Re: Planet X: the UNWISE Astronomer

James Daggett (jdaggett@gate.ent) wrote:
> 4) Planet X has an eliptical orbit and that the Sun 
>    and some brown star are at the foci. Now you 
>    have given us two pieces of information that is 
>    very useful. One the period of 3657 years and 
>    second that the distance between the two foci is 
>    18.724 time the distance of Pluto from the Sun. 
>    Now let's examine the orbital data from the 
>    given data. From the period we can deduce the 
>    semi-major axis from Kepler's third law. 

Oh please.  Mankind's “laws” are so far from that.  Newton is finally
being lowered into his grave, long awaiting him, per recent probe
behavior.  There will still be those that roar up and defend his
mis-conceptions, which the Zetas have politely termed DESCRIBING what
Newton saw, not explaining it.  

SCIENTISTS BAFFLED BY SATELLITE FORCE
  A baffling force which appears to be holding back two 
  satellites could make scientists rewrite the laws of physics. 
  Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11, launched in the early 1970s to 
  explore the farthest reaches of space, are at the solar 
  systems edge, 7.63 billion miles from Earth. But 
  something is pulling them back towards the Sun, and 
  causing the two probes to slow down by 6mph every 
  century. The force, first spotted by NASA in 1980, 
  and put down then to an error in calculations, is 
  significant and consistent enough that scientists 
  believe it can only be explained by tearing up the 
  theory of gravity.

  BBC Science Page

As explained to me, Newton's laws of gravity don't hold up over huge
distances in space. Space probes Pioneer 10 and 11 are being "pulled back"
to the sun by some unknown force. The force is small but constant, and
it seems to affect the Galileo and Ulysses probes to a similar degree.
Scientists are considering the possibility that the probe has revealed a
new force of nature. Dr. Duncan Steel, a space scientist at Salford
University, says even such a weak force could have huge effects on a
cosmic scale. 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/02/10/wnasa10.xml&sShe%20et=/news/2002/02/10/ixworld.html