Two Suns? Twin Stars Could Be Visible From Earth By 2012

Cyre2067

The Living Force
_http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/20/two-suns-twin-stars_n_811864.html

Earth could be getting a second sun, at least temporarily.

Dr. Brad Carter, Senior Lecturer of Physics at the University of Southern Queensland, outlined the scenario to news.com.au. Betelgeuse, one of the night sky's brightest stars, is losing mass, indicating it is collapsing. It could run out of fuel and go super-nova at any time.

When that happens, for at least a few weeks, we'd see a second sun, Carter says. There may also be no night during that timeframe.

The Star Wars-esque scenario could happen by 2012, Carter says... or it could take longer. The explosion could also cause a neutron star or result in the formation of a black hole 1300 light years from Earth, reports news.com.au.

But doomsday sayers should be careful about speculation on this one. If the star does go super-nova, Earth will be showered with harmless particles, according to Carter. "They will flood through the Earth and bizarrely enough, even though the supernova we see visually will light up the night sky, 99 per cent of the energy in the supernova is released in these particles that will come through our bodies and through the Earth with absolutely no harm whatsoever," he told news.com.au.

In fact, a neutrino shower could be beneficial to Earth. According to Carter this "star stuff" makes up the universe. "It literally makes things like gold, silver - all the heavy elements - even things like uranium....a star like Betelgeuse is instantly forming for us all sorts of heavy elements and atoms that our own Earth and our own bodies have from long past supernovi," said Carter.

A nearby supernova eh? :cool: :cool2:
 
Omg this is one of the most exiting news ever!!! I hope its true and in case it does happen, it to be beneficial. Thanks for posting Puck!! :D :D
 
maybe the press will soon start to do some damage control so when people will see things in the sky they will be not alarmed. A supernova will be a shiny, maybe very very shiny star in the sky. If we see a twin Sun, which means a certain angular diameter, things are surely not funny. It reminds me of this drawing:
 

Attachments

  • missing.gif
    missing.gif
    14.3 KB · Views: 4
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/221925-Will-Betelgeuse-Really-Become-a-Second-Sun-in-2012-
 
mkrnhr said:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/221925-Will-Betelgeuse-Really-Become-a-Second-Sun-in-2012-

Question: Thought the brown dwarf star is the same as Comet Elenin, which is the second sun, and is passing the earth very nearby in 2011?? :huh:

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/221672-Comet-Elenin-is-Coming-
 
SolarMother said:
mkrnhr said:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/221925-Will-Betelgeuse-Really-Become-a-Second-Sun-in-2012-

Question: Thought the brown dwarf star is the same as Comet Elenin, which is the second sun, and is passing the earth very nearby in 2011?? :huh:

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/221672-Comet-Elenin-is-Coming-

Hi SolarMother,
The C's have said the closest part of the orbit of the twin sun barely enters the outer edge of the Oort Cloud which is at the outer edge of our Solar System: "A: Oort cloud is located on outer perimeter orbital plane at distance of approximately averaged distance of
510,000,000,000 miles.". So it is impossible for Comet Elenin to be the brown dwarf/second sun.
 
I just found the attached images on a blog that I am occasionally reading at _http://www.salamandra.de/tagebuch/start.php:

[quote author=Luisa Francia]
auf einer wanderung durch die schneeweite entdeckte ich ein zweites licht, das strahlte wie die sonne, nur halt kleiner. das war direkt ein bisschen unheimlich. eine stunde oder so starrte ich in den himmel, jetzt bin ich total durchgefroren...

i walked through the snowy landscape and suddenly discovered this light, almost as strong as the sun, only smaller. i was a bit worried. stood there for an hour or so. now i'm frozen...
[/quote]

Another dot to connect?
 

Attachments

  • rimg0128_die_zweite_sonne_und_die_sonne.jpg
    rimg0128_die_zweite_sonne_und_die_sonne.jpg
    7.3 KB · Views: 8
  • rimg0137_zweite_sonne.jpg
    rimg0137_zweite_sonne.jpg
    5.6 KB · Views: 6
The SOTT post: http://www.sott.net/articles/show/223364-The-Beginning-of-Ice-Age-Magnetic-polar-shifts-causing-massive-global-superstorms
got me to thinking about an idea of the magnetic pole shift. Specifically, the latter part of the article pertaining to the Earth wobbling that stopped:

Possible magnetic pole reversal may also be initiating new Ice Age

According to some geologists and scientists, we have left the last interglacial period behind us. Those periods are lengths of time - about 11,500 years - between major Ice Ages.

One of the most stunning signs of the approaching Ice Age is what's happened to the Chandler wobble.

The Earth's wobble has stopped.

As explained in the geology and space science website earthchangesmedia.com, "The Chandler wobble was first discovered back in 1891 by Seth Carlo Chandler an American astronomer. The effect causes the Earth's poles to move in an irregular circle of 3 to 15 meters in diameter in an oscillation. The Earth's Wobble has a 7-year cycle which produces two extremes, a small spiraling wobble circle and a large spiraling wobble circle, about 3.5 years apart.

"The Earth was in October 2005 moving into the small spiraling circle (the MIN phase of the wobble), which should have slowly unfolded during 2006 and the first few months of 2007. (Each spiraling circle takes about 14 months). But suddenly at the beginning of November 2005, the track of the location of the spin axis veered at a very sharp right angle to its circling motion.

"The track of the spin axis began to slow down and by about January 8, 2006, it ceased nearly all relative motion on the x and y coordinates which are used to define the daily changing location of the spin axis."

And the Earth stopped wobbling - exactly as predicted as another strong sign of an imminent Ice Age.

So, the start of a new Ice Age is marked by a magnetic pole reversal, increased volcanic activity, larger and more frequent earthquakes, tsunamis, colder winters, superstorms and the halting of the Chandler wobble.

Unfortunately, all of those conditions are being met.

This got me to recalling how a compass needle behaves when a magnet is slowly inched towards it. When the magnet with the side of the same charge approaches the side of the compass with the same charge, when it comes close enough, the compass needle will wobble a little then a fraction of a millimeter later, the compass needle suddenly "jumps" (i.e. does a 180 degree) so that the opposite pole is now facing the magnet.

And then the idea of the "twin star" (i.e. companion brown dwarf to our Sun or "Nibiru"/"Planet-X") popped in my head. Could the earth's wobble have a connection to the twin star's approach? The stopping of the wobbling and a sudden pole shift would indicate the approach and closest proximity of the twin star?

(from http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=14395.msg114884#msg114884)
4 July 1998 (notice, BEFORE the remote viewing Johnno found)

Q: (A) I am trying to write down some things about a
cosmology, and I have some questions mainly about the
coming events. First there was the story of the sun's
companion brown star which is apparently approaching the
solar system, and I would like to know, if possible,
details of its orbit; that is, how far it is, what is its
speed, and when it will be first seen. Can we know it?
Orbit: how close will it come?

A: Flat eliptical.

Q: (A) But how close will it come?

A: Distance depends upon other factors, such as intersecting
orbit of locator of witness.

Q: (L) What is the closest it could come to earth... (A)
Solar system... (L) Yes, but which part of the solar
system? We have nine planets... which one? (A) I
understand that this brown star will enter the Oort
cloud... (L) I think they said it just brushes against it
and the gravity disturbs it...

A: Passes through Oort cloud on orbital journey. Already has
done this on its way "in."

Q: (A) You mean it has already entered the Oort cloud?

A: Has passed through.

Q: (A) So, it will not approach...

A: Oort cloud is located on outer perimeter orbital plane at
distance of approximately averaged distance of
510,000,000,000 miles.

Q: (L) Well, 510 billion miles gives us some time! (A) Yes,
but what I want to know... this Oort cloud is around the
solar system, so this brown star, once it has passed
through... (L) It must already be in the solar system?
(A) No, it could have passed through and may not come
closer. Is it coming closer or not? Is it coming closer
all the time?

A: Solar system, in concert with "mother star," is revolving
around companion star, a "brown" star.

Q: (A) So, that means that the mass of the companion star is
much...

A: Less.

Q: (A) Less?

A: They are moving in tandem with one another along a flat,
eliptical 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.

Q: (A) But I understand that the distance that the distance
between the sun and this brown star is changing with
time. Eliptical orbit means there is perihelion and
aphelion. I want to know what will be, or what was, or
what is the closest distance between this brown star and
the sun? What is perihelion? Can we know this, even
approximately. Is it about one light year, or less or
more?

A: Less, much less. Distance of closest passage roughly
corresponds to the distance of the orbit of Pluto from
Sun.

Q: (A) Okay. Now, this closest pass, is this something that
is going to happen?

A: Yes.

Q: (A) And it is going to happen within the next 6 to 18
years?

A: 0 to 14.

1998 + 14 years is 2012. So, going by the C's transcript, we should see the brown dwarf anytime soon until around maybe mid-2012?

Richard S said:
Hi SolarMother,
The C's have said the closest part of the orbit of the twin sun barely enters the outer edge of the Oort Cloud which is at the outer edge of our Solar System: "A: Oort cloud is located on outer perimeter orbital plane at distance of approximately averaged distance of
510,000,000,000 miles.". So it is impossible for Comet Elenin to be the brown dwarf/second sun.

So Comet Elenin would be one of the few visible comets to be picked up (i.e. could not be ignored) by the MSM. Then the brown star makes an appearance (a few orbits beyond pluto), the poles reverse suddenly, then we're pelted by more comets, etc.

I tried searching for the C's transcript regarding a rough order of events but the closest I came up with using the forum search was this:

Neil said:
I've been rather interested in all of this disclosure talk flying around the net, not from the point of view of the disclosure itself, which will be something akin to wikileaks, but as a temporal marker for how far along we are in the Cassiopaean "prophecy." There are certain "signs" that they gave as a sort of ramping up of activity leading up to the wave. There was a sort of order to it like:
1. Accelerating freak weather patterns.
2. War leading to global totalitarianism.
3. Economic Collapse.
4. Cometary bombardment.
5. Ice Age.
6. Pole Shift.
7. Aliens masquerading as gods.
8. The Wave Comes.
9. Return of "Christ."

I don't know if that's necessairly the right order, I just decided to list them by increasing "weirdness factor."
 
Michael Martin said:
The SOTT post: http://www.sott.net/articles/show/223364-The-Beginning-of-Ice-Age-Magnetic-polar-shifts-causing-massive-global-superstorms
got me to thinking about an idea of the magnetic pole shift. Specifically, the latter part of the article pertaining to the Earth wobbling that stopped:
See also the comment I just added to the article.
 
Hmm... so from the 2001 C's transcript (in the comments in the article):

Q: (L) Is a pole shift of the axis...(A) Honey, you ask if the pole shift is possible, of course it's possible. But suppose it's almost zero probability? 'Is it possible' is not the right question. 'Is it going to happen?' That's a question. (L) Okay you ask, carry on. (A) Are we looking at a pole shift during the next ten or so years with a high degree of probability?
A: Yes.
Q: (A) In this concept of pole shift, what would be the main feature of this pole shift, of all those which we were discussing?
A: New axial orientation, and magnetic reversal.
Q: (L) That's fairly dramatic. (A) Alright, now, change of axis or orientation of axis of rotation: can we say we would straighten up, getting almost perpendicular to the ecliptic? Or the other possibility is that it will fall down being almost parallel to the ecliptic. The third is that we'll flip completely by 180 degrees. We know it's highly unpredictable, but can we have a clue from which one is, so to say, dominate?
A: Perpendicularity will be restored.
Q: (A) We know the axis will change dramatically and magnetic reversal will happen. You didn't mention a change or shift of the lithosphere alone. Can we...
A: Lithospheric shift will feature to some extent.
Q: (A) But, that means eventually that the equator will almost not change because...
A: Correct.

I'm trying to read up on topics pertaining to the plane of the ecliptic, inclination/axial tilt and axial rotation but it will take me some time to read through all of that and properly grok all of it.
From what I get so far, the poles are usually positioned around 22-24 degrees from the "perpendicular to the ecliptic" position.
The poles won't move to Hawaii but a 23 degree shift would still be pretty hard to ignore by people on the blue marble... Also, the magnetic reversal, when it happens, would also be pretty hard to ignore...

I tried looking for records of the pole positions but this Canadian website only posts the positions from 2001 to 2005.
_http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/geomag/nmp/northpole_e.php
Year Latitude ( °N) Longitude ( °W)
2001 81.3 110.8
2002 81.6 111.6
2003 82.0 112.4
2004 82.3 113.4
2005 82.7 114.4
Haven't figured out though how to check how many degrees the north pole is from the perpendicular position using just latitude and longitude values...

Also, while initially reading up on those topics, I encountered this tid-bit regarding the Milankovitch cycles:
(from _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_tilt)
Obliquity
In the solar system, the Earth's orbital plane is known as the ecliptic plane, and so the Earth's axial tilt is officially called the obliquity of the ecliptic. Greek letter ε.

The Earth currently has an axial tilt of about 23.4°.[2] The axis remains tilted in the same direction towards the stars throughout a year and this means that when a hemisphere (a northern or southern half of the earth) is pointing away from the Sun at one point in the orbit then half an orbit later (half a year later) this hemisphere will be pointing towards the Sun. This effect is the main cause of the seasons (see effect of sun angle on climate). Whichever hemisphere is currently tilted toward the Sun experiences more hours of sunlight each day, and the sunlight at midday also strikes the ground at an angle nearer the vertical and thus delivers more energy per unit surface area.

Lower obliquity causes polar regions to receive less seasonally contrasting solar radiation, producing conditions more favorable to glaciation. Like changes in precession and eccentricity, changes in tilt influence the relative strength of the seasons, but the effects of the tilt cycle are particularly pronounced in the high latitudes where the great ice ages began.[3] Obliquity is a major factor in glacial/interglacial fluctuations (see Milankovitch cycles).

The obliquity of the ecliptic is not a fixed quantity but changing over time in a cycle with a period of 41,000 years. It is a very slow effect known as nutation, and at the level of accuracy at which astronomers work, does need to be taken into account on a daily basis. Note that the obliquity and the precession of the equinoxes are calculated from the same theory and are thus related to each other. A smaller ε means a larger p (precession in longitude) and vice versa. Yet the two movements act independent from each other, going in mutually perpendicular directions.

Obliquity is a major factor in glacial/interglacial fluctuations (see Milankovitch cycles)

Interesting idea about the angle of solar radiation having an impact on temperature levels but maybe the "obliquity" that was observed was merely a "signpost" rather than the primary cause of glacial onset?
I think the consensus on the boards right now is the theory of accumulation of particulate in the atmosphere (from cometary bombardment and volcanic eruptions) that directly contributes to the reflection of sunlight and subsequent global temperature drops...
 
James McCanney made an interesting comment in his August 18, 2001 science hour broadcast.
It perked my ears when I heard it. It is found at 11:15 minutes into the segment. He said:

"NASA in the thick of it, claiming this week that there's a brown dwarf four times the size of Jupiter that's out in the Oort Cloud..."

http://www.jmccanneyscience.com/JamesMcCanneyScienceHour_August_18_2011.mp3

Now I've been searching the net for such an announcement. So far nothing. Either he misspoke or the announcement wasn't given wide distribution. Based on the C transmissions, this NASA "confirmation" if true would be interesting to say the least.
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom