Andy Lloyd's Dark Star Blog

 

Blog 86   (November-December 2021)

 

 

Astronomer suggests IRAS May Have Detected Planet X in 1983

 

A British astronomer has reviewed the IRAS data from way back in 1983 and come up with a possible location for Planet X - around RA 319 Dec 60.  While Planet Nine hunters have a candidate target to point their telescopes towards, let's examine how this new evidence came to light: 

There haven't been too many sky surveys conducted in infra-red.  It's problematic doing them from Earth, even in the coldest climates, because the heat in the environment creates an infra-red fog to peer through into space.  Better then to use space-based telescopes, even if they have a relatively limited lifespan. 

The most effective to date has been WISE.  During its tour of duty it appears to have failed to detect Planet X, despite covering a lot of the sky.  However, its lifetime was quite short so it may have missed a slow-moving object that would have become more apparent over an extended period of time.  After all, it's the variation in position against background stars that makes solar system objects stand out from the crowd.  The further away they are, the more difficult they are to spot both in terms of position and reflected luminosity.

It's helpful, then, to consult other sky surveys at other times, to get a clearer picture of how candidate objects may have shifted ground, however marginally.  there has been a lot of debate in the Planet X community about whether the 1983 sky survey by IRAS picked out Planet X. 

The excitement generated among IRAS astronomers about some mysterious infrared objects (1) were widely reported at the time (2), then sank without trace.  In response to the understandable interest in the apparent discovery of a brown dwarf in the solar system back in 1983 (in the constellation Orion), more recent analysis of these articles in the astronomy press have poured cold water over the possible candidate objects.

"...most of the IRAS observations in the 1984 paper were distant, ultra-luminous young galaxies and one was a filamentary structure known as “infrared cirrus” floating in intergalactic space." (3)

However, no actual explanation has ever been forthcoming about what the actual object in Orion was - just that the brown dwarf/massive planet speculation was one among a number of possibilities scientists were considering - at least early on in their deliberations.

Although the above Washington Post article was the most famous of the IRAS anomalies, I've always found the Sagittarius 'sighting' more intriguing, not least because of the way this was reported in the science press in the UK at the time:

 

"The object's infrared emission shows that it has a temperature of around 230K. This is too cool for a star yet to (sic) hot for a dust cloud. It could be a distant gaseous planet, several times heavier than Jupiter and giving off heat as its own gravity causes it to shrink in size. Whatever it is, say the British astronomers, the Americans have been keeping very quiet about it in recent weeks." (3)

More about this in my books 'Dark Star' (2005) and 'Darker Stars' (2018).  Suffice it to say, the position of the candidate object in the sky is also a possible reason why this object has been so difficult to pin down:  Sagittarius is the constellation featuring the centre of the Milky Way, which offers a highly luminous and complex backdrop within which to hunt for a distant world.  If Planet X is hiding in there, then it's little wonder it's so hard to detect!

Despite the scepticism shown by some scientists about the IRAS data and its possible connection to Planet X (3), other scientists consider it worthwhile to revisit the issue.  The result of recent analysis of the IRAS data has provided what could be exciting new evidence:

"Astronomer Michael Rowan-Robinson of Imperial College London in the UK conducted an analysis of data collected by the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS) in 1983, and found a trio of point sources that just might be Planet Nine.  This, Rowan-Robinson concludes in his preprint paper, is actually fairly unlikely to be a real detection, but the possibility does mean that it could be used to model where the planet might be now in order to conduct a more targeted search, in the quest to confirm or rule out its existence." (5)

The scientific paper which Rowan-Robinson has written sets out more detail about his analysis, and rules out most possible anomalies to leave just one candidate (314.83499+64.21527) which could fulfil the criteria for Planet Nine, as it is currently envisaged within the scientific community:

"For a lower mass planet (< 5 earth masses) in the distance range 200-400 AU, we expect a pair or triplet of single HCONs with separations 2-35 arcmin. Several hundred candidate associations are found and have been examined with Scanpi. A single candidate for Planet 9 survives which satisfies the requirements for detected and non-detected HCON passes. A fitted orbit suggest a distance of 225+-15 AU and a mass of 3-5 earth masses." (6)

Rowan-Robinson then plots out the possible path of the elusive planet across the sky in the last 40 years or so, and gently urges astronomers to take a fresh look at this area of sky to see if it's hiding within that zone of interest (~RA 319 Dec 60).  Fingers crossed...

 

Written by Andy Lloyd,  26th November 2021

References:

1) Houck, J. R. et al "Unidentified point sources in the IRAS minisurvey." Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 278, p. L63-L66 (1984)

2) Thomas O'Toole "Possibly as Large as Jupiter" 30 December 1983

Washington Post article

3)  Cesar Grossmann "Did The Washington Post confirm Nibiru’s existence?" 2017

Quora article

4)  Martin Redfern and Nigel Henbest "Has IRAS found a tenth planet?" New Scientist 10 November 1983 Vol. 100:1383, p400

New Scientist article

5)  Michelle Starr "Mysterious Object Glimpsed Decades Ago Might Have Actually Been Planet Nine" 16 November 2021 with thanks to John

Science Alert article

6) Michael Rowan-Robinson "A search for Planet 9 in the IRAS data" 11 Nov 2021 Accepted for publication in MNRAS

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2111.03831.pdf

 

The Lunar Bombardment

 

A new isotopic study of lunar rocks has indicated that the cratering of the Moon's surface occurred by debris left over from the Earth's formation.  In a paper that seems to tear up a lot of what is currently thought to have happened in the early solar system, a research team from WWU Münster argue that the lunar bombardment did not take place 3.9 billion years ago as generally thought (1). 

 

Instead, the impacts occurred much earlier, in the immediate aftermath of the early cataclysms that marked the formation of the Earth/Moon system (2).

""Our research shows that the bombardment of the Moon was by the same bodies that formed the Earth and Moon," explains planetologist and lead author of the study Dr. Emily Worsham. The impact craters on the Moon, therefore, are due to a continuous bombardment of leftover asteroids from the main phase of the Earth's formation. This also allows scientists to rule out a sudden increase in the impact rate due to bombardment with bodies from the outer solar system." (1)

The Late Heavy Bombardment was a cluster of massive bombardments that occurred over a long period of time around 3.9 billion years ago.  It is thought to have affected all of the planets and moons in the inner solar system, including Earth.  This devastating and sustained bombardment is a mystery because it occurred long after the planets formed 4.5-4.6 billion years ago. 

Why did this cluster happen after the solar system had essentially settled down for half a billion years?  Many ideas have been put forward, largely to do with a significant migration of the gas giants (an essential component of the Nice model of solar system formation).  This new isotopic study of lunar rocks shows that the Moon's impactors did not originate from the outer solar system (the isotopic signatures of ruthenium and molybdenum would have differed significantly if they had).  Which means, the scientists argue, that the migratory tussle of the gas giants must have happened very early on.  This fits with the Nice model's concept of gravitational interaction with the remnants of the Sun's ptotoplanetary disk.

 

Citing a 1977 article (3), the authors of this new paper pick up the argument that the previously studied lunar rocks (that suggested that dating of the LHB) came mostly from a single impact basin on the north-central Earth-facing side of the moon named the Mare Imbrium (1). This localised sampling then led to a skewing of the dating statistics.  To further support this argument, they point out that earlier impact dates have been determined for other lunar craters (4). 

However, evidence for the Late Heavy Bombardment is widespread across the solar system.  Although the Münster press release seems to tear up the LBH, in the paper itself the authors recognise that it is a reality:

"Nevertheless, the general agreement among the 40Ar-39Ar age frequency distributions of Apollo samples, lunar meteorites, howardite-eucrite-diogenite meteorites (thought to derive from asteroid 4 Vesta), and H chondrites indicates that an LHB occurred and affected the entire inner solar system. Hence, there is no doubt that an LHB occurred, but its origin remains elusive." (2)

So this argument is more about what happened to the Moon in particular, rather than about the more generalised - and mysterious - bombardment that occurred around 3.9 billion years ago.

The central issue here continues to be the need for a trigger event to kick the late bombardment off:

"A cataclysmic LHB would require a dynamic impetus that led to a sudden increase in impact rate." (2)

Absolutely.  So, if scientists are ruling out a late migratory event, how could this possibly have happened?

Time to think outside the box.  What is rarely - if ever - considered is that the Earth/Moon system might have itself migrated inwards at the start of that bombardment event.  As I have written about in my 2019 book 'Darker Stars', some asteroids in the outer main belt also have Earth/Moon isotopic signatures, suggestive of a common origin (5).  I have argued that the LBH followed a serious impact and localised gravitational tussle (i.e. with Nibiru and its moons, as suggested by the late Zecharia Sitchin (6)).  The resultant debris stream would then account for the subsequent cluster of impacts with objects with Earth/Moon composition.

The intervention of a usurper Planet X object makes a lot more sense than the rather confused arguments that astrophysicists are currently tussling with. 

 

Written by Andy Lloyd,  10th November 2021

References:

 

1)  WWU Münster Press Release "Late bombardment of the Moon revealed" 29 October 2021 with thank to Lee

https://www.uni-muenster.de/news/view.php?cmdid=12125

see also:

https://phys.org/news/2021-11-planetologists-heavy-bombardment-moon-billion.html

2) Emily Worsham and Thorsten Kleine “Late accretionary history of Earth and Moon preserved in lunar impactites”. Science Advances 2021 Vol. 7; doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abh2837

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abh2837

3)  G. A. Schaeffer and O. A. Schaeffer "39Ar/40Ar  ages of lunar rocks", in Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 8th, 2253–2300 (1977).

4)  M. D. Norman and A. A. Nemchin "A 4.2 billion year old impact basin on the Moon: U-Pb dating of zirconolite and apatite in lunar melt rock 67955" Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 388, 387–398 (2014)

5)  Andy Lloyd 'Darker Stars' Timeless Voyager Press 2019

6)  Zecharia Sitchin "The Twelfth Planet" Avon Books 1976

 

 

Emerging from the Water World

 

We have long taken for granted the land masses on Earth.  Perhaps less so now as our oceans begin their slow ascent due to anthropogenic global warming.  Especially for those living along decaying coastlines or in sea-facing cities.  however, scientists have known for some time that the landmasses weren't always there:  Very early on in Earth's 4.6 billion year history, the planet transformed from convulsing molten rock to water world.  For a long time, the surface of the early Earth was just water.  At some point later, land masses began to rise above the planet's global water line.  These first continents are known as 'cratons' by scientists.

New research suggests that these cratons emerged much earlier than previously thought.  The consensus scientific opinion placed the emergence of landmasses to around 2.5 billion years ago.  Now that timeline might be extended back to as early as 3.4 billion years.

"...scientists have found sedimentary rocks — which form from the broken-up bits of other rocks that have undergone erosion and weathering — that date back to that era. Such sedimentary rocks could only form once land broke through the surface of early Earth's oceans." (1)

This new timeline is now much closer to the Late, Heavy Bombardment (LHB) 3.9 billion years ago.  Around the time of this extended bombardment the Earth was entirely covered in water.  During the bombardment, asteroids/meteorites striking the Earth would have plunged into deep oceans, therefore leaving no surface cratering (not so on the Moon, of course, which still shows the monumental impact of this period of bombardment). 

According to Zecharia Sitchin's interpretations of ancient Mesopotamian myth, Babylonian cosmology included a watery planet known as Tiamat (2).  This watery planet was rendered asunder by the usurper planet Marduk (associated with a Planet X body often called Nibiru) and its moons.  Sitchin asserts that the early, watery Earth was Tiamat; whilst Marduk has disappeared from view.

I've often argued that the LHB was the time of this great Cosmic Battle (3).  So it's interesting that Earth's first landmasses arose sometime after the LHB.  If Sitchin's account is correct, the early Earth lost a very significant amount of water during its encounter with Marduk (which involved a collision with a small moon described by the Babylonians as the 'North Wind', and an orbital shift inwards).  The encounter resulted in vaporised oceans and a spillage of precious water into space.   Less water, more likelihood of emerging landmasses...

 

Written by Andy Lloyd,  17th November 2021

References:

1)  Nicoletta Lanese “Earth's 1st continents arose hundreds of millions of years earlier than thought” 8 November 2021 with thanks to Lee

https://www.livescience.com/earth-first-continents-cratons-study

2)  Zecharia Sitchin "The Twelfth Planet" Avon Books 1976

3)  Andy Lloyd 'Dark Star' Timeless Voyager Press 2005

 

Timeless Sitchin

 

A rare 1990 radio interview with Zecharia Sitchin has been made available free online.

In this interview, circa 1990, Bruce Stephen Holms, host of Timeless Voyager Radio asks Zecharia Sitchin many questions about the Sumerian's record of the Anunnaki. Holms's interviewing style makes it easy to listen to the dialogue which investigates the "pre-history" of humans.  According to Sitchin, who is one of a handful of people who can read and translate the Sumerian language believes that these "historical" records are not mythology but rather a long history of pre-human existence on our planet by extraterrestrials.

Zecharia Sitchin author of a number of books proposing an explanation for human origins involving ancient astronauts. Mr. Sitchin attributed the creation of the ancient Sumerian culture to the Anunnaki, which he stated was a race of extraterrestrials from a planet beyond Neptune called Nibiru.  He asserts that Sumerian mythology suggests that this planet Nibiru has an elongated, 3,600-year-long elliptical orbit around the sun. Zecharia says that the Annunaki lived on Earth for 300,000 years before they (the Anunnaki) genetically created mankind.

https://player.captivate.fm/episode/773159bc-8404-41e5-b9b6-89e1ff29bd18

 

 

Dark Star Blog Index

 

Dark Star Books Index

You can keep informed of updates by following me on Twitter:  

www.twitter.com/#darkstarandy

Or like my Facebook Page:

https://www.facebook.com/darkstarandylloyd