uranus. This is the tidal effect of the passing. The tital effect would have occured in the direction of the passing, outside of the effect of the planet's tilt being dramaticly changed. The rings could be the result of the atmospeare oscollating back to stability. Please understand that the atmospear of Uranus would have been dramaticly expanded due to the heat caused by the disruption, but would have cooled off rapidly due to it's distance from the sun. As it cooled the rings would have formed along it's current rotation, not along the lines of the tital effect.
The planetary orbit of Uranus would not have been changed other than slightly. Due to Uranus's mass. Now when the rogue passed by Pluto, something did occur. Because of Pluto's small mass, it was pulled into a new orbit. Now a question has just come to me, that will seem a bit radical. When Pluto was pulled into the new orbit, is it possible that Pluto split into 2??? Forming Charion in the process??
As for when this occured, the first date possible is 26 million years ago. It could have happened even further back. I have only gone back 43 million years so far, and it takes a lot of time to process the orbital data and computations. Even on a old mainframe.
Yevaud. In regards to access of the photographic plates, I do have some access. Exspecially from Carneigie-Mellon University. I work about a mile from there. Yes I do live in Pittsburgh. My access is limited, for I am not a undergraduate there, but just a part time student. In order to compare the area in question, I do have to scan the plates. It takes lots of time, and I do not have prioity as the undergrad's and grad students do on the optical scanning equipment.
PLC: If this theory ever reaches the point that I can give a narrow slice of the sky to look, then at that time it might be worth piggybacking on one of your collegues time, with their permission of course. But I do not yet have it narrowed down far enought to justify the use.
To all who have asked questions, Please keep it up!!!!!!    
==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 Dingo
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeppers. Except I was referring to the outer planets, not the inner system. For those who weren't following the debate:
If a massive object were to have passed through the solar system at some remote time during the past, we might be able to determine it's existance by the effects it left. The screwy nature of the outer gas giants orbits and inclination, for example.
Looking at the solar system as a flattish disk, should "nemesis" have passed through, it would leave a trail of effects; like taking a hot poker and laying it flat onto a record, for example.
Not only is this trail of evidence valuable in it's own right, it also provides a trajectory in / out of the solar system. Backtrack this and, taking into account the time passed, this - theoretically - should lead directly to the perturbing body.
Which, as Dingo points out, is probably a non - emmitting body. Therefore, how to locate this?
Occultation of stellar bodies, that's how. By use of previously taken photographic and CCD plates, one can compare an identical region of space over time and catch the body passing between us and the stellar body.
Dingo: I have some contacts (still) within the Astronomy community up here. Let me know if you need some help gaining access to archival material. I'll do what I can.
--Yev
"Twinkle, twinkle little star...
I don't wonder what you are...
for by spectroscopic ken...
I know you are hydrogen."
Ian D. Bush, Poet, 1800's  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Thank you Calli
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you Calli  I will start adding the information into the model. It will take me a while  But the more data I have in the model, the more accurate the model will be. I know whith the addition of the data your provided is going to slow down the computation time, but I would rather have the data in there, than to have an inaccurate model. Should be interesting what I come up with, and how it is going to effect my theory        
Yevaud: Thank you. If I need access to the material I will get ahold of you on that. So far the model I have shows only Uranus and Pluto as having any major effects. Calli's information is going to be of great help. I am going to have to do some heavy computations with them, because having to include gravitational changed in orbits due to close incounters with planets in the past of the NEO's and such is going to be a pain, but nessisary. There will be a margin of error, nothing I can do about that, because over time, the planets would have absorbed a lot of the debree, and there currently is no way to predict the orbits of those objects, or the colisions with other small objects. All I can do is my best
   
==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 Yeah
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three (or more!) body problems are a bear, aren't they?
--Yev
Two men are in the forest, hiking. They stumble onto a sleeping bear which, naturally, is kind of cranky at being woken. One man immediately begins to put on a pair of sneakers.
"That won't help outrun the bear," one observes.
"I don't have to outrun the bear," the other says, lacing up the sneakers, "I just have to outrun YOU."  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Very much a bear
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a huge problem, but it is do-able. It takes a lot of number crunching, and a lot of processing time to do so  
==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 Too true
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, one might assume that the pertubative event might be at a tangent to the outer system (considering the skewed orbits of these bodies) - giving some sort of baseline for the event itself...by that meaning that most other perturbations would be within the plane of the solar system, but the "nemesis" event not neccessarily so. So, you look at orbital changes and determine if the event came from within or without the system (even after all this time). Not to mention any relationship between the various bodies (similar orbital anomolies)...
--Yev
"I hold it true that pure thought can grasp reality, as the ancients dreamed..."
Albert Einstein  
==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

 let me know
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
when I can help, dingy.
Btw, blink comparators might help locate an object with a high parallax, too. I would expect this thingie to have such a parallax.

What angle of entry are you looking at? I would kind of expect something out of the ecliptic plane...

FWIW, the cartoon yale inserted had the mailing address from my hometown in it. That used to be Acme Boot's HQ. My grandma was one of their top fancy-stitchers.  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 External factors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yevaud: The only explination I have been able to come up with for the knocking of Uranus on it's side is an external intrusion into the solar system at enough speed for the intruder to escape back into the intersteller media. There has been speculation that the cause of Uranus being on it's side was caused by a planet size collision in it's early history. Big arguement against it is the moon's of Uranus are not in orbit around it's rotational axis. Otherwise over the billions of years, the moons would have abit slowly, have migrated to that axis. So the arguement I have is that the tilting of Uranus is a (in galatic terms) recent event.
As for the collision arguement itself, their is a major problem. A collision at the speed nessisary to tilt the planet at the angle it is, would have left a debrie field that would have been spotted by now, and to my knowledge, there is no debrie field. Hince the conclusion of a close encounter.
According the the calculations I have come up with so far, the size of the passing body would need to be very close to 3 Jovien units. Anything smaller than 2.5 Jovien units would have needed to collide to cause the same tilt. If that kind of collision occured, there would be be debrie again. Anything larger than 3.25 Jovien units would have torn the moons away from Uranus, or majorly disrupted of the moons orbits, and there is no evidence at this time showing that.
Now with the theory I have proposed, there would have been some atmosphere pulled from both Uranus and the rogue, and at high temperature. This would have heated the moons and caused geological changes. There is evidence of something like that having happened in their past.
Now the disruption of Pluto can or can not be related. From the model I have ran, their is a possibility of that disruption due to the nessisary angle of the close encounter with Uranus. The angle of that encounter has the rogue passing at between 7 and 18 degrees in relation with the solar plain. Depending on the angle of the rogue, Pluto's orbit would have been disrupted before the encounter, if at around 18 degree's or if it is after the encounter, Uranus would have changed the path of the rogue from 7 towards 18 degrees (sling shot effect) Hince the problem in determining the point it would currently be. Is Pluto a factor or not?? If so, was it before or after the encounter with Uranus. Did "Nemesis" pass Uranus inbound or outbound?? (from the model it comes up with outbound) Now if it were inbound, I have ran into a few interesting senerio's. One it would have passed close enough to the asteroid belts, which might explain the unusual paths of some of the NEO's. If that is the case, Nemesis would not have escaped the solar system, but instead would have collided with the sun, and have been absorbed, but there would have been a massive flaring which could have contributed to the mass extintion on Earth by radiation overloading of the Ozone layer, weakening the lifeforms currently on the planet to the point where when a major collision with an astoriod would have caused the mass extintions. But that would have happened if the "Nemesis" rogue went by 65 million years ago. If that did happen, then we are talking about the probibility of multiple encounters with rogue brown dwarfs over the course of the solar systems life time. As I place the Uranus encounter as outbound around 26 million years ago according to my model I am working with.  
==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 Mmmm...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I see. It couldn't have been a direct impact...something that size would absolutely exceed the binding energy of the impacted body and smashed it to pieces.
Fascinating thread. Keep it up!
--Yev
 ==============================================================
 dingo1
Member

 PLC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Angle from the solar plane is 7 to 18 degree's +/- 5 degree's due to slingshot effect from Uranus. Solar sling shot would be up to +/- 1 degree
 
==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 A quick aside
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's a lot of controversy over Pluto and it's odd orbit...question: since it bears a lot of similarities to Oort cloud objects, have you considered Pluto might have been perturbed from there during the encounter?
Just a passing thought...
--Yev
 
==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

 good
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
wanted to make sure you were thinking in 3D. Sometimes a tendency even among pro astronomers to forget to.
It sounds very good. Keep me posted, and I will help when/where I can.
 ==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Yevaud
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have not concidered that point about Pluto, so I will have to give it some thought. It does make sense. I will have to get back to you on what I come up with on that. It would be very interesting to see what the Pluto probe will find if they ever get it built and launched
 ==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 And
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the BBC, back when: "...Since 1992, when astronomers discovered the first Kuiper Belt object, they have found hundreds of chunks of rock and ice beyond Neptune, including about 70 that share orbits similar to Pluto's."
Well. Postulating that Pluto is a capture due to Nemesis, here's another 70 objects whose orbits can be analyzed...
Your life has just gotten more complicated, mah' fren'
--Yev  
==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

 and don't worry about computation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I remember my friend the particle physicist back in grad school. The PPs had an entire VAX devoted to their modeling, and he used to set up a run on Friday afternoon, to be ready when he got back on Monday, sometime...
Dese tings take a loooooooong time ta run.
==============================================================
 yevaud
Member

 Although
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you got access to a fairly capable Sparc running SunOs...
--Yev
"Computers are like children. You pamper them, baby them, hold their hands...
and they STILL act out on you."
Unattributed
"I don't know where the file is. YOU tell ME. YOU'RE the computer..."
TV Commercial  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Yevaud
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accually you just made life a little bit easier. You just clarified something that accually does make my theory a bit stronger.
This will be radical, but makes a lot of sense.
Pluto and Charion are not seperate entities, but instead two pieces of the same planet ripped apart during a passing of a rogue object (Nemesis). Yevaud, you pointed out that some of the Kuiper Belt objects are in the same general orbit as Pluto....I had over looked that fact. couldn't they be pieces of the debrie from Pluto being ripped apart??? Due to the release of energy from the breakup, Pluto and Charion would have quickly reformed into seperate for the most part round bodies in orbit around each other. due to Pluto being the more massive body, the orbits would have Charion more likely to end up in orbit around Pluto, but this would explain the slight wobble in Pluto's orbit, that people have been contributing to another planet that has not been discovered causing the wobble.
I feel that this give a bit more evidence to the statement that Nemesis is not a brown dwarf in orbit around our sun, but instead a rogue that passed through the solar system millions of years ago.
Thank you Yevaud for your contribution to this point!!!    

Accually I have access to 4 HP 8565e2 Mainframe computers....A bit slow at a combined processing speed of 70 mips

 ==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 No problem
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, sure, that's a possibility. Also, they could be just seperate (but of similar composition) bodies that were just swept along by the gravitational pull of Nemesis passing by...and then fell into their *moderately* stable orbits. The 70-odd objects mentioned could (to repeat an earlier point), if their orbits were regressed many cycles, show a common "path" through the Kuiper belt...a sort of "trail of mayhem."
Glad to be of help. It's why a lot of us are here...
--Yev  
==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

 OR --
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
they could be outer satellites of Uranus that got drug along for the ride...
I love to brainstorm, then pick the ideas to death.  
==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 Absolutely!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peer review, ain't it wunnerful?!
Concept: Peer Review. Definition - Propose a theory, and then try to dis-prove it as fast as possible!
However, Dingo has some good points. The concept has a certain...flow to it. Horrosho!
Now THIS thread is how space.com (only an opinion) should run...
--Yev
"The inexhaustability of the electron"
V.I. Lenin  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 PLC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ohhhhhhhh now there goes my evening. I had not even thought about that possibility. It might be one of the reason's why Uranus has so many moons. I am going to have to do some major computations, and that is going to take some time!!!!
   

Well it will keep me busy for the next few days. At least we have cloudy skys for the next few days
==============================================================
 calliarcale
Member

 *chuckles*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You go, dingo1!
I've been having a wonderful time reading all the stuff that people are discussing here. This is absolutely great! We're seeing the advancement of human thought, and it's abso-friggin-lutely marvellous!
==============================================================
betelguese
Member

 Major computations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's OK Dingo1, you have a 4 horse power computer (4 HP), should be no problem. What about distributed computing? I'll be happy to run a Dingo/Nemesis screensaver 24/7  
==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

 WOOOOOO-HAAAAAAAA!!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I LOVE THIS STUFF!!!!!!!
       
==============================================================
 dingo1
Member

 Distributed computing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beleguese. Sorry these computers are not on any distributed computing network. Wish they were. They are mainframes that were formerly used to handle banking processing back in the 80's. My former boss kept them for his own research when the department I was in charge of converted over to distributed networking using Client server technology only. He is gracefully letting me have access to them on a limited bases (when he is not busy doing serious computations of his own)  
For those who do not know what MIPS are....it translates to Million Instructions Per Second....old mainframe term So the processing speed for the 4 mainframe computers is 70 million instructions per second. A Cray 7 would be nice, where I could do a couple of billion transactions per second, but I do not have that kind of access
==============================================================
 space_junkie
Member

 since we're throwing out ideas...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How bout this one.
Your Brown Dwarf swept through the solar system, collided with a planet (better known today as the aseroid belt), dragging debris into the outer solar system (debris=moons of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune). Pluto could have been a larger chunk dragged further out. Additional collisions in the chaos surrounding this event could have directed debris into the inner solar system creating Earth's "Armageddon Event".


Yeah, thats the ticket. (said like what's his name on Saturday Night Live)
==============================================================
 yevaud
Member

 Yeah
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That *would* provide some explanation as to why those Gas Giant's moons are all so wildly different.
You know, another thought, Dingo: there would've been a lot of odd gravitational stress (natch!) placed on those bodies...I wonder if any of 'em still show, say, weird torsional effects, strange tectonics (such as it were) and whatnot...
--Yev
"Ah well...It's just a little theory of mine."
John Archibald Wheeler
 ==============================================================
 calliarcale
Member

 strange tectonics
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now *there's* a thought. Ever seen a picture of Miranda? It looks like it was blasted apart and then put back together all wrong. Might that have been influenced by the passage of Nemesis?
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Asteroid Belt.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good question. The event you just described would have needed to take place during the early formation of the solar system. The major reason that a planet did not completely form in the asteroid belt was not caused by it being broken up by a rogue brown dwarf, but said thing could have happened, but by the gravitational pull of Jupiter itself. The solar system has been for the most part somewhat stable over the last billion years or so, but something has disrupted it several times over the period. It is not a recurring pattern as some people think, but random encounters. What I have proposed here is a theory of mine in regards to one of those random encounters, and it's effect on our solar system. If it can be born out, then some rethinking on the part of the exstablished astronomy community. It is called the advancement of science, and I hope to make a little contribution to it  Every idea is welcome  
==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 Yep
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly my point. I used to have some Planetary Scientist friends, and when those pix from the fly-by began to appear, they were freaked! Twisted, contorted, tortured terrain. They were literally staring at the images, saying "what the f***."
This is looking promising!
--Yev
"Whattaya mean, 'Grandma's on the roof?'"  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Calli,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It might, exspecially if PLC's idea about Pluto possibly being one of Uranus's former moons. Understand that ripping apart something that big would not have been a quiet event, but a bit explosive (think very huge explosion) sending reminents all over the solar system. Most of the debrie would have been cleaned out of the solar system by now, but not all of it. I have a lot of computations to do, and see if that is a possibility. I feel like this theory of mine is going to be revised several times....But that is what good science is all about    
==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

 DUCK!!!!!
   



There it went again.....
==============================================================
 space_junkie
Member

 what about....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Venus and Earth. Could it have a highly elliptical orbit that takes it to the orbit of Venus? After all something had to have caused Venus to be flipped 180 degrees (thus the retrograde rotation). This would also mean that it crosses Earth's orbit (maybe the collision that created the Moon?) It could answer alot of questions if this were true.
 ==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

 keep in mind
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
that dingy is working with the theory of multiple objects here. No one flyby has to do everything.
Also keep in mind that this could very well, if it turns out to be semiperiodic, prove the hypothesis that the extinction events, etc. are due to passage thru spiral arms in the galaxy, which is one of the potential explanations proposed. This sounds to me very much like a rogue interloper trundling thru on nearly each SA pass...

FWIW, said events have been a little pet interest of mine.

BTW, I surely hope certain unmentioned and unmentionable people don't show up in this forum. Talk about sounding just a bit like the V.V. of V...
==============================================================
 space_junkie
Member

 that was kinda my point
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If this object has a period on the order of 20 million years or so and it is highly elliptical,then it could have caused many events throughout the history of the solar system. In 4 billion years it would have crossed the orbits of many of the planets 200 times. If it didn't directly cause the problems seen on some of the planets, then it could, at least have caused them indirectly (ie. with associated debris, orbiting moons of its own etc.)  
==============================================================
apollo2791
Member

 WOW
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have learned so much by reading this thread! Thanks! (now let's just hope no one comes and spoils it)  
==============================================================
mgallik
Member

 "You know, another thought, Dingo: there would've been a lot of odd gravitational stress (natch!) placed on those bodies...I wonder if any of 'em still show, say, weird torsional effects, strange tectonics (such as it were) and whatnot...
--Yev"
Sounds a lot like Eros433 Yevaud. And we have pictures.




To return to the theory of an impact turning Uranus
on its side and the subsequent debris field.

Might Nemisis have had a few satelites of its own
and could they have had a part in sweeping up the
evidence?

Perhaps one of them may have been the impactor itself.
==============================================================
 dingo1
Member

 More possible answers to questions asked
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Space Junkie: The theory I am working on is definitely multiple encounters with rogue objects, so the possibility you have mentioned about Venus having been struck is a possibility.
Proving it is going to be very difficult to say the least. Venus is an enigma in it's self. With it's high temperature and pressure, finding surface features that show impact signs is highly unlikely. There has been a theory proposed in regards to Venus, That it's surface periodicly undergo's a mass liquidfication, where it's contenintal plates float on an ocean of lava. Also in accordance to that theory, the last time it took place (the last liquidfication) was approx 5 million years ago. That possible event could have been triggered by a large object impact. Possible a large asteroid. I do not know for sure, if we could get a probe to land on the surface, and survive long enough to take a sample and lift off the planet, we might be able to determain if that did occur by looking for Iiridius isotopes (sorry for my spelling) simillarly found here on Earth in the geological layers from 65 million years ago.
Please understand that my theory is multiple rogues, and they do not have to me large one's like the one I have proposed that passed by Uranus. They can also be small ones as well. There is a lot of debrie in the interstellar media, mostly gas, but there easily can be objects that can cause massive distruction as they pass through a solar system.
Mgallik: In regards to your question about the rogue having it's own moon's and one of it's moons is what struck Uranus itself and causing the tilt. That is a plasible arguement. For then the flyby would not have to be as close as what I have so far calculated. One thing that you have to take into account is that there would still have been a sling shot effect, but not as pronounced. Uranus does wobble slightly in it's orbit around the sun. A bit more than the gravitation effects of it's moons can account for. I can speculate on the cause, and people will argue with me, and that is the core of Uranus is out of balance due to it's composition of the core is not for the most part uniform, but instead of 2 or more different compositions crushed together. It might explain why the magnetic field on Uranus is 60 degree's off center.
I have started setting up the modified model last night, and it will take a while to add all of the variables so far suggested in this thread, so do not expect overnight results
PLC: You suggested that Pluto was formally a moon of Uranus dragged out of it's orbit. I am including that possiblilty in the model, but I am also now going to add another possiblity as a result of Mgallik suggestion that the rogue has it's own set of satalites. I think it is a possibility the Pluto might have been one of it's satalites instead   that was stripped from the rogue due to tidal effects   You know me, I will not fall into the mindset trap of narrowmindedness, and will look at all possibilites. I do not think that the rogue flew through our solar system unscathed!!!.
Calli: The moon Miranda you brought up is an enigma in itself. It is very possible that it is the result of a collision from debrie as a result of an encounter with one of the rogues that possibly crossed through our solar system.    
==============================================================
space_junkie
Member

 pluto
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't it just as possible that Pluto is a moon of Nemesis that was stripped off by collision or gravity of a nearby planet or Sun or both.
This model of yours is getting really complicated.

dingo, I don't know how antequated your equipment is, but you may be better off using your home computer. I have done multibody analyses using Excel if you can believe it. It works pretty well, you can plot the results any way you want and computational time is not as bad when you have a fast computer.
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Space Junkie
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is possible, but if it were stripped, it would have to be from one of the outer planets. This is due to Pluto's so far known composition (primaily ice). If it were from an inner planet, the Ice would have boiled away completely. Pluto's gravitational pull can not support much of an atmospere. In the outer reaches where it is currently, the ambiant temperature is so low that the gas instead of boiling away, would have condensed back onto Pluto after the encounter (with some loss of mass) To picture what it would be like, picture a comet in your head, and what happens to the corona when it reaches the outer reaches on it's trip, and the corona instead of still pouring out gas and dust, congelles back onto itself.
Now as to whci planet it could have been stripped from. Most likely canidate is Uranus. There is enough evidence to support the encounter (massive tilt, magnetic fields shifted also) Also keep in mind the orbital ballistics. If you draw a bead from Uranus, based on it's tilt, and increase the velosity up to Pluto's nominal speed, you will be able to generate an orbit that for the most part matches Pluto's current orbit. There is only one point in Uranus's orbit that allows for it, and if you add in Pluto's orbit, there is a pattern that occurs roughly every 29 million years where the conditions would be exactly right for such an event. The next time they would be in the right position is not for another 3 million years  
==============================================================
yevaud
Member

 Another thought
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another thing that's odd is the varied composition of the bodies we're talking about here (discounting Uranus). Pluto and the 70-odd objects in the Kuiper belt I'd mentioned yesterday are of mostly icy composition, while the various moons and planetisimals are of rocky composition.
The question is, of all of these, which were "dragged along" from the Kuiper belt and which are moons and moonlets. I wonder if there may have even been some re-shuffling, such as some of the moons of Jupiter and/or Saturn may have begun as either moons of Uranus (and were "moved" in the wake of Nemesis), and also if any of these are captures (originating somewhere outsystem).
Also: How about Saturn's rings...how old are they? One almost wonders if there may either have been a few moonlets of icy composition there that were smashed by Nemesis' passage, OR if the rings are largely captured pulverized material from Nemesis' passage.
--Yev
"First came Amoeba. Then came deviant Amoeba.
And THEN came Total Quality Management."
Theory of evolution, Scott Adams  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Yevaud
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anything would be possible, exspecially with the small moonlettes in orbit on the various planets, but current evidence does not show any with one or two exceptions. Those exceptions (if we leave Uranus out of the question) are a few of the outer moonlettes around Saturn, which could have been captured, as their orbits are off of Saturn's plane. As to the ring system on Saturn,and the other gas giants, they could be captured debrie from the encounter, I picture it kind of like the accreasion disk of a black hole, but on a much smaller scale. what would be facinating would be if we could send up returnable probes to all of the outer planets, and capture some of the material from the rings, moonletts, and planets (exspecially Pluto), the Kuiper ring objects and the Oort cloud, and do comparisons. If my theory is correct, and the encounter's happened, exspecially with Pluto possibly having been dragged into it's current orbit, and Charion possibly being a large fragment of Pluto (similarly to what has been proposed with Earth and it's moon). A chemical comparison would help prove or disprove my theory, because the chemical composition would be nearly identical.
The theory that the our moon use to be a part of the Earth back in the primortial days 4.5 billion years ago, it that the chemical makeup of the moon rocks, and earth rocks of the same age, are nearly identical, giving support to that theory.
Someone once asked me a long time ago to speculate on that. The moon is a lot lower in nickle/iron in comparison to the Earth, but it is consistant with the average found within the Earth's crust and Mantle. Earth is more abundant in those two elements, but Earth also has a nickle/iron core, and is constantly (in geological terms) adding to the mantle and crust those elements as a result of active volcunism, and plate teutonics. I hope that helps answers some of your questions in regards to my theory    
==============================================================
criscosoft
Member

 Number crunching...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's too bad people such as yourself who need raw computing power don't have access to a distributed computing net, such as the one SETI uses to analyze radio telescope data. It's such an elegant solution for "Average Joe" (or Jane) analytical work...  
==============================================================
halfgael
Member

 Well...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
goddamnit.
While I've been posting in the brain-dead threads, you guys having been talkin' the good stuff here. The 'Hey, Yale, from PLC' told me to mind my own business.

Now, I know better.
==============================================================
 dingo1
Member

 Seti and computers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know what Seti is doing....yes I have there program running in the background on my PC here. What Seti is doing, is statistical analyisis, and looking for patterns. That can be done well on a PC system. What I am doing is mathimatical computations, of somewhat vast amounts, but on one where each change has to be calculated in regards to the rest of the model. Unfortunately, this has to be done on a single computer  hense the mainframe.
==============================================================
aetius
Member

 BTW...I have been fascinated by the Sun's 7th planet ever since one of the Voyagers went there back in 1986 (Damn it! Georgium Sidus was such a COOL name! Yeah, yeah...mythology, blah blah blah...I know all about it. Still, who the hell names a whole planet after "Your Anus"?). I always thought that its major satellites revolved around the planet at roughly the same orbital inclination as Uranus' axial tilt. How much is the difference between the two? Thanks!
 ==============================================================
anupriya
Member

 This is a great thread y’all. I was just thinking this might explain why Oort cloud is stretched out on one side. That might be the place where the Nemis might have been the closest! And the craters on every planet(and moons) in out solar system. The Oort cloud is primarily made of water and minerals, that would explain how water got on all the planets, but some couldn’t hold on to it (isn’t there a theory that earth didn’t have as much water to start with?).  
Just a thought!
Good luck,
Anupriya  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Initial results
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have done some preliminary processing, and so far have gotten promising results. Also have some unusual results that need to be looked into, so as to further refine my model. One can not discount unusual results, like a lot of people do, but to look at the cause. There are a lot of unknowns I am dealing with. Question for those who are following this thread. Is there anyone who knows of any evidence of a small cloud of semi-obscurring material in the general solar area around 1.2 light years away???  
==============================================================
payloadcontroller
Member

 Huh...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That rings a bell, ding-a-lingy, but I've been so busy lately with personal sitch that I couldn't tell you my own name hardly, let alone pin down something like that.
-PLC
==============================================================
 dingo1
Member

 Updated results
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So far so good on the model. I have gone back 100 million years, and have 2 possible encounter senarios. Marginal result at 23, 582,713 years ago. Best result at this point is 65, 149,931 years ago. Secondary results show shotgun like pattern of debree heading towards the inner solar system. Earth is in outer edge of spread
 ==============================================================
fromahzi
Member

 rogue's moons
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have I missed? It seems unlikely (to me)that a rogue star/gas giant would have moons following it around.
Just based on a mental picture, it seems like any moons would have been left behind or ripped out of orbit many passes ago. And, it also seems unlikely that it would pick up significant moons (or anything larger than debris) on a pass thru - more likely it would deorbit existing moons sending them on a joy ride.

F

See, no expertice in anything at all anymore
 ==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Fromahzi
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There you are not informed. A rogue star or planet could easily have moons around it. Understand a rogue is something that is not moving along the normal galactic plane, but instead it is following a different path than normal. Also understand that our solar system is also moving around the galaxy but in it's path along the galaxtic plane. Every star is not nessisarily moving at the same speed. Close encounters and collisions happen all of the time  
==============================================================
mons
Member

 Nemesis and Moons
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the rate Nemesis is traveling, could it pick up moons? I'm sure it's gravity is overwhelming but is it strong enough to rip moons away and carry it along? I would think, even if it does, it would suck the moon right into itself. I'm wicked guessing here.
==============================================================  
dingo1
Member

 Mons, and a some more info to contemplate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and Yes. Yes it's gravity is strong enough to strip moons from other planets. Some of them would be captured or sucked in, others could be dragged into new orbits. It really depends on how gravitationally massive the moon who is being effected's original planet is, and how close Nemisis passed by. In either case, there will be massive damage to the moon, by gravitational tug-a-war, and also by tidel effects. In the theory I posted orginally and the modifications I have made to it as the result of all the discussion, the model so far shows some of the effects. One thing I have learned new from all of this is the effects it had on the planet Uranus, and it's moon system. It passed close enough to really cause massive changes. From the model so far, when Nemisis passed, it knocked Uranus over on it's side. It dragged the moons of Uranus on to it's path (something new people). Shattered a few of the moons, ripped one completely away from Uranus, adding enough delta V to place it in a new orbit, almost capturing it, but not quite, for it did escape out of Nemisis gravity well (Pluto). Due to the tug-awar, it split Pluto into 2 major pieces( Pluto and Charon) a string of debree (Kepler objects) and upset the Oort cloud some (The Oort cloud budge). Now there is a possibility that a second moon was ripped from Uranus, but on an angular course, that was captured by Neptune (Triton) the model has not shown it so far, but I am keeping an eye on it. There were major fragments that were whipped through the solar system which could account for at least a few million years of major impacts occurring, including some on Earth, and Also Mars. ( Mars shows a MAJOR impact in it's past).
Now people will question me on why Uranus's moons for the most part do not show as much ecliptical orbits as you would expect from such an event. The answer for that is time. From the gravitational exertion of Uranus, the orbits would stableize into a reasonable circular paths. I have not at this point modelled and caluclated how long that has taken, but from rough calculations, it would have taken appox 25 millin years. Give me time. I hope this has answered your question. Please keep the questions coming. the theory is starting to flesh out, and the model seems to reflect that  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Another Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have gone back another 26,000,000 million years. Sorry if it is not as far as some of you were hoping. My mainframe time was very limited for the week. Nothing new to report  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Newest Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have gone back to 210,000,000 million years now.
Results are still about the same. Just 2 more encounter possibilites.  
==============================================================
dingo1
Member

 Interesting developement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weekly update time... have now gone back 275,000,000 yea

I think it sounds QUITE reasonable, dear Dingy. I am very excited about it, and can hardly wait to see the data. We have a potential paper here, you know that????

Be careful with what you ask.  The amount of data so far generated is a bit over 7 gigabites

CR@POLA!!!!!

Uh, maybe a nice summary chart or two would suffice...

PLC, A summury chart or to is a most definite.  Wait till I have to print out all of it.  It is mostly telementry data.  I figure according to my initial calculations to generate roughly 100 gig of telemetary data.  And that is raw data.  And only for the events that fall within the parameters.  Once I have completed the initial runs, I am working on getting a program that I can read the data into and generate a graphical display that will show a visual summury of the data.  That should bring things down to a usual size.  That is why I say it is easier to visualize the encounters than it is to explain.  And that is only if the calculation formulas will pass scruteny.  I do not need to do all this work, then have someone point out an error in the formulas rendering it useless.  I do figure it will be a few years of hard work to be ready for presentation.  I am missing things, I have that feeling I have missed something.  Once I can figure that out, then it will be ready for publication.  Hmmm I am thinking about approching a couple of grad students to see if they would like to contribute to the research and add their input and work, and maybe all of us can generate a joint paper, and it might help them earn their doctorates.  I do not need the recognision, I just enjoy the work.

That'd work. Keep me posted. I'll be glad to help.

Biggest help of course will be questions...Lots of them...the more the merrier.  I can not look and find possible problems and answers if I do not know what questions need addressing

Sorry, Dingo, I've tried to read most of it, but I may have missed a few things.  

Here's my question, you may have already answered it:  Does this also explain the creation of the moon as a piece of the Earth blown off by a collision in the early solar system?  I realize your data doesn't go back that far yet, but is that also feasible?

Orstio,
No, I have not addressed that issue yet, but I can give you the most current answer to that question.  Take in mind that the creation of the moon was during the formation of our solar system.  From scientific evidence from samples brought back during the Apollo missions, it was determined that the composition of both the Earth and the Moon are basicly the same.  The age of the oldest rocks from the moon is 4.5 billion years old.  From current models accepted by the astronomy community, a large planetoid struck the Earth, near that time, before our planet was completely conjelled, causing the Earth to split into two primary parts.  The Earth and the moon.  The moon is very slowly receeding from the Earth, at a annual distance of a few millimeters.  
As for the possibility of rogue encounters at that time, very likely, as were were in an area of new star development at that time.  Most of the rogues were problibly created during this star formation cycle.

interesting idea dingo...here's two questions for you. Have you considered the possibility of this rogue star being formed within our solar system and on having it's orbit disrupted by some other passing body...thus throwing the planet into some large orbit around our sun...or possibly this rogue being in an orbit around our nearest stars and our sun.

Excellent questions Blass.  I will answer them in order you have asked.  The first question you asked was the possibility of a large planet associated with our solar system who's orbit is so elongated due to an event as described within my theory, peing a long term periodic.  My best answer to that question is no.  Taking into account the size of our star, being a yellow dwarf, it's gravitational influance is not strong enough to maintain a planet with such a long periodic orbit.  The planet in order to have such a period, would have the initial speed at it's closest approch of the sun would be higher than the escape velosity of our solar system.  If the mass of our sun were 2.6 times larger, then it would be a remote possibility.
As for your second question, it is very mathimaticly improbible, for the speed of the other sun in question would be have to be exact, and within a 5 light year radius of our star.  There is no evidence what so ever of such a star in our immediate vacinity.  Keep up the questions.

Awfully interesting, that high a percentage of impact craters on Lunar Farside.  I do remember my professors used to wonder why it was that there were so many.  Couldn't have been during the terminal bombardment phase...much more recent surface features with relatively new cratering.

For correlation, maybe some datum on the age of the various farside maria and such vis a vis the cratering.  Obviously if there were areas of (geologically) recent magma upwellings with lots of cratering on the surface, it'd go a long way towards pinning down the era/date.

--Yev

"dxdx [insert miracle here] etc..."

YeVaud,
Yes it would help to retrieve several samples of the cratering on the farside of the moon.  It would really help pin this theory of mine down, exspecially if the results of the age testing on the damples coorisponds to the results of the model I have developed.  The last result which I have posted, shows the Earth Moon system being in the resulting debree field generated my the impact/flyby.  It also cooresponds to the approxamate date of one of the major mass extintions.  The clues are there for such an event I theorized.  And I am not the only one who is working on a theory like the one I have proposed.  Those of us who have been working on these theories are really hoping the the Pluto/Kuiper mission flies, and we are hoping that if it allowed to be built, and we can get the funding that probes can be dropped and at least some additional data can be collected

Dingo

PLC asked me to mail this but I don't know your real address or if you have a space.com account. You may find this interesting,

------------------------------------------------------------
Geological Society of America
Boulder, Colorado
Contact:
Ann Cairns, Director–Communications
acairns@geosociety.org, 303-447-2020, ext. 1156

June 21, 2001

GSA Release No. 01-26

A Disturbance In the "Force" Caused the K-T Impact?

But this disturbance is more mysterious than Darth Vader. UCLA scientists
don't know exactly what it was, but they believe it occurred within the
Solar System 65 million years ago. The ensuing pandemonium upset Solar
System dynamics causing Mercury, Earth, and Mars to go off course.

"We speculate that it may also have perturbed asteroids in the inner part of
the asteroid belt, throwing one or more of them into Earth-crossing orbits,"
explained Bruce Runnegar, Director of UCLA's Center for Astrobiology. "Thus,
the ultimate cause of the K-T impact -- and demise of the dinosaurs -- may
have been a chaos-induced change in Solar System dynamics."

Runnegar will present the team's findings at the Earth Systems Processes
conference on Wednesday, June 27, in Edinburgh, Scotland. The Geological
Society of America and the Geological Society of London will co-convene the
June 24-28 meeting.

The other team members, Ferenc Varadi, a UCLA geophysicist, and Michael Ghil,
the Director of UCLA's Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, have
worked for years on chaos in the Solar System and, in particular, the role
of in-step motions known as resonances in giving rise to the chaos. This
earlier work on resonances and chaos among the planets and the asteroids
prepared the ground for the present tantalizing results.

"In order to better understand the history of the inner Solar System over
hundreds of millions of years, we carried out several accurate, long-term,
numerical simulations of the orbits of the nine major planets using physical
models with increasing complexity," Runnegar said. "Our best calculations
show that the dynamical state of the inner Solar System changed abruptly
about 65 million years ago." Ghil added: "It is possible that it was a
transition through a special kind of resonance that produced the abrupt
change at the K-T boundary."

While scientists generally accept that there was indeed an extraterrestrial
impact 65 million years ago (at the Cretaceous/Tertiary or K-T boundary) that
wiped out most living species on Earth, they do not agree on the nature of
what caused that impact.

Was it an asteroid? Was it a comet? Now at least we have a better idea and
a vital clue to what really happened with this Earth-shaking event so many
millions of years ago.

CONTACT INFORMATION

During the Earth System Processes meeting, June 25-28, contact the GSA/GSL
Newsroom at the Edinburgh International Conference Centre for assistance
and to arrange for interviews: +44 (0) 131 519 4134

Ted Nield, GSL Science and Communications Officer
Ann Cairns, GSA Director of Communications

The abstract for this presentation is available at:
gsa.confex.com/gsa/2001ES...t_8024.htm (http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2001ESP/finalprogram/abstract_8024.htm)

Post-meeting contact information:

Bruce Runnegar
Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics
University of California
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567, USA
Office Phone: +01 310 206 1738
runnegar@ucla.edu

Ted Nield
Geological Society of London
+44 (0) 20 7434 9944
ted.nield@geolsoc.org.uk

Ann Cairns
Geological Society of America
+01 303 447 2020 ext. 1156
acairns@geosociety.org

Yelmalio & PLC.  Thank you for the information.  I have just e-mailed Ann Cairnes for more information and data about this announcement....Thank you again.

Thats one of the wildest things I've read.I'm feeling somewhat tortured.Dingo,if she responds please fill us in.

Clifdweller,
I will most definitely will post everything she responds to, for this announcement that was made supports my theory in some ways.  It is another piece of the puzzle.  Lets just hope it is the same puzzle...LOL

Just great. I got earthquakes and volcanoes. I have to worry about earth-crossers and nearby supernovae and now you're throwing rogue planets at us?

Uranus is really irritating. It likes to say 'no' to just about every theory.

Was it hit and tilted early on?
Nah. The main moons are on the equatorial plane.

Was it (with moons) a capture itself?
Nah. It sits nicely on the same plane as 7 other planets.

Is there any new news?

dingo - this is really interesting but I honestly feel like I'm jumping in in the middle without a solid base of understanding.  Can you give me (or pointme in the direction of) some beginners' info on Nemesis, rogues, etc?
Thanks!

Halfgael,
No I do not have anything new to report at this time.  Wish I did.  As soon as I am back to work, I will continue the processing of the model.

You are right in that Uranus is one of the most interging enigma's in our solar system.

Was it struck early in it's history.  In accordance with my theory 'No' .  From past modelling conducted, it's moons would have shifted their orbital planes noticably after 1 billion years.  Even though evidence does show a slight shift in the orbital plane of the moons, it is not great enough to allow for encounters greater than 1 billion years.

Is there any evidence that the tilt of Uranius rotational orbit being natural.  The answer so far is no.  To the knowledge gained today, there is not any natural cause that will cause a planet to twist on it's side.

Ruling out any other possible explination to date of the cause of Uranius's unusual rotation, the conclusion I have come up with is a collision of fantastic size.

Those are the paramiters I have come up with.

Size of rogue...  What would be the maximum and minimum sizes of such a rogue, based on the evidence so far determined that would cause such an encounter, and leave things as they currently are.  And the evidence as it is.

Speed of rogue.   Too slow and the rogue would be captured.  The fast and it would not have created the damage as it currently shows.

Plasible secondary evidence.  Any encounter of this magnitude is going to leave evidence.  It would scatter debree all over the solar system.  Most of the physical evidence would have been cleaned up over the millions of years (due to Jupiter being the great vacume cleaner of the solar system)  But the terrestrial planets would show evidence of major impacts.  As the current evidence in geological history, Major impacts have occured on Earth that corrispond with some of the possible dates of the encounter with the rogue.

One of the most significan mass extintions here on Earth, greater than the T-M encounter that help cause the end of the Jurassic age 65 million occured 265 million years ago, and evidence shows a loss of life much greater (95% of all life) give rise to the age ot the dinasours.  The T-M event shows evidence that a second intrusion possible occured 65 million years ago.

One thing to keep in mind about my model.  Is that no known mass extintions are programmed in to it.  I am comparing the data generated to the known dates of mass extintions, and if they match, they do, if not, I am still reporting them.

Recent simulations would suggest that the Moon was formed when a Mars-sized object struck the Earth some 4.5 billion years ago.  Some of that giant object should still be present, on both the Earth and Moon.  We should expect to see, on the Earth and Moon, something different in the chemical anatomy than that of the other planets, primarily Mars and Venus, (small rocky atmosphere-bearing planets that did not have a similar impact).  Are there things chemically similar, between the Earth and Moon, that are not also similar between Earth and Mars/Venus?

Orstio,
Not enough data to be able to answer this question.  We only have a few hundered lbs of moon rock that we have been able to study in depth.  From the testing that has been performed, the chemical makeup of the moon is basicly the same as the Earth.  It is one of the founding cornerstones of the Earth/Moon theory of a collision and creation of the duel Earth/Moon system.
We lack physical samples from any othe the other inner planets to be able to form a consenses about about there chemical makeup.  From articles I have read, there is a slight puzzlement about the Earth/Moon.  It has a much higher Nitrogen level than mathimatical models predict for our location within the solar system.  But the science is still in it's infancy

I may have missed it,but have you ever considered tying this in with the solar systems oscillation in the gallactic plane?Check this LINK (http://www.americanscientist.org/Issues/Sciobs97/Cloud.html) out.

Cliffdweller, it is not an odd question at all.  Accually I have the galaxtic rotation within the model, and the osscolation of our solar system during this perion.  It is one of the main reasons for the multiple encounters within my theory.  During the course of time, there is a good possiblilty that within the cycle that the rogue I have described makes it nearby pass of our solar system.  One thing to take in account, is that this flyby will not nessisarily cause a major desturbance on each passing.  It will cause a disrubtion of the Oort clowd do to that the Oort cloud surrounds our complete solar system, but due to the location of the major planets will not be the same at each passing, there is a very good chance that it will pass by without a major chance of disrupting the planets.  On a few encounters as my model so far shows, the flyby did create a major disruption and possible collition.  If you have followed the progress of the testing, you will see there is a pattern that is showing.  I will be running the model forward in time as well, to see when the next possible encounter will be.  From my current calculations the next encounter will not be for another 3 million years

Progress report:

For those who have been folloing this theory.  I have not stopped work on it.  I have not been able to afford any processing time at this point as I am stil unemployed.  I have been anaylising the data generated so far, but will need to do some retesting to verify the unusual results I have for some dates.  I will keep everyone informed as progress occurs.   Sorry for the delay

That's okay, pal. Keep up the good work. There's an ApJ article in this when you're done. :-)

did you ever read the book "worlds in collision" by velikovsky, (or somesuch name), I got the book somewhere, in it he comes to the conclusion that a large planet or star went through the solar system and that as a result venus would be red hot and volcanic (this was back when venus was thought to be a waterlogged jungle - 1950s). back in his day he was slated realy bad by the "learned" people, but his theory could apply to yours (maybe). heres a quick link to a website

www.knowledge.co.uk/velikovsky/index.htm (http://www.knowledge.co.uk/velikovsky/index.htm)

Mentor.

Mentor:  have that book somewhere on me shelves!

Take it easy!  It's very interesting...but needs to be ratified!  Each step needs to be authenticated, along the way?

Yes I have read the book.  I do not discount it.  A lot of his later theories you can discount. This is one of his more plausible theories.  My theory has a long way to go.  Others have concidered the same basic idea in one way or another.  It will remain a theory for a long time to go, until we are and have explored a lot more of our solar system.  Mine is just one of several theories abound.  Yes I have been able to simulate possible collisions, based on current observational and tracking data so far accumilated and published over the years. As you can tell from the dates I have listed so far in my theory, they possible dates of some of these incounters is very far apart.  That is based on positions of all of the currently known objects, like the Kipler objects and their relative positions at those times.  Several of the theories that are out there just use the major planets and their alignments for possible encounters, and discounting the smaller objects.  That is where my theory differs from others, in that I do include those objects in my model.  It is also why it has takes a lot of processing time to come up with dates of possible encounters.  I have over 7 terrabytes of orbital data generated so far.  There is a lot of data to analize

Progress report 10/30/2001

The running of the model has been restarted, I was unable to restart it from where I had to stop it last time, so restarted it from the beginning.  Lets see if I get the same results as of last time while it is catching up

Progress report:

Processing is continuing.  I have reached the point where we last left off.  There has been slight data discrepancies, but generally the data for the most part has matched.  The discrepancies have happened where the previous encounters as calculated have taken place.  It might be due to the number of variables caused by the number of items being orbitally backtracked

Keep it up, pal. I would expect some differences, due to the numerical approximations involved in a multi-body problem, and we would have to run it enough times to ensure reproducibility anyway, before publishing.

I have been running the model forward, as well as back, and if the pattern is accurate, the following prediction can be inferred from the data generated.   Next major encounter will take place approximately 3,337,951 years from now.  The model has shown it to be a close encounter, with some fireworks.  The model shows the rogue will pass through our outer solar system, with a close flyby of Saturn (57,000,000 miles out).  Not close enough to disturb the planet itself, but it will disrupt the rings (if my calculations are correct).  So we can expect major collisions of micrometeoroids from the ring onto Saturn’s moons.  Particularly Titan.
The rogue will be fractionally diverted from its path due to gravitational influence of our sun by .00054 degree's.  The rogue will enter our solar system at an angle of 4.693 degrees from solar plane, at a speed of 74 m/sec.  From its encounter with Saturn, the rogue shall continue its journey through the rest of the outer planets.  It will cross close to Uranus's path, but as Uranus will be located about 1/3 of the way further around the sun, their will be no encounter.  It will cross Neptune’s path, with no encounter.  It will miss Pluto's orbital path due to the angle.  It should strike at least 3 of the Kuiper objects though, and the results should be similar to comet collisions on Jupiter a few years ago.
With current equipment, we should be able to visibly spot this rogue approximately 1200 years prior to the encounter, but its magnitude is close to 22, extremely dim. (Earlier detection will be done by radio astronomy) The closer it gets the brighter it will become, and within 10 years of the encounter, it will be as bright as magnitude -1.2.  As bright as Jupiter on a clear sky.  This rogue will by encounter time be the brightest star visible at -3.1 magnitude, with a comet like tail.  It will take 1500 years to fade from visible view.  Due to it's calculated size of 2.54 Julian masses, this object does not generate it's own light (with the possible exception of lightning) but will be generating a detectable heat

any news  dingo?

How many people actually know of your theory (except us :) (http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/smile.gif ):))

God I love this thread!

Remcock,
Due to situations in my personal life, I have not been adding much to the theory recently, but I have had time to do a lot of anaylsis of the data generated so far.
My theory is not just here.  Though I have been only doing my updates to this site.  A few other sites have this thread referenced on their site as well. On the Hunt for Planet X website and forum, this theory of mine has been presented in an open chat discussion, which included a few well known astronomers, and there is planned during the month of February for me to come back and go into further depth into the details of my theory.  So far I have been keeping it out of the mainstream of discussion ( with the exception of here) in regards to the rest of the mainstream astronomy community due to the contraversial nature of my theory, until I have had time to rerun the model several times, as well as verify my formula's.
But recently announced findings that one of Uranus's moons is possibly not a natural satalite of that planet, but instead a captured satalite instead, gives me additional hope that my theory might be on the right track

Update:
It is about time I give an update in the status of my theory, as I have not updated things for the last several months.
So to bring people up to date, for the last few months after my crisis in my personnel life, I have been doing a lot of analsys of the data so far generated.
The conclusions so far is as follows...
Best case:
When:          447,512,833 years ago.
Size of rogue:  2.54 Julian masses
Collision with Uranus:  Yes glancing blow of the atmospheres, it basicly skipped.
Speed of rogue: 47.23 m/sec outnbound
Angle from solar plane of rogue.  &.713 degree's
Loss of speed of the rogue resulting from collision .691 m/sec
Secondary collision by a moon of the rogue, resulting in the possibilty of a multiple projectiles.  One large fragment of this collision directly struck Pluto.  data indicates this resulted in Pluto being split into multiple pieces (2 primary pieces, several fragments) Additional result distorted Pluto's orbit.

Fragmitary cloud formed resulting in the formation of the Kepler objects.  Additional effects were the bombardment of the rest of the planets for a period at least 1 million years in duration of large meteorites ranging from 1km to 50 km in size.  Composition of meteorites were primarily ice's

Hi there Dingo. I'm new to this forum BUT from what I've read of your nascent BUT promising theory, I must say I'm pretty impressed thus far. Just a few clarifications I seek and a few things to add. Hope they will be helpful.

All are in response to posts you made:

Posted on 7/20/01 7:04:21 pm
"My best answer to that question is no. Taking into account the size of our star, being a yellow dwarf, it's gravitational influance is not strong enough to maintain a planet with such a long periodic orbit."

"within a 5 light year radius of our star. There is no evidence what so ever of such a star in our immediate vacinity"

Hmmm have you considered the situation with the Alpha Centauri system? i.e. Proxima Centauri 4.22 light-years away from us is some 13,000 AU distant from the primary and secondary pair i.e. Alpha Centauri A and B (4.35 light-years away). BUT yet it is still gravitationally bound and move together with a common proper motion through space as a trinary. In a question that I posed to astronomers like Tom Van Flandern, Drs. John B. Murray, John Matese, Geoff Marcy, Burgasser, etc, they all said something to the tune that binaries and multiple systems with wider seperations than 13,000 AU exist and can and do have relatively stable orbits.

Probably it has to do with the nature of the component's orbit and characteristics of the primary star. Alpha Centauri A is the same type of star as our Sun i.e. a yellow G2 V dwarf, if Alpha Centauri system with a primary of a similar spectral type like the Sun can support a third member i.e. Proxima despite the latter being some 0.13 light years removed, why can't the Sun support a Late M Red Dwarf or Brown Dwarf at a similar distance?

Question with answer to/from Tom Van Flandern:
Question:
Extrapolating on the Alpha Centauri system, if such wide seperation of some 13,000 AU can exist between the primary and secondary pair on one hand and Proxima on the other, logically speaking can other binaries or multiple star systems NOT have gravitationally bound companions seperated by even GREATER distances? e.g. perhaps the Sun may have a cool Red or Brown dwarf in orbit some 13,000 AU or more removed? Are there systems around where companions have seperations even GREATER than 13,000 AU?
Answer:
Wider separations exist. Half the stars in the sky are double or multiple stars. The other half are single stars.

Questions with answer to/from Prof Gibor Basri:
Question:
Given that some astronomers think that the ratio of Brown Dwarfs to Stars ratio could be at least 2:1 maybe even more, what are the chances of us locating such a substellar object in the vicinity of our very own solar backyard? i.e. within 1 Light Year?
Answer:
Actually, we think that ratio is more like 1:10. But there is a substantial chance that the closest object is a BD, and people are looking (especially Davy Kirkpatrick
of the 2MASS survey).

Question:
Is it or is NOT possible that somehow there may be an object or 2 even 3 that are somehow inclined at over 30 degrees maybe even up to 90 degrees to the main planetary plane that remain yet to be discovered in our very own solar system? If this is so, will it be possible for this object to have part of its orbit within the orbit of Pluto?
Answer:
I suppose it is possible.

Question and Answer to/from Dr. John B. Murray:
Question:
Given that some astronomers think that the ratio of Brown Dwarfs to Stars ratio could be at least 2:1 maybe even more, what are the chances of us locating such a substellar object in the vicinity of our very own solar backyard? i.e. within 1 Light Year?
Answer:
Virtually zero.  At one light year distance, the magnitude will be several orders of magnitude below the detection limits of the largest telescopes, including Hubble.  The next generation of infra-red satellites, if they get funded and launched, might extend our present range so that they will be detectable.

Questions and Answers to/from Dr. John Matese:
Question:
Given that some astronomers think that the ratio of Brown Dwarfs to Stars ratio could be at least 2:1 maybe even more, what are the chances of us locating such a substellar object in the vicinity of our very own solar backyard? i.e. within 1 Light Year?  
Answer:
It won't likely occur soon, but technology is advancing so that I think it will happen within the this decade.

Question:
Is it or is NOT possible that somehow there may be an object or 2 even 3 that are somehow inclined at over 30 degrees maybe even up to 90 degrees to the main planetray plane that remain yet to be discovered in our very own solar system? If this is so, will it be possible for this object to have part of its orbit within the the distance to Pluto?
Answer:
It is possible that such an exotic earth-mass like object could have escaped detection. And I think such an object could occasionally be closer to the Sun than Pluto without messing up the orbits of the planets, but such an object has no basis in observations at present.

Implications and Conclusions:
Logically speaking if indeed the Sun's gravitational influence extends out to around a light-year or more, and any object orbiting it is a lesser object than a G-Dwarf, it could be possible for it to maintain a stable orbit around the Sun. It may also be advisable to take into consideration that some of the extrasolar planets/Brown Dwarfs found thus far have elliptical orbits that exhibit substantial degree of inclination.

Such an object exotic and bizzarre as it might be, although yet to be found, may be there although current technologies and instruments CANNOT furnish UNAMBIGUOUS and IRREFUTABLE evidence as yet. MOST astronomers with a SOUND mind are NOT willing to rule it or other objects out as yet.

Next consider these 2 following posts of yours:
Posted on 12/26/01 8:41:54 am
"will take place approximately 3,337,951 years from now
The rogue will enter our solar system at an angle of 4.693 degrees from solar plane, at a speed of 74 m/sec.
"it's calculated size of 2.54 Julian masses"


Posted on 6/24/02 10:30:01 pm
"When: 447,512,833 years ago.
Size of rogue: 2.54 Julian masses"

Can't help BUT notice the GLARING similarity in mass of your Rogue object i.e. 2.54 Mj, a PURE coincidence? NOTE the time difference i.e. 447,512,833 years ago and 3,337,951 years from now. This and given that the Escape Velocity of Sun is 6.19 km/s compared to your Rogue's 74 m/sec, could the former NOT be the same object as the latter? And thus a  NON fusor** in a remote orbit around the Sun? ;) (http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/wink.gif );)    

**
astron.berkeley.edu/~basr...planet.htm (http://astron.berkeley.edu/~basri/whatsaplanet.htm)

Some links here that may interest you:

1.) This ONE is SURE VERY CONVINCINGLY argued >>>
www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/ (http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/)

2.) Another reasonable piece >>>
www.naturics.de/applicati...index.html (http://www.naturics.de/applications/solar-cycles/index.html)

Focus especially on the subtopics and implicatins:
www.naturics.de/applicati...exact.html (http://www.naturics.de/applications/solar-cycles/scexact.html)
www.naturics.de/applicati...venus.html (http://www.naturics.de/applications/solar-cycles/scvenus.html)
www.naturics.de/applicati...ummar.html (http://www.naturics.de/applications/solar-cycles/scsummar.html)
www.naturics.de/applicati...onseq.html (http://www.naturics.de/applications/solar-cycles/scconseq.html)

Rajasun.  Excellent questions.

Alpha Centauri does not have the gravitational attraction nessisary to hold Proxima in it's captured orbit by itself, but when you add the gravitational influence of Beta Centauri to the model, the combined gravitational attraction of both stars is strong enough to keep Proxima in a stable highly eliptical captured orbit.  The distance of the Centauri zone in accordance with my model extends out to .23 lys at it's furthist point, so that Proxima is within the capture zone at .13 lys

Tom is correct in that there are several known star systems with multiple members with greater seperations between members.  It is mainly a question of the gravitational influence of the masses of the component members, and the interaction of their coorisponding gravity wells and the speed at which they orbit one another.  Sol's capture gravity well extends out to approximately .11 lys along the solar plane and .087 lys off the solar plane in accordance with my model.  (The difference in the numbers is caused by SOL's rotation, it flattens out the zone)

The chances of us discovering a BD within 1 ly is there, but is increasingly becoming more remote as our technology and research inprove.  Time will tell.

To further elaberate on this.  We have only discovered Pluto 66 yrs ago.  It has an orbit of 248 yrs.  It was noted that there was a wobble in it's orbit, and as a result astronomers discovered Charon, Pluto's moon/sister planet.  Pluto is being monitored to see if there is another wobble, which would indicate an additional and undiscovered planetary body within our solar system.  So far no wobble has been detected.
As for the inclinations of 30 and up to 90 degree's from solar plane, That is the biggest possibility for discovery of Planet X, or Nemisis as several people hope exists.  Please keep in mind that the solar wind is one of the biggest factor in the creation of the solar plane.  As the solar system was created within a spinning disk of material.  And solar wind also contributes significantly in stabilizing the orbits in their eliptical paths.


In regards to your second question, about the size and dates.  Those are calculated based on my model, I have not formed any conclusions at this point.  I can speculate that the rogue is not a member of our solar system, but is a member of our local cluster of stars and within the occolation of the galatic plane passes by or through our solar system periodiclly

It is as yet uncertain whether Proxima does indeed orbit the Alph Centauri pair. NASA LINK (http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970717b.html)

Quote:

---

 The third member of the system Alpha Centauri C lies 13,000 AU from A and B, or 400 times the distance between the Sun and Neptune. This is so far that it is not known whether Alpha Centauri C is really bound to A and B, or if it will have left the system in some million years.

---

I will look into that deeper.  It really depends on it's speed in relationship to Alpha and Beta Centauri.  I do know that depending on which calculations and formula's used it is either barily slow enough to be in orbit, or just fast enough to exceed the escape velocity of that system.  My personnel feeling on it, is that it is not an original star of the system, but a captured one instead, and is a possible example of a rogue star.  But it has been ruled out as one of the possible rogue flyby's in conjunction with my theory as it exceeds by several julian masses the maximum size that could have flown by Uranus without destroying that planet.

Sorry Dingo for replying this late, have been busy of late. Anyway just a few mistakes, definitions and misconceptions that NEED correcting. Here:
QUOTE:"Rajasun. Excellent questions.

Alpha Centauri does not have the gravitational attraction nessisary to hold Proxima in it's captured orbit by itself, but when you add the gravitational influence of Beta Centauri to the model, the combined gravitational attraction of both stars is strong enough to keep Proxima in a stable highly eliptical captured orbit. The distance of the Centauri zone in accordance with my model extends out to .23 lys at it's furthist point, so that Proxima is within the capture zone at .13 lys

Tom is correct in that there are several known star systems with multiple members with greater seperations between members. It is mainly a question of the gravitational influence of the masses of the component members, and the interaction of their coorisponding gravity wells and the speed at which they orbit one another. Sol's capture gravity well extends out to approximately .11 lys along the solar plane and .087 lys off the solar plane in accordance with my model. (The difference in the numbers is caused by SOL's rotation, it flattens out the zone)

The chances of us discovering a BD within 1 ly is there, but is increasingly becoming more remote as our technology and research inprove. Time will tell.

To further elaberate on this. We have only discovered Pluto 66 yrs ago. It has an orbit of 212 yrs. It was noted that there was a wobble in it's orbit, and as a result astronomers discovered Charon, Pluto's moon/sister planet. Pluto is being monitored to see if there is another wobble, which would indicate an additional and undiscovered planetary body within our solar system. So far no wobble has been detected.
As for the inclinations of 30 and up to 90 degree's from solar plane, That is the biggest possibility for discovery of Planet X, or Nemisis as several people hope exists. Please keep in mind that the solar wind is one of the biggest factor in the creation of the solar plane. As the solar system was created within a spinning disk of material. And solar wind also contributes significantly in stabilizing the orbits in their eliptical paths.


In regards to your second question, about the size and dates. Those are calculated based on my model, I have not formed any conclusions at this point. I can speculate that the rogue is not a member of our solar system, but is a member of our local cluster of stars and within the occolation of the galatic plane passes by or through our solar system periodiclly"
Source: dingo15068, Commodore and Captain of Phoenix, Posts: 878, (7/29/02 9:02:28 am)

Hate to break this to you BUT Beta Centauri otherwise categorized as Hadar, HR 5267, HD 122451 is a Bluish-White SuperGiant of Spectral Type B1III 525 Light-Years (L.Y.) away. They are in the same constellation i.e. Centaurus yes, BUT it is in NO way gravitationally bound to the Alpha Centauri Trinary in ANY sense! This is BASIC astronomy Dingo!

The second steller member component in the Alpha Centauri trinary is Alpha Centauri B NOT Beta Centauri. Alpha Centauri B is a cooler 5300 Kelvin K01V Orange-Yellow dwarf. Alternate designations of Alpha Centauri include Alp or Alf Cen B, HR 5460, Gl 559 B, Hip 71681, HD 128621, and LHS 51.## The pair is separated on an average of 24 AU and orbit one another every 79.9 years. Proxima orbits with a period of at least a million years and these days the consensus seems to be that it has an e > 0 orbit i.e. a hyperbolic orbit and is probably NOT gravitationally bound.@@
@@ According to Anosova et al (1994), however, its motion with respect to the AB pair is hyperbolic.
##1.
For MORE on Beta Centauri, go here:
www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan.../5267.html (http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan/constellations/hr/5267.html)
"Hadar is the 10th brightest star in the sky. Take a look at the list of the Brightest Stars

Beta Centauri (proper name Hadar) is a blue-white super giant and in about 4,000 years, the proper motion of Alpha Centauri will carry it close enough to Beta Centauri that they will appear to be a magnificent double star. Since Beta Centauri is about 300 light years away, they will be an optical double. Now the two stars look like two eyes, the right one (Beta) distinctly blue. They are called the 'pointer stars' since they point to the Southern Cross to the west. Some of the Australian aboriginals call them 'The Two Men that once were Lions'. Other aboriginals call them the twins that created the world. "

##2.
For a look at how FAR apart Alpha Centauri is from Beta Centauri, go here:
www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan...aurus.html (http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan/constellations/constellations/Centaurus.html)
Look out for the Greek alphabets alpha and beta. Bottom left corner of the Centaur i.e. the 2 front foot.
If you have used Beta Centauri INSTEAD of Alpha Centauri B in whatever model for the determination/calculation of their gravity wells. You have to redo the sums. A Blue-White SUPERGIANT an an Orange-Red dwarf are worlds apart.


And can't help it BUT noticed this also:
Pluto's Sidereal Period is NOT 212 years BUT this>>>
P = Distance (AU)^3/2 = (39.53)^3/2 = 248.5365 Years


Though it must be said separations on the scale of Matese's or Murray's Perturber are UNLIKELY i.e. 20000 to 32000 (0.31626 to 0.506 L.Y.) BUT orbital decay and occasional oscultation may play a hand in time to somewhat alter the shape and dimension of the orbit, stabilizing and harmonizing its motion over ten thousand or so binary orbits. From as yet unpublished sources, there now exist evidence that the source of the Pioneer anamoly MAY be perturbatory in nature and centered around a region of space located about 3400 - 3500 AU distant. This is as far as I can go without COMPROMISING on something that is ongoing research.

A couple of THOUGHT provoking articles and lines may be helpful:
##1. www.cfht.hawaii.edu/Refer...lleti4.htm (http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/Reference/Bulletin/Bull39/bulleti4.htm)

Accretion in PMS binaries: high angular resolution spectra with OSIS
J.-L. Monin and G. Duchêne (Grenoble).
During the past five years, many studies have addressed the question of the multiplicity in star-forming regions (SFR). While about 60% of G-K main sequence dwarfs belong to multiple systems in the solar vicinity (Duquennoy & Mayor 1991), several papers (e.g. Leinert et al. 1993) have pointed out that 80%, and maybe up to 100%, of Taurus young stars are not formed singly. More recently, this binarity excess has been found in other SFR (e.g. Ghez et al. 1997). It is a major theoretical challenge to explain several points including why do stars form in multiple system, and why is the degree of multiplicity different in different SFR and in the solar environment.

##2. www.solstation.com/stars/kuiper.htm (http://www.solstation.com/stars/kuiper.htm)
Thus far, these distant EKOs have escaped detection by deep ecliptic surveys, leaving astronomers to consider whether the outer E-K Belt was perturbed by something else other than the giant planets or that the primordial Solar nebula was smaller than currently hypothesized (Joseph M. Hahn, 2000; and explanation of Lynne Allen's current research).

##3. www.astro.lsa.umich.edu/u...earch.html (http://www.astro.lsa.umich.edu/users/rhiannon/currentresearch.html)
Beyond 50 AU, these gravitational perturbations would have been negligible, so an unperturbed distant Kuiper Belt would contain a much higher density of objects. At present, fewer than 10 KBOs out of the entire known sample are at distances greater than 50 AU, and none of these are on unperturbed, circular orbits. With my survey's faint limiting magnitude it is possible to detect smaller, more common KBOs to greater distances, thus measuring the density and extent of the outer Kuiper Belt.

Although this survey could have detected objects with diameters larger than160 km at distances up to 65 AU over much of the field, I did not find any KBOs beyond 53 AU, and none in the circular orbits expected of a primordial Kuiper Belt beyond 48 AU. Comparing this absence of KBOs in an annulus from 55 to 65 AU with the seven KBOs found between 40 and 50 AU in the same survey indicates the volume density in the outer region is at most 68% the volume density of the inner region, at a 95% confidence level (Allen, Bernstein & Malhotra 2001).

These other sources could be perturbations from giant planetesimals or planetary embryos scattered through the belt or perturbations from a close stellar encounter early in the history of the solar system (Ida et. al., 2000).

##4. www.solstation.com/stars/kuiper.htm (http://www.solstation.com/stars/kuiper.htm)
By late 2000, over 300 EKOs had been discovered. However, none were found to be currently orbiting farther from the Sun than 55 AUs, despite recent surveys that were capable of detecting objects out to 65 AUs out. Lynne Allen and Gary Bernstein of the University of Michigan and Renu Malhotra, of the University of Arizona and the Lunar Planetary Laboratory suggest that some event may have stripped away most of the planet-building material beyond 50 AUs from the Sun (more information).


##5. www.imsa.edu/edu/astrophy...ation.html (http://www.imsa.edu/edu/astrophys/studentwork/anneka/binaries/formation.html)
The protostellar nebular is now disk shaped with either a central mass concentration or a more uniform density. The former leads to a single star system, and the latter leads to binary and multiple star systems.

##6. www.astro.wisc.edu/prints...bs00.ps.gz (http://www.astro.wisc.edu/prints/mathieu/fbs00.ps.gz) (if you are on a *NIX based machine, otherwise this>>>
216.239.51.100/search?q=c...n&ie=UTF-8 (http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:CSmHvLoytDIC:www.astro.wisc.edu/prints/mathieu/fbs00.ps.gz+circumbinary+disk&hl=en&ie=UTF-8)


Revisiting the topic of gravity, isn't it interesting that the Sun is thought to exercise enough influence even out to some 50,000 to 200,000 AU (depending on which estimate you stand by)^^ and YET people find it difficult to contemplate the idea of a Low MASS stellar or substellar or EVEN DEGENERATE NON FUSING Grey Dwarf in the Scattered Disk or Oort Cloud. hmmm...isn't it true that smaller bodies like the comets SHOULD have been MORE EASILY lost%% to interstellar space than are LARGER, MORE MASSIVE ordinary or DEGENERATE objects? Compare these:
Pluto
Escape velocity (m/sec)..............................1100
Jupiter
Escape velocity (m/sec)..............................59500
Sun
Escape velocity (m/sec)..............................617700
Source:
pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/.../pluto.htm (http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/welcome/pluto.htm)
pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/...upiter.htm (http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/welcome/jupiter.htm)
pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/...uranus.htm (http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/welcome/uranus.htm)
seds.lpl.arizona.edu/nine...s/sol.html (http://seds.lpl.arizona.edu/nineplanets/nineplanets/sol.html)

%%
Given that Vesc = Sqrt[(2 * G * M)/r], where Vesc = Escape Velocity, G = Gravitational Constant, M = Mass of Object and r = radius of object

^^1. astron.berkeley.edu/~basr...lec08.html (http://astron.berkeley.edu/~basri/astro10/lectures/lec08.html)
The giant planets also perturbed the orbits of many comets during the early solar system; these were ejected into a giant cloud of comets surrounding the solar system and extending out 50,000 AU or more: the Oort cloud. These comets are on very elliptical orbits which come down into the outer solar system, but they spend almost all their time very far away. Occasionally one comes in and is perturbed again into a short period orbit going into the inner solar system (like Ha