Session 3 August 1996

Palinurus

The Living Force
pavlin_k said:
That apparent contradiction might be solved with changing the frame of reference.

What if the explanation fits a 3 star system?

Hey pavlin_k,

I'm afraid your ingenious exegesis doesn't hold water as it is based on faulty assumptions -- which probably stems from your non-acquaintance with some of the basic materials.
There simply cannot be a three fold star system at play here -- if only for the following quotes from the same current session:

Q: (T) Okay, what is the twin sun theory?

A: Theory that the sun is really a double star.

Q: (L) Well, that is a damn good question! (T) What makes one atom helium and one atom oxygen? How do they know how to become what they are?

A: No.

Q: (T) Well, what determines the number?

A: Is it the composition of the nucleus?

Q: (L) Yeah. That's right. We forgot. What causes or determines the number of protons or whatever in the nucleus?

A: What composition would cause the orbiting of one electron?

Q: (L) One proton?


A: Now, think macro-dynamically.

Q: (L) Well, you once said that the sun is a window, or transition point to another density. Are you saying that the nucleus of an atom is also a window?

A: What we are saying is the sun is a proton and its twin is an electron!

But there is much, much more available to probably rank your exegesis among the realm of creative and inventive fantasies, and other confabulations. Like this for instance, a discussion about the discrepancy between 56% and 3.4%, or 0.56% even: Computational modelling of the companion star and its interaction with Sol notably Reply #7 - #13, but that whole topic is pertinent here.

Then we have:
pavlin_k said:
http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic said:
July 4, 1998
A: Solar system, in concert with "mother star," is revolving around companion star, a "brown" star.

"The Mother star" ( partner ) and "The Little Brother" ( companion ), both of them "brown" stars.

You are reading this snippet completely out of context. Mother star is in quotes and here just means our own sun as being part of the solar system, i.e. planets plus sun/star. The whole system is revolving around the companion star which means they are moving 'in tandem' with one another which signifies two:

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic said:
A: They are moving in tandem with one another along a flat, elliptical orbital plane. Outer reaches of solar system are breached by passage of brown companion, thus explaining anomalies recently discovered regarding outer planets and their moons.

More background and further context in this topic: Some transcripts about dark companion and comet cluster

And now about this other snippet you mentioned:

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic said:
A: Other bodies not known to earth science.

More on what specifically that probably means, to be found in this topic: Another Hit ? - Solar System Structure


A general discussion about this whole matter can be found here: Incoming Second Sun?

Also relevant are (to name but a few):

NASA's WISE Survey Finds Thousands of New Stars, But No 'Planet X'
Another Hit for the Cassiopaeans? - Brown Dwarf Companion Star

Session 18 March 2000 with this remark therein that seems to give us some wriggling room for divers interpretations but NOT for a wild goose chase:
A: Our "companion star" data was meant as a clue for guidance purposes, not as the be all and end all.

Finally, when you do a forum wide search for companion star you will get 6 pages of results with 163 references in total.

So like I said, there really is much, much more available if you're genuinely interested, and I didn't even mention SotT.

Hope this helps a bit. :)
 

pavlin_k

The Force is Strong With This One
Palinurus said:
Session 18 March 2000 with this remark therein that seems to give us some wriggling room for divers interpretations but NOT for a wild goose chase:
A: Our "companion star" data was meant as a clue for guidance purposes, not as the be all and end all.
That is another reminder that when asking with strong prejudice, for just one companion, the greater truth can shine through only as clues.

Palinurus said:
Finally, when you do a forum wide search for companion star you will get 6 pages of results with 163 references in total.

So like I said, there really is much, much more available if you're genuinely interested, and I didn't even mention SotT.

Hope this helps a bit. :)
Any theory needs validation from the empirical data.
What better empirical evidence for a star then photos?
_http://files.kostovi.com/C_borealis_2.jpg
_http://files.kostovi.com/C_borealis.jpg

Q: (A) I want to continue questions from the previous session. First, about this companion star: where is it now; which part of the zodiac?
A: Libra Constellation.
The answer is as accurate as the limitation of the question allows.
Corona Borealis is above zodiacal Constellation Libra.

Some estimations regarding our little brother
diameter: 1.7 Jupiter's
density: the same as the Sun's
orbital period: 14000 years
distance now: 45 000 AU

Compare that with the Mother star here ( with photo evidence ).
http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,35630.0.html

The Mother Star is positioned on the summer solstice in the general direction of Sirius.
As hinted in this answer concerning Sirius.
Laura said:
A: Not Sol’s companion; but look in that direction for clues to your own little brother.
 

Palinurus

The Living Force
That is another reminder that when asking with strong prejudice, for just one companion, the greater truth can shine through only as clues.

Pavlin_k, I'm totally at a loss where from you actually got this fixed idea about asking with strong prejudice (no less!).

Fact of the matter is that the C's themselves have voluntarily initiated the concept of a companion star (singular, not plural). It's not an idea that originated from Laura or Ark or whoever, initially, as far as I can recall.

Why would the C's introduce a false idea and then never correct it even once, whilst the subject has been discussed with them numerous times without any prejudice in any shape or form concerning any possible answer about it that I know of?

Would you be able to give an example where such prejudice was clearly shown as per your opinion of it?
 

pavlin_k

The Force is Strong With This One
Palinurus said:
Would you be able to give an example where such prejudice was clearly shown as per your opinion of it?
Show us your empirical data.
Show us your photos.
How would you support your statement that there is only two stars in the solar system?
 

Palinurus

The Living Force
My current position is NOT that we have a system with two stars, you misread or misinterpreted what I wrote. For me the solar system consists of one star, our sun called Sol, and a number of planets.

The C''s have offered a hypothesis about a companion star (brown dwarf) to tentatively explain why the supposedly incoming periodical comet cluster (roughly 3600 year period) would this time be more densely populated than usual. Because of the relatively short lasting proximity of this hypothetical brown dwarf to the Oort cloud at its perihelion, its gravity would influence some of the bodies out there and send them on a trajectory in the direction of Sol, thereby possibly endangering earth.

This hypothesis has not yet been proved right or wrong because of lack of sufficient observations. According to conventional science no brown dwarf has been spotted that would match the C's hypothesis. You claim otherwise, apparently. I'm not convinced you're right.

This PDF-file contains the latest (2012) I could find about thirteen recently observed nearby brown dwarfs: _http://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.2122v1.pdf

Conventional science sources:

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_stars_and_brown_dwarfs
_http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/12lys.html
_http://www.bodurov.com/NearestStars/
_http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e9/Near-stars-past-future-en.svg/1279px-Near-stars-past-future-en.svg.png

Animations:

_http://fiddle.jshell.net/Ovid/ALMZD/3/show/
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nearest_stars_rotating_red-green.gif
 

pavlin_k

The Force is Strong With This One
Palinurus said:
The C''s have offered a hypothesis about a companion star (brown dwarf) to tentatively explain why the supposedly incoming periodical comet cluster (roughly 3600 year period) would this time be more densely populated than usual. Because of the relatively short lasting proximity of this hypothetical brown dwarf to the Oort cloud at its perihelion, its gravity would influence some of the bodies out there and send them on a trajectory in the direction of Sol, thereby possibly endangering earth.

This hypothesis has not yet been proved right or wrong because of lack of sufficient observations. According to conventional science no brown dwarf has been spotted that would match the C's hypothesis. You claim otherwise, apparently. I'm not convinced you're right.

This PDF-file contains the latest (2012) I could find about thirteen recently observed nearby brown dwarfs: _http://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.2122v1.pdf

Conventional science sources:

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_stars_and_brown_dwarfs
_http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/12lys.html
_http://www.bodurov.com/NearestStars/
_http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e9/Near-stars-past-future-en.svg/1279px-Near-stars-past-future-en.svg.png

Animations:

_http://fiddle.jshell.net/Ovid/ALMZD/3/show/
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nearest_stars_rotating_red-green.gif

Conventional science has it's own agenda.
Agenda that is not beneficial to humanity if you look around and observe the results.
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.

Here you can find 20 nearby brown dwarfs that conventional science ignores.
_http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15107#p96752
 

Palinurus

The Living Force
Conventional science has it's own agenda.
Agenda that is not beneficial to humanity if you look around and observe the results.
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.

Here you can find 20 nearby brown dwarfs that conventional science ignores.
_http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15107#p96752

Pavlin_k, once again I'm unable to follow your line of reasoning in these sweeping statements.

Granted, conventional science has all sorts of problems, especially when mismanaged and misused by psychopaths for their diverse nefarious agendas. That sorry state of affairs obviously doesn't prevent you from using their raw data to distill your own pictures out of those, judging on the list you linked to.

Furthermore, in the current context of this topic there's no way 'we' created problems which 'we' cannot solve with our current way of thinking. Where did you get that from? It doesn't apply here at all.

Which brings me to this other question: what exactly is your agenda?
 

romochar

Jedi Master
Brown dwarf star: In the news!

_http://news.sciencemag.org/space/2014/08/water-clouds-tentatively-detected-just-7-light-years-earth

Article was also mentionned on SuspiciousObservers at: _http://youtu.be/f9KJoUIdJRg

It's not the kind of star we read about that often, so I thought it might be good to share here? This session has always reverberated in me from the first timje i read it... These subjects are out of my depth but i wondered if the distance and the details might be OFF?! Whithin other things...
 

Merlin

Padawan Learner
Guess Pavlin has got it right . . .

Quote - pavlin_k Re: Session 3 August 1996

The Mother Star is positioned on the summer solstice in the general direction of Sirius.
As hinted in this answer concerning Sirius.

There is another reference to Sirius - strangely it appears in a WICCAN romance teen-pulp fiction graphical novel The Rose and The Cross by Kelly Sebastina. A blurb from Amazon says:-

Fleeting glimpses of WICCA and Mary Magdalene embedded in a pictorial essay on the antics of teen nymphet Angie who snares Uncle Chris to discover the Nectar of Immortality. Plus, a discussion on women's emancipation, the hidden dynamics of the US Civil War, the collapse of Communism, why smokers can't kick the habit, the origins of football, and, finally, why the bell tolls for the EU with the revocation of the Death Penalty.

www.amazon.com/Rose-Cross-Kelly-Sebastina/dp/1516916662

The image on Page 231-232 shows the solar system in a 24,000 year orbit with Sirius A and Sirius B . . . All good things happen in the Ascending Cycle (12,000 years) and vice versa for the Descent (12,000 years) . . .
 

Attachments

  • Pg 231-232.png
    Pg 231-232.png
    180 KB · Views: 67
  • 41D39ehqBjL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
    41D39ehqBjL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
    27.2 KB · Views: 65
  • 71jTqnhA4JL.jpg
    71jTqnhA4JL.jpg
    227.7 KB · Views: 66

thorbiorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
In this post, I attempt to link what the C's said in this session about the speed of the comet cluster, with what is known about the speeds of known comets and their meteor streams. The cluster I'm referring to is the 3600-year cycle mentioned on many occasions. At the end, I wonder if cluster could also be clustering.

The speed of the incoming comet cluster according to the C's
From this session:
A: Let us just say that the cluster travels much faster than the usual cometary itinerary.
Long-periodic comets have orbital times from around 200 to 1000 years. Comets with periods longer than 1000 years are listed as near-parabolic comets. If this cluster reappears about every 3600 years then the comets must be near-parabolic comets.

The period of comets varies, and so do their speeds
The Lunar and Planetary Institute has a page about Impact Cratering Mechanics with illustrations designed for educational purposes. The first one shows that the speed of long-period comets is higher.
01 (1).jpg
In the description, they explain:
The minimum velocity of objects impacting the Earth is ~11.2 km/s, which is equivalent to the escape velocity of the Earth. Asteroids, the most common type of impactor, slam into the Earth at an average velocity of 18 km/s. Short-period comet impacts with the Earth are less common, but have higher impact velocities averaging 30 km/s. Even rarer are impacts from long-period comets at higher impact velocities that average 53 km/s.
The speed of 53 km/s for long-period comets could be an average between 45 km/s and 70 km/s, weighted for frequency with slow being more common. There are objects faster than this, like the interstellar space rock Oumuamua that moved at 83.7 km/s,

The described differences in speed between short and long period comets may be idealized and not hold in all cases. For instance the 55P/Tempel-Turtle Comet, a short-period comet, mentioned in a German list and this Japanese, has of period of 33 years, but the speed is close to 71 km/s. This is the same as for the meteor stream associated with Temple-Tuttle, the Leonid meteoroids, which "are considered to be some of the fastest meteors out there." But is that speed an anomaly caused by factors in the space of its present orbit, or might and Tempel-Turtle originate from a faster and larger comet with a longer period? Is there something to the Temple.Tuttle and its Leonids along what Aristotle thought. In article about the Great Leonids Meteor Storm of 1833, one finds:
Olmsted also overturned a 2,000-year-old doctrine developed by Aristotle that held that meteors were the fiery sparks of the remains of enormous gas bubbles that rose into the air, before exploding high above the ground.
If Aristotle had an idea that meteor streams could be a result of comets breaking up, then he was onto something. Olmsted's thinking was fine, but not the whole story.

The speed of some meteor streams associated with comets
If the Leonids are fast, what about others? I tried to look up a site on NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory with meteor streams to check if they were associated with comets. In some instances, yes, for others discoveries are waiting or their parent comet is long gone.

Next are a few examples of comets associated with streams and chosen from those with the longest orbits I could find in the list:
C/1739 K1 is a parabolic comet, and they don't give and orbit. If it has, it will be very long period, but it does have a stream, the Leonis Minorids that move at 62 km/s
C/1911 N1 (Kiess) has a period of 2489 years and is associated with the Aurigids. The German Wiki is more informative and gives the speed as 66 km/s
C/1983 H1 (IRAS-Araki-Alcock) has a period of 970 years and is the parent of Eta Lyrids with average speeds close to 44 km/s
C/1861 G1 (Thatcher) has a period of 415 years and gives rise to the April Lyrids, and they have speeds around 48 km/s
C/1979 Y1 (Bradfield) has a period of 307 years, and has given rise to the July Pegasids that moves at 65 km/s
The above examples indicate that the long-period and near-parabolic comets are in the fast lane; two-three or more times faster than the average impact speed on Earth, if the speeds of their meteor streams are reliable indicators of their own speed. Since only meteor streams in the list from NASA have been assigned a comet, there is much to discover. Add to this that the NASA list of meteor streams is much shorter than this from Universeguide.com

The 3600-year cluster and meteor streams
Perhaps one of the meteor streams not yet associated with a comet, or meteors not yet associated with a stream owe their existence to a comet cluster with a period of 3600 years. If there is an uptick in the number of observations of fast meteors, it could be an indication of a change in the cosmic environment. A difficulty with observing meteors precisely, is that the equipment has to very carefully set up. A small error can make a lot of difference when calculating the orbit and the period of the meteor.

A few known comets in the 3600-year league
Below are some examples from the Wiki list of near-parabolic comets with periods of 3600 years ±100 years. The name of the comet is to the left, the period to the right. For other explanations, see the link above.
Near-parabolic comets ~3600y.png

Could cluster also mean clustering?
When one considers an orbit of 3600 years then a cluster may mean not all at one time, but close together, or within a few years. Another possibility is that there is a rhythm to the appearance of comets, that creates a clustering effect of comets from all over the place at regular intervals, similar to how some muscles of a heart contracting come closer together. If one can observe structures and beauty in a Mandelbrot set, or among numbers, why not unexpected patterns and structures in cosmic space and among comets. It is still possible we will be rather surprised.
 

Palinurus

The Living Force
Could cluster also mean clustering?
When one considers an orbit of 3600 years then a cluster may mean not all at one time, but close together, or within a few years. Another possibility is that there is a rhythm to the appearance of comets, that creates a clustering effect of comets from all over the place at regular intervals, similar to how some muscles of a heart contracting come closer together. If one can observe structures and beauty in a Mandelbrot set, or among numbers, why not unexpected patterns and structures in cosmic space and among comets. It is still possible we will be rather surprised.
In a previous session it was revealed that the pattern of the comet cluster would be like a spirograph which means at first it will look like a single body but when coming closer to earth the individual comets would seem to come in from all angles at once.

Session October 7, 1994:
Q: (L) How many are in this cluster?
A: Varies.
Q: (L) Do they lose or pick any up from time to time?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) How big is the biggest one at this time?
A: 900 miles diameter. Spirograph.

Later on there was also this: Session July 4, 1998:
Q: (A) I understand that this comet cluster is cyclic and comes every 3600 years. I want to know something about the shape of this comet cluster. I can hardly imagine...
A: Shape is variable. Effect depends on closeness of passage.
Q: (L) So, it could be spread out... (A) We were asking at some point where it will be coming from. The answer was that we were supposed to look at a spirograph.
A: Yes.
Q: (A) Now, spirograph suggests that these comets will not come from one direction, but from many directions at once. Is this correct?
A: Very good!!!
Q: (A) Okay, they will come from many directions...
A: But, initial visibility presents as single, solid body.
 

thorbiorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
In a previous session it was revealed that the pattern of the comet cluster would be like a spirograph which means at first it will look like a single body but when coming closer to earth the individual comets would seem to come in from all angles at once.
Thank you @Palinurus, perhaps it is possible to imagine how that might work out.
Regarding: Session October 7, 1994:
Q: (L) How many are in this cluster?
A: Varies.
Q: (L) Do they lose or pick any up from time to time?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) How big is the biggest one at this time?
A: 900 miles diameter. Spirograph.
900 miles is 1440 km or a radius of 720 km. Comparing with the size of object in the Solar System it would in size be similar to the minor planet Makemake. That is huge, and the gravity interaction between the bodies might be responsible for the spiralling effect. One can imagine a group of bodies, with some larger some smaller, loosely bound by gravity, having a center of gravity outside each of them and then moving together at the same time in an highly elliptical orbit.
Below are three Spirographs, of which the middle also carries the idea of a spiral.
Spirograph2.jpgSpirograph 3.jpgSpirograph2.png
And more simple from Mathworld.Wolfram.com are these:
Spirographs_825.gif

A hypotrochoid generated by a fixed point on a circle rolling inside a fixed circle. The curves above correspond to values of
a=0.1
, 0.2, ..., 1.0.
 
Top Bottom