osci

Some food for thought....

Is this beyond the bounds of the probable?

Does documented evidence exist to support this, such as the revelations contained in the "Egyptian book of the Earth"?......
or even the curious sightings by astronomers recorded over nearly a 300 year period from the 1600's to the late 1800's........

__________________
Democracy & Ignorance = A Winning Combination

rickove

Weres it hidding,what docs have you gleen this info from?Sure the Hubble woulda spotted it an we would see it all?

osci

apparently there are records from a number of astronomers at the time recording they had observed a very large crescent shaped body close to Venus that cast a shadow.

1662 Gian Domenico Cassini (director of the Paris Observatory)
the latest observation was supposedly made in 1892 by the american astronomer Edward Emerson Barnard, he describes an object of the seventh stellar magnitude being observed close to Venus.

__________________
Democracy & Ignorance = A Winning Combination

trash

No.

Documented (evidence) speculation; of ghosts, UFOs, bigfoot also does not lend support to these subjects either.

porkop

they made a movie about this.......Journey to the far side of the sun.

bit far fetched in my opinion

trash

! sdrawkcab saw ginhtyreve tub ,sey

osci

I would have thought the records of the astronomers of this period of what they had been observing would indeed be evidence enough to warrant further investigations.

__________________
Democracy & Ignorance = A Winning Combination

Globe

Off you go and investigate then, post back in this thread what you find.

osci

From what I understand the twin is supposed to be the same orbit as earth but almost behind the sun,
Also I guess one reason why hubble may not be able to see it, could simply be it may not be looking for it........

__________________
Democracy & Ignorance = A Winning Combination

Onefella

!!ON ,ON !taht ton !kcuf hO

nomeat

Without looking any further into this topic I think it is safe to assume that we would know about a hidden body the size of earth simply due to it's gravitational effects on the sun and the other planets.

bulbous

Elvis lives there !

porkop

quite true trash, but I dont think they spoke backwards? strange, not authentic hey

osci

its interesting you mention this, because apparently there is some, as yet, unknown effect or body which is affecting Uranus & Neptune, the affect is causing both these planets to wobble in their orbits.....it was thought that Pluto was the cause of these wobbles in Netune' & Uranus' orbit, however its now recognised that Pluto is way too small to be the cause of this......

__________________
Democracy & Ignorance = A Winning Combination

porkop

It could be a localised black hole?

Glenhuon

Ah!!! Planet X. There have been theories about this for decades, if not hundreds of years. Since we now have satellites and spacecraft that are able to see the opposite side of the Earths orbit, and have found nothing in any part of the electromagnetic spectrum, it seems to be a myth.
But, there's also the tale of Nemesis, a dense, dark, cold body in a hugely eliptical orbit that passes us by every umpteen million years and causes great disruption ( Extinction of the Dinousaurs etc).

Bill

trash

All this talk about imaginary planets, where there are much more interesting real ones. Like Earth's second moon Cruithne.
Cruithne, Earths "second moon"

It's not quite a moon because it's more an asteroid in a resonant orbit or synchronous solar orbit with earth rather than in orbit around the Earth. The Earth and Cruithne each have the same orbital period.

Pluto could also be considered a moon of Neptune by the same logic since they are also in a solar resonant orbit.

osci

Hi Bill......generally speaking I'd reckon virtually anyone would agree with that, however, if we look a bit closer at it, the question needs to be asked,

" are our satillites & spacecraft specifically programmed to look for this planet" "or anything, other than what their programmed to do/look for"

for example - the space probe that was sent to intercept the comet and fly through the tail last year or the year before (i forget the comets name) the camera on this probe would not have been able to see in any direction other than straight ahead and also it wouldn't have been able to take any snapshots other than what it was program for, the same can be said for the cassini probe, we only saw the pictures of what it was pre-programmed and this to take photos of the known planet on its flyby.

The Astronauts that went to the moon, they wouldn't have been able to see it, becasue they would have had to travel 10-15 further, keeping in mind that this planet is on the same orbit as the earth but on the other side of the sun.

but all the same I find it extremely interesting

__________________
Democracy & Ignorance = A Winning Combination

osci

thats some scary, but really interesting stuff from that link, to think an asteroid can come that close to earth...........but on the other hand, why call this an imaginary planet, is it simply because it hasn't been found or is it simply we have no desire to look when there is evidence which supports this.. its existence.

__________________
Democracy & Ignorance = A Winning Combination

intelliGEORGE

Google has a car that captures 360 degree 20Mpixel images, yet somehow NASA will only have 1 camera on the space probe. I don't think so. I'd think if I was spending millions to send up a space probe, I'd be putting more than 1 camera on it.