NASA needs to change its assumptions to find Planet 9

In 2009 I summarized Earth Changes in a book that carries the title “More Than 60 Minutes- When Earth Stands Still” into which I connected together theories of established physics, geological discoveries, medical research, historical findings and ancient text to have found out that Earth Climate, its Temperature Belts, Global increase of Temperature, and Spin Speed are very much dependent on the location of Earth magnetic poles. I found out that Earth Spin Speed is not always constant and that at ancient times it used to spin much slower. I was able to propose a different magnetic configuration at Earth’s core and find out what makes Earth and/ or any other planet spin and change spin speed at times. I was able to explain the biblical events of the Exodus and the Great Deluge. I was able to explain the mysterious planet that Abraham saw. In my research all changes lead to a mystery planet that owns a strong magnetic grip that pulls the magnetic poles of our own planet and as such causes havoc; evidenced by increase quakes, volcanic activities, global warming, climate exchange, and would soon be evidenced in  relocation of Temperature Belts, difference at Sea Level(s), variation in Spin Speed and many more.   I established the grounds to justify an orbital cycle of that planet of 3,562 years (when moving from the Inner Solar to Oort Cloud and back) + 52 years (when moving from the Inner Solar to circle around the Sun and back) i.e. a total of 3,614 years and that the due date of its coming arrival at the Inner Solar System is August 2017.

In November 2010, the scientific journal Icarus published a paper by astrophysicists John Matese and Daniel Whitmire, who proposed the existence of a binary companion to our Sun, larger than Jupiter, in the long-hypothesized “Oort cloud” — a faraway repository of small icy bodies at the edge of our solar system. The researchers use the name ‘Tyche” for the hypothetical planet. Their paper argues that evidence for the planet would have been recorded by the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE), which NASA had launched earlier in 2009. In a press conference in November 2011 NASA announced that it would send WISE on a mission to scan the space in an effort to verify such a hypothesis. In 2012 NASA announced that no trace is found to signal the existence is of a new planet in the solar system.

In January 2016, Caltech researchers Mike Brown and Konstantine Batygin found evidence of a giant planet tracing a bizarre, highly elongated orbit in the outer solar system. The object, which the researchers have nicknamed Planet 9, is estimated to have a mass of about 10 times that of Earth and orbits about 20 times farther from the Sun on average than does Neptune. According to Caltech researchers, it would take this new planet between 10,000 and 20,000 years to make just one full orbit around the Sun. In February 2016 I shared my findings of 2009 with the Caltech researcher Konstantine Batygin, and suggested that the orbital path of such a planet to have an eccentricity of 0.9. In other words the orbital path would be thin, elongated or acute and not oval as presented by Caltech. In March 2017 the Caltech researcher Mike Brown updated the orbital shape in a tweet, and seemed to have adopted my recommendation.

Lately and on February 16th 2017 NASA came to announce a new website that uses WISE data to search for unknown objects in and beyond our own solar system. NASA has compiled a “flipbook” of short animations that show sky scans taken over several years. Participants can search for disruptions in the images — basically, clusters of tiny colored dots — and mark their findings. The goal is to pinpoint real moving celestial objects. Participants can then share and discuss their subjects in an online bulletin board. The “flipbooks” were compiled during a mission by WISE. The infrared-wavelength astronomical space telescope can detect darker objects that are farther away. There is a broad area — around four light-years — between Neptune and the nearest star, Proxima Centauri, which receives very little sunlight. This means objects in that zone can’t reflect light — and therefore are very hard to find. When WISE scanned the sky, it picked up images in that zone that NASA believes contain Planet 9. NASA says the images can easily fool processing systems, so they need human eyes to do the work.

figure-107-nasa-wise-scan

It appears that NASA made the assumption that the planet or object moves laterally in space when observed from Earth; or in other words it follows an oval and not acute elongated orbit. Therefore, it is highly possible that WISE screens taken over several years shall not show different locations for the same object. It is possible to have the object at screens taken over a number of years overlap on itself at same declination and right ascension. As it comes closer to the inner solar system, only then a shift in location could be observed from Earth over periods of times.

But, as it comes closer, one expect the object size to differ from one screen shot to the other. Therefore, I recommend NASA to reconsider its assumption and approach and to revisit all single object scans appearing at same declination and right ascension over a number of years. The only difference that NASA could be able to confirm is the change in object size and not in location. If the object is closing on us, then its size will appear larger as time passes by. Such a check could be done using a processing systems, since it is an easier task for a computer software to detect change in size, than a human eye.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to NASA needs to change its assumptions to find Planet 9

  1. katesisco says:

    I was thinking that a white dwarf which science has recently redefined to be highly magnetic (a magnetar–see R Duncan work at U of Texas ) which could be 15 miles in diameter which would then be a highly improbable discovery is the actual culprit. Note the lifetime of magnetars is millions not billions of years.
    I am ordering your book, thank you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s