Goddamn Nibiru - Tyche

[TheGreatGatsby]

There is mounting evidence for a gas planet or star IN OUR SOLAR SYSTEM.

Pluto was so 2006. Meet Tyche, a possible new planet that may be hanging out on the outer edge of our solar system.
John Matese and Daniel Whitmire of the University of Louisiana-Lafayette are causing a media frenzy with their claim that a gaseous object, estimated to be four times the mass of Jupiter, is within the sun’s gravitational field.
The professors say evidence gathered by the NASA space telescope WISE (Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer) will verify whether the planet exists. It is believed to be orbiting on the Oort Cloud in the outer reaches of the solar system.
The orbit of Tyche (pronounced ty-kee) would be 15,000 times farther from the sun than Earth. Matese and Whitmore say the space object is made up of hydrogen and helium, with an atmosphere similar to Jupiter’s.
The WISE telescope is currently in a polar orbit above Earth and its mission is to discover undetected cosmic objects. The telescope’s data will begin to be analyzed in April, and both Matese and Whitmore believe that in two years the data will reveal the presence of Tyche. "If it does, John and I will be doing cartwheels. And that's not easy at our age,” Whitmire said in an interview with The Independent.
Still, the International Astronomical Union would have the final word on whether Tyche is indeed the ninth planet.

Is it scientifically possible that this (alleged) planet is on a collision course with earth, or will it remain in its ultra-long distance from the sun?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The orbital mechanics studies done so far would have to be totally wrong to allow for ANOTHER massive object in the solar system.

[Atheist-Lite]

There is mounting evidence for a gas planet or star IN OUR SOLAR SYSTEM.

Pluto was so 2006. Meet Tyche, a possible new planet that may be hanging out on the outer edge of our solar system.
John Matese and Daniel Whitmire of the University of Louisiana-Lafayette are causing a media frenzy with their claim that a gaseous object, estimated to be four times the mass of Jupiter, is within the sun’s gravitational field.
The professors say evidence gathered by the NASA space telescope WISE (Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer) will verify whether the planet exists. It is believed to be orbiting on the Oort Cloud in the outer reaches of the solar system.
The orbit of Tyche (pronounced ty-kee) would be 15,000 times farther from the sun than Earth. Matese and Whitmore say the space object is made up of hydrogen and helium, with an atmosphere similar to Jupiter’s.
The WISE telescope is currently in a polar orbit above Earth and its mission is to discover undetected cosmic objects. The telescope’s data will begin to be analyzed in April, and both Matese and Whitmore believe that in two years the data will reveal the presence of Tyche. "If it does, John and I will be doing cartwheels. And that's not easy at our age,” Whitmire said in an interview with The Independent.
Still, the International Astronomical Union would have the final word on whether Tyche is indeed the ninth planet.

Is it scientifically possible that this (alleged) planet is on a collision course with earth, or will it remain in its ultra-long distance from the sun?

I question the logic. Anything that large would have it's own ring of planets and these would be noticed, or their constant disturbance of the Oort Cloud and the Kuiper belt would be noticed. This large body would have a significant effect on Jupiter and the other gas giants. They have no evidence just funds to look for evidence. I think it more likely the abominabal snowman exists to be quite frank. After all they have a footprint....don't they?

[FBM]

It's not impossible, but it's not terribly likely. Hard to imagine why optical telescopes wouldn't have picked it up already. I'll wait until the data are analyzed. It would be pretty cool, tho.

[mistermack]

I'm very much NOT mathematically inclined, but I can't see why this shouldn't be possible.
At 15,000 times bigger orbit, the gravitational pull on the sun would be absolutely miniscule, quite possibly undetectable, and likwise for the close-in planets.
And the time period for an orbit would also be vast, so slow that it would be nearly impossible to measure changes.
The orbit would have to be incredibly elliptical for there to be a chance of collision with earth, or any other planet.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We got the exploration devices to their destinations by knowing the orbital mechanics, which take into account all the major bodies in the solar system. If the solar system contained a body that wasn't accounted for in the orbital mechanics, the devices would have missed their targets. Cassini-Huygens, the Voyagers, etc., would have gone off track. They didn't. The orbital mechanics model is correct. No extra bodies in the solar system.

[mistermack]

We got the exploration devices to their destinations by knowing the orbital mechanics, which take into account all the major bodies in the solar system. If the solar system contained a body that wasn't accounted for in the orbital mechanics, the devices would have missed their targets. Cassini-Huygens, the Voyagers, etc., would have gone off track. They didn't. The orbital mechanics model is correct. No extra bodies in the solar system.

Like I said, you would have to do the maths. But there must be a distance where the object is so far out, that it's gravity and period of orbit would make no impact on the calculations, or an undetectable amount.

[Atheist-Lite]

I'm very much NOT mathematically inclined, but I can't see why this shouldn't be possible.
At 15,000 times bigger orbit, the gravitational pull on the sun would be absolutely miniscule, quite possibly undetectable, and likwise for the close-in planets.
And the time period for an orbit would also be vast, so slow that it would be nearly impossible to measure changes.
The orbit would have to be incredibly elliptical for there to be a chance of collision with earth, or any other planet.

I'm just thinking about this planets size and probably it formed at the same time as the sun....unlikely it was captured....consider the odds against capture....anyway it would have had its own acrettion disc and planetary formation...most important it would have its own oort cloud composed of ice and this would have such reflective properties, being much larger than Niburu itself, it would easily be one of the brightest visible objects in the solar system....where is it hiding? far side of the sun?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We got the exploration devices to their destinations by knowing the orbital mechanics, which take into account all the major bodies in the solar system. If the solar system contained a body that wasn't accounted for in the orbital mechanics, the devices would have missed their targets. Cassini-Huygens, the Voyagers, etc., would have gone off track. They didn't. The orbital mechanics model is correct. No extra bodies in the solar system.

Like I said, you would have to do the maths. But there must be a distance where the object is so far out, that it's gravity and period of orbit would make no impact on the calculations, or an undetectable amount.

The maths have already been done, I pointed that out. And a tiny error at the start turns into a huge error after a trip of a few billion miles.

[FBM]

We got the exploration devices to their destinations by knowing the orbital mechanics, which take into account all the major bodies in the solar system. If the solar system contained a body that wasn't accounted for in the orbital mechanics, the devices would have missed their targets. Cassini-Huygens, the Voyagers, etc., would have gone off track. They didn't. The orbital mechanics model is correct. No extra bodies in the solar system.

They did go off track, tho. It was attributed to the ever-so-slight disparities between Newtonian mechanics and relativistic space-time that are only significant over vast distances. IIRC, the initial calculations for the Voyagers failed to match the data much beyond the Mars orbital plane. That caused a lot of head-scratching at MC, and the last I read about it (a couple of years ago), they still hadn't accounted fully for the discrepancies.

I'd offer to look it up for you, but I wouldn't actually do it.

[Atheist-Lite]

We got the exploration devices to their destinations by knowing the orbital mechanics, which take into account all the major bodies in the solar system. If the solar system contained a body that wasn't accounted for in the orbital mechanics, the devices would have missed their targets. Cassini-Huygens, the Voyagers, etc., would have gone off track. They didn't. The orbital mechanics model is correct. No extra bodies in the solar system.

They did go off track, tho. It was attributed to the ever-so-slight disparities between Newtonian mechanics and relativistic space-time that are only significant over vast distances. IIRC, the initial calculations for the Voyagers failed to match the data much beyond the Mars orbital plane. That caused a lot of head-scratching at MC, and the last I read about it (a couple of years ago), they still hadn't accounted fully for the discrepancies.

I'd offer to look it up for you, but I wouldn't actually do it.

The discrepancy wasn't that great. Could be something floating out there but nothing on the scale of Tycho....most likey it is a bulge in the kuiper belt circling ice/rocks caused by the gas giants - a easily overlooked but obvious nudge in that would account for things.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We got the exploration devices to their destinations by knowing the orbital mechanics, which take into account all the major bodies in the solar system. If the solar system contained a body that wasn't accounted for in the orbital mechanics, the devices would have missed their targets. Cassini-Huygens, the Voyagers, etc., would have gone off track. They didn't. The orbital mechanics model is correct. No extra bodies in the solar system.

They did go off track, tho. It was attributed to the ever-so-slight disparities between Newtonian mechanics and relativistic space-time that are only significant over vast distances. IIRC, the initial calculations for the Voyagers failed to match the data much beyond the Mars orbital plane. That caused a lot of head-scratching at MC, and the last I read about it (a couple of years ago), they still hadn't accounted fully for the discrepancies.

I'd offer to look it up for you, but I wouldn't actually do it.

The discrepancy wasn't that great. Could be something floating out there but nothing on the scale of Tycho....most likey it is a bulge in the kuiper belt circling ice/rocks caused by the gas giants - a easily overlooked but obvious nudge in that would account for things.

A transient aggregation of individual objects into a pseudomass, for instance.

[Atheist-Lite]

We got the exploration devices to their destinations by knowing the orbital mechanics, which take into account all the major bodies in the solar system. If the solar system contained a body that wasn't accounted for in the orbital mechanics, the devices would have missed their targets. Cassini-Huygens, the Voyagers, etc., would have gone off track. They didn't. The orbital mechanics model is correct. No extra bodies in the solar system.

They did go off track, tho. It was attributed to the ever-so-slight disparities between Newtonian mechanics and relativistic space-time that are only significant over vast distances. IIRC, the initial calculations for the Voyagers failed to match the data much beyond the Mars orbital plane. That caused a lot of head-scratching at MC, and the last I read about it (a couple of years ago), they still hadn't accounted fully for the discrepancies.

I'd offer to look it up for you, but I wouldn't actually do it.

The discrepancy wasn't that great. Could be something floating out there but nothing on the scale of Tycho....most likey it is a bulge in the kuiper belt circling ice/rocks caused by the gas giants - a easily overlooked but obvious nudge in that would account for things.

A transient aggregation of individual objects into a pseudomass, for instance.

Yeah, you've got the technical words....

[FBM]

The discrepancy wasn't that great. Could be something floating out there but nothing on the scale of Tycho....most likey it is a bulge in the kuiper belt circling ice/rocks caused by the gas giants - a easily overlooked but obvious nudge in that would account for things.

I have only the dimmest of memories of reading a couple of stories on it. I also Either way, I'm looking forward to the observational data.

[mistermack]

I'm very much NOT mathematically inclined, but I can't see why this shouldn't be possible.
At 15,000 times bigger orbit, the gravitational pull on the sun would be absolutely miniscule, quite possibly undetectable, and likwise for the close-in planets.
And the time period for an orbit would also be vast, so slow that it would be nearly impossible to measure changes.
The orbit would have to be incredibly elliptical for there to be a chance of collision with earth, or any other planet.

I'm just thinking about this planets size and probably it formed at the same time as the sun....unlikely it was captured....consider the odds against capture....anyway it would have had its own acrettion disc and planetary formation...most important it would have its own oort cloud composed of ice and this would have such reflective properties, being much larger than Niburu itself, it would easily be one of the brightest visible objects in the solar system....where is it hiding? far side of the sun?

I would say that at 15,000 times our distance to the sun away, there isn't going to be much sunlight to reflect, so I can't see how it could be as bright as you suggest. Especially as the portion that is reflected directly back at the earth would be incredibly small. And we visit the far side of the sun every year, so that's unlikely.