I'm posting this in two threads since the info applies to both:
FB friend sent me this "HUGE media blackout regarding Earth and Moon orbital changes?"
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/229/227/HUGE_media_blackout_regarding_Earth_and_Moon_orbital_changes.html...and wrote:
"Here in WI (and mind you, I am NOT an expert with the compass) I looked up where the sun should set, and where it appeared to set, and had my husband independently measure, and it does seem like the sun sets NNW now, rather than W. We should be at 304 degrees, but only at around 290 degrees."
Thing is, at summer solstice, the sun does not set due west - it sets at its "highest" point which is close to NW. But still there IS something going on as I will describe.
The problem is this: our house is built in such a way that a little after sunrise on the winter solstice, the sunlight shines all the way through the house down the central hall. That is, the sun rises about 2/3rds of the way toward SE fro...m E. It then sets, very close to the SW heading.
Sunrise on Summer solstice, on the other hand, is closer to NE. It only actually rises due East and sets Due West at the time of the Spring and Autumn equinoxes. (I'm at 43-44 degrees north)
Okay, fine.
On the summer solstice, if I sit on the terrace, the sunset lines up exactly between a tree to my right and the side of the barn - been watching this for a number of years now. So I was sitting there on the terrace on the summer solstice two days ago and it struck me that the sun was not lining up as it always had before. In fact, I think we even have some solstice photos from a couple years back and I'll go out and take one today to make my point. (and check my memory!)
So then, there is this on youtube: Moon Orbit Wrong Cornell University
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4FlElhom7w&feature=relatedThis Cornell study (
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1102/1102.0212v6.pdf ) reports the following:
"On the anomalous secular increase of the eccentricity of the orbit of the Moon.”
A recent analysis of a Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) data record spanning 38.7 yr revealed an anomalous increase of the eccentricity of the lunar orbit amounting to de/dt_meas = (9 +/- 3) 10^-12 yr^-1. The present-day models of the dissipative phenomena occurring in the interiors of both the Earth and the Moon are not able to explain it. We examine several dynamical effects, not modeled in the data analysis, in the framework of long-range modified models of gravity and of the standard Newtonian/Einsteinian paradigm. It turns out that none of them can accommodate de/dt_meas. Many of them do not even induce long-term changes in e; other models do, instead, yield such an effect, but the resulting magnitudes are in disagreement with de/dt_meas. In particular, the general relativistic gravitomagnetic acceleration of the Moon due to the Earth's angular momentum has the right order of magnitude, but the resulting Lense-Thirring secular effect for the eccentricity vanishes. A potentially viable Newtonian candidate would be a trans-Plutonian massive object (Planet X/Nemesis/Tyche) since it, actually, would affect e with a non-vanishing long-term variation. On the other hand, the values for the physical and orbital parameters of such a hypothetical body required to obtain the right order of magnitude for de/dt are completely unrealistic. Moreover, they are in neat disagreement with both the most recent theoretical scenarios envisaging the existence of a distant, planetary-sized body and with the model-independent constraints on them dynamically inferred from planetary motions. Thus, the issue of finding a satisfactorily explanation for the anomalous behavior of the Moon's eccentricity remains open.
Now notice what this paper says in particular: "A potentially viable Newtonian candidate would be a trans-Plutonian massive object (Planet X/Nemesis/Tyche) since it, actually, would affect e with a non-vanishing long-term variation." This is suggesting a possible companion star affecting the solar system arrangements (though the youtubers naturally select "planet X" to shout).
But then the Cornell peeps say: "On the other hand, the values for the physical and orbital parameters of such a hypothetical body required to obtain the right order of magnitude for de/dt are completely unrealistic. Moreover, they are in n...eat disagreement with both the most recent theoretical scenarios envisaging the existence of a distant, planetary-sized body and with the model-independent constraints on them dynamically inferred from planetary motions. Thus, the issue of finding a satisfactorily explanation for the anomalous behavior of the Moon's eccentricity remains open."
In short, something is definitely up, but the Planet X model doesn't work.
That means, that the most likely object is more likely to be a companion star whose mass is not currently plugged into the given models.