Goddamn Nibiru - Tyche

[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?

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.

The circling ice cloud would be much larger than the planet. If you consider how even a little debris makes the rings of saturn visible......?

[mistermack]

The circling ice cloud would be much larger than the planet. If you consider how even a little debris makes the rings of saturn visible......?

Yeh, but there's no real comparison, if their figure of 15,000 is accurate.
Saturn is about ten times farther out than Earth. If it was 15,000 times farther out, I don't think we'd see the rings, or the planet, and it's gravitational effect would be virtually undetectable.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

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.

The circling ice cloud would be much larger than the planet. If you consider how even a little debris makes the rings of saturn visible......?

So how come the Sun's oort cloud, which is (allegedly) many times larger, has never been directly observed? It is merely hypothesised as the source of most comets. Your visibility argument doesn't wash - although the orbital mechanics point that Zilla made is much more convincing.

I'll accept that there is a chance this thing is really there but I will require conclusive proof before I go buying real estate.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

XC, we get visitors from the Oort Cloud all the time, comets.

[Atheist-Lite]

There isn't any evidence. You could say there's alien bases on the moon and then go looking for them but without any evidence it just doesn't make sense.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

XC, we get visitors from the Oort Cloud all the time, comets.

The oort cloud is still hypothetical in as much as it has never been observed. We only see the comets when they get close enough to the sun to light up - there are supposedly billions of the things in the oort cloud but we can't see them directly - only the tiny fraction that wander near enough to us. It is a well founded hypothesis, for sure, but until we have ways of seeing lumps of ice at that distance from ourselves and any lightsource, it will remain theoretical.

So if Tyche has its own oort cloud, how would we be expected to see it as you claim? Which was my point. I will leave your strawman in my collection.

[rachelbean]

[Atheist-Lite]

Anyway even if it isn't observable it would still be there....nirubu would have a cloud of ice objects and these would be weakly placed so would be constantly crossing to the suns oort cloud and messing up things in a really bad chaotic way so that comets would be constantly thrown into the inner solar system.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Anyway even if it isn't observable it would still be there....nirubu would have a cloud of ice objects and these would be weakly placed so would be constantly crossing to the suns oort cloud and messing up things in a really bad chaotic way so that comets would be constantly thrown into the inner solar system.

You say. Kindly point me to the scientific papers on this. Or even a wiki article. Simply stating something you just thought of as fact is not doing science.

[Atheist-Lite]

Anyway even if it isn't observable it would still be there....nirubu would have a cloud of ice objects and these would be weakly placed so would be constantly crossing to the suns oort cloud and messing up things in a really bad chaotic way so that comets would be constantly thrown into the inner solar system.

You say. Kindly point me to the scientific papers on this. Or even a wiki article. Simply stating something you just thought of as fact is not doing science.

It isn't science to say there's a planet there without any evidence. Let's start at the beginning here?

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Anyway even if it isn't observable it would still be there....nirubu would have a cloud of ice objects and these would be weakly placed so would be constantly crossing to the suns oort cloud and messing up things in a really bad chaotic way so that comets would be constantly thrown into the inner solar system.

You say. Kindly point me to the scientific papers on this. Or even a wiki article. Simply stating something you just thought of as fact is not doing science.

It isn't science to say there's a planet there without any evidence. Let's start at the beginning here?

Well actually it is. Matese and Whitmire have produced peer-reviewed papers giving their reasons for believing its existence - namely the distribution of comets. You have just made an unsupported assertion based on your own gut instinct.

[TheGreatGatsby]

It's easy to see why they would link this to Nibiru. If the orbit is highly elliptical, it's possible that it was observable in the past, leading the amazingly sophisticated Mayan astronomers to predict a collision at a future date. That degree of sophistication would have given them more technology though, of which there is no evidence.

[Atheist-Lite]

Anyway even if it isn't observable it would still be there....nirubu would have a cloud of ice objects and these would be weakly placed so would be constantly crossing to the suns oort cloud and messing up things in a really bad chaotic way so that comets would be constantly thrown into the inner solar system.

You say. Kindly point me to the scientific papers on this. Or even a wiki article. Simply stating something you just thought of as fact is not doing science.

It isn't science to say there's a planet there without any evidence. Let's start at the beginning here?

Well actually it is. Matese and Whitmire have produced peer-reviewed papers giving their reasons for believing its existence - namely the distribution of comets. You have just made an unsupported assertion based on your own gut instinct.

It wouldn't just dislodge the objects on the outside edge of the oort cloud and sooner or later they'll have to explain why that doesn't happen, along with the absense of Niburu? Whereas 'natural bulging' of the Oort cloud would concentrate itself at the outer edge and explain all things- no Niburu required.....

[mistermack]

Linking this planet to the niburu stuff is a red herring.
If this was on an orbit so elliptical that it was going to collide with Earth in 2012, it would surely have to be in full view of powerful telescopes now, and as it's orbital period would probably be more than 100,000 Earth years, there is not likely to be legends of humans seeing it in the past.
.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

XC, we get visitors from the Oort Cloud all the time, comets.

The oort cloud is still hypothetical in as much as it has never been observed. We only see the comets when they get close enough to the sun to light up - there are supposedly billions of the things in the oort cloud but we can't see them directly - only the tiny fraction that wander near enough to us. It is a well founded hypothesis, for sure, but until we have ways of seeing lumps of ice at that distance from ourselves and any lightsource, it will remain theoretical.

One word: Occultation