Re: Some arguments about "Nibiru" from a NASA astrophysicist
I have a copy of "Nemesis: The Death Star" by Richard Muller that is in my future reading pile. I should have looked at it last night.
I came back to my office one afternoon and was greeted excitedly by Peter Friedman, one of my graduate students. He had taken a message for me from Dave Cudaback. The scientific grapevine had been at work. Dave had heard from Chris McKee about a rumor spread by Martin Cohen at the NASA Ames Research Laboratory. Cohen had heard that two astronomers had found Nemesis.
The astronomers were Frank Low, from the University of Arizona, and Thomas Chester, who worked for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory at the California Institute of Technology. Together they had been studying the data obtained by IRAS, and they had found a bright object in the data that matched a 15th-magnitude star photographed at Mount Palomar using the 200-inch Hale telescope. It had no detectable proper motion and no visible spectral lines. These were characteristics that Nemesis would have if it were a light-mass, "brown dwarf" star, too light for thermonuclear fusion to have ignighted in its core. The team was refusing to give the position of the star until they completed further measurements.
I immediately called Chester. He wasn't in. I left a message asking him to call me back. [...]
Chester finally returned my call. I began, "Hi Tom. I just heard a rumor that someone at Cal Tech has found a candidate for Nemesis. Do you know anything about it?" I could hear Tom chuckling at the other end of the line. "Yes, we are the ones. But don't get excited. Frank Low and I have just completed a week of careful measurements on the star. Just yesterday we were able to show it is not Nemesis. It turned out to be more than 6.5 light-years away. We found spectral lines in the infrared. It is a carbon star." A carbon star is a large red star, made to appear dim only by virtue of its distance.
I wonder how or why the distance of the object goes from "calculated that it could be as close as 50 billion miles" to "more than 6.5 light-years away". Also one of the two people mentioned above that where looking at the data are mentioned as an author in one of the three papers linked to in the above universetoday.com link.
Also, couldn't find any information on the internet about what this is about "they had found a bright object in the data that matched a 15th-magnitude star photographed at Mount Palomar using the 200-inch Hale telescope."
Thinking about Mount Palomar's mention in the 7 March 2009 session, maybe it was used to find and track Nemesis/Dark Companion. What better place to conduct the search than one that was under control.
Edit Added: And then IRAS was used to confirm the location found from Mount Palomar.
Q: (L) I think whatever they were observing or calculating is no longer there, so it's like a defunct machine. (DD) Which leads us to the Palomar observations that they said, with the 4th density occupation beneath the mountain. How long had Palomar been a base before the Rockefellers or the human aspect was added to it?
A: 200 years.
Q: (DD) So 4th density STS had been in the mountain for 200 years before. Were the Rockefeller faction the first humans that were brought into that particular operation?
Q: (DD) Obviously 4th density STS didn't need an observatory on that mountain. What was their purpose?
A: Of course not, but their minions do. Keeps them in line.
Q: (DD) We went up to the mountain after the Cassiopaean remarks about that - three times. We noticed that there were some very in-plain-site openings beneath the mountain and into the ground. What was the 10-12 foot diameter manhole with a big lid on it. It would take a crane to lift this lid. It looked like you could drop a truck down this hole. What was the purpose of that?
A: Leads to facilities which have another entrance. That entrance is actually an "exit" and opens easily from the inside.
Q: (DD) Okay. We noticed a couple of other smaller, similar manhole structures down there. And we also noticed what looked like a ventilator shaft. I got pretty close to it and listened and it sounded like there was some form of machinery. Was that some sort of life support for the human...
A: Not that. Remember that a large telescopic observatory requires a great deal of technological support, including its own power supply, etc.
Q: (DD) Ah, okay. Is that the purpose of the three buildings on rails that we saw that had the pipes that all came together and ran down the hill or underground?
A: Part of the observation apparatus.
Q: (DD) Okay. Why did 4D STS choose that particular location to build a base?
A: Ah! Now an interesting question! Perhaps you should research the history of the place and factor in the concept of windows between realities.
Might be interesting to look into the history of Palomar, but need a subscription or pay $20 for a single article purchase:
THE FIRST 50 YEARS AT PALOMAR: 1949–1999 The Early Years of Stellar Evolution, Cosmology, and High-Energy Astrophysics
Also, another thing that has always irked me is that when the Hubble telescope went up it wasn't working properly due to a flaw in a mirror. They say it is from a paint speck - how they tracked that one down years later is beyond me. I had thought that Hubble was designed that way so that during the time it was 'broken' it would be used to photograph and map in high resolution the entire earths surface for various military purposes and when I was getting my engineering degree, a person working toward an aeronautical engineering degree had some contact with military engineers asking about a report he was doing on Hubble and they said that that might be right with a smile on their faces. Now my thinking goes along the lines that during the time Hubble was 'broken', maybe it was used to find/reacquire/track the Nemesis/Dark Companion. Just some conjecture.
It transpired that the central region of the mirror was flatter than it should be - by just one-fiftieth of the width of a human hair. This is equivalent to only four wavelengths of visible light, but it was enough. One insider said that the Hubble mirror was "very accurate, very accurately the wrong shape".
What had happened was that many years before, when the mirror was being made, a speck of paint had affected an optical measuring rod. The subsequent measurements were very slightly wrong.
Edit Added: And recently WISE being sent up is used for more tracking and updating of position.