Author of the Month :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world.
Hi Bibhu

Good question re dynamics. Yes, I talked about Muller’s work in my book LS, and looked at a few different scenarios. The common approach to determining the distance of a companion in relation to the solar system is to constrain the sun’s motion to zero and then plot based on Kepler’s laws, which implies everything pretty much moves at the same speed and the longer the periodicity the more distant the object and vice versa. So you are right, suggesting a periodicity that produces the observable known as precession (a cycle of ~24,000 to 26,000 years), requires the object be very close, under this static Sun scenario. Those calculations are detailed on our website.

But we have also done the calculations based on the assumption the solar system moves. We observe the sun race through space against the background stars at about 50”p/y, yet every since Copernicus this observable has been assumed to be false, the artifact of a wobbling earth. Remember Copernicus had just dethroned the earth from being the center of the Universe (to the consternation of the Church) and put the immovable Sun in its place, so he could not say that the Sun moved! He assumed the earth wobbled, and ever since people have been trying to come up with a precession equation that works. Noticing all the problems associated with precession explanations, and finding no solutions, we have taken the approach the sun really does move.

This approach should not be all that novel but since luni-solar precession theory constrains SS motion to zero, you will not find any work on this in the literature. Bottom line, there are several viable scenarios that suggest the sun could be gravitationally bound to a nearby visible star, it just means that our solar system is moving faster than it is currently allowed under luni-solar constraints. Even Sirius at ~8.6ly, with a center of mass~6.6ly is viable if the SS is moving at 430km/s. This seems high under the current paradigm but we do know that many stars move at incredible speeds (some twice this number) and Reg Cahill, an astrophysicist our of Australia has independently calculated 430km/s the speed of our SS versus the CMB (but not sure about this methodology). And to your point, it does NOT require high eccentricity (highly elliptical orbit).

Personally, I like the Sirius scenario for many reasons, especially because it would seem to explain the incline of Pluto (whose orbit period is also at a perfect 5:1 ratio of the Sirius B orbit periodicity, which may have a pendulum effect) and the highly elliptical (and weird) orbit of Sedna, which happens to be in 2:1 resonance with the precession periodicity (companion orbit). These resonances are expected and necessary in large dynamic systems, especially for the outer dwarfs. Mike Brown at Caltech (the man who killed Pluto) is apparently still looking for a way to explain Sedna's orbit.

“Truly the greatest gift you can give is that of your own self-transformation.”
Chinese Philosopher – Lao Tzu

Subject Views Written By Posted
The Celestial Clock 483 Walter Cruttenden 03-Sep-12 20:20
Re: The Celestial Clock 214 Dr. Lew Graham 03-Sep-12 21:51
Re: The Celestial Clock 219 Walter Cruttenden 03-Sep-12 23:33
no lost star, only knowledge.. 221 hendrik dirker 06-Sep-12 16:34
Re: no lost star, only knowledge.. 169 Walter Cruttenden 07-Sep-12 03:20
Re: no lost star, only knowledge.. 223 hendrik dirker 08-Sep-12 17:52
The solar system moves 179 Walter Cruttenden 09-Sep-12 00:20
Re: The solar system moves 227 hendrik dirker 09-Sep-12 15:43
Re: The solar system moves 169 Walter Cruttenden 10-Sep-12 07:15
It is what it is 170 hendrik dirker 11-Sep-12 23:00
Re: It is what it is 205 Walter Cruttenden 12-Sep-12 04:38
Re: The Celestial Clock 169 Corpuscles 03-Sep-12 22:52
Re: The Celestial Clock 174 Walter Cruttenden 03-Sep-12 23:57
Re: The Celestial Clock 173 carolb 04-Sep-12 02:24
Re: The Celestial Clock 130 Walter Cruttenden 04-Sep-12 19:22
Re: The Celestial Clock 200 Nolondil 05-Sep-12 23:41
Re: The Celestial Clock 132 Walter Cruttenden 07-Sep-12 20:56
Re: Yes, I get the occasional negative response 215 Thunderbird 04-Sep-12 03:08
Luna Capture 209 Dr. Lew Graham 04-Sep-12 04:00
Re: Luna Capture 188 Thunderbird 04-Sep-12 15:51
Mythology on Luna Capture 171 Dr. Lew Graham 05-Sep-12 04:09
Re: Luna Capture 261 Audrey 05-Sep-12 04:09
Re: Yes, I get the occasional negative response 162 Walter Cruttenden 04-Sep-12 19:25
Re: The Celestial Clock 210 Bibhu Dev Misra 04-Sep-12 08:42
Re: The Celestial Clock 195 Walter Cruttenden 04-Sep-12 19:39
Re: The Celestial Clock 230 Bibhu Dev Misra 05-Sep-12 08:25
Re: The Celestial Clock 209 Walter Cruttenden 05-Sep-12 19:59
Re: The Celestial Clock 148 Sirius7237 04-Sep-12 16:11
Re: The Celestial Clock 156 Walter Cruttenden 04-Sep-12 20:32
Re: The Celestial Clock, 161 michael seabrook 05-Sep-12 21:53
Re: The Celestial Clock, 174 Walter Cruttenden 06-Sep-12 06:54
Re: The Celestial Clock, 178 michael seabrook 06-Sep-12 21:00
The 'correct' time on the Celestial Clock, 194 Dr. Lew Graham 06-Sep-12 21:16
Re: The 'correct' time on the Celestial Clock, 211 carolb 06-Sep-12 22:49
Explain 21 December 2012 precisely? 187 Dr. Lew Graham 06-Sep-12 23:21
Re: The 'correct' time on the Celestial Clock, 194 michael seabrook 07-Sep-12 14:13
Re: The 'correct' time on the Celestial Clock, 162 Walter Cruttenden 07-Sep-12 21:24
Re: The 'correct' time on the Celestial Clock, 180 michael seabrook 08-Sep-12 12:21
Re: The 'correct' time on the Celestial Clock, 145 Walter Cruttenden 08-Sep-12 19:34
Re: The 'correct' time on the Celestial Clock, 197 Bibhu Dev Misra 09-Sep-12 07:37
Re: The 'correct' time on the Celestial Clock, 137 Walter Cruttenden 10-Sep-12 07:41
Re: The Celestial Clock 175 Bibhu Dev Misra 07-Sep-12 19:17
Re: The Celestial Clock 181 Walter Cruttenden 08-Sep-12 19:27
Queastion: Earth crust displacement 206 finaltom 30-Sep-12 02:52
Re: Queastion: Earth crust displacement 216 Walter Cruttenden 30-Sep-12 21:56
Re: Queastion: Earth crust displacement 153 finaltom 30-Sep-12 23:04

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.