The Dark Star: The Planet X Evidence (29 page)

There is no doubt that astronomers are becoming more interested in
the potential for the involvement of a brown dwarf in the early solar system.
This open-mindedness is in marked contrast to the population at large, whose
interest in the Planet X phenomenon has waned in recent years. Perhaps that is
exactly why astronomers feel more at ease in speculating about the outer solar
system's origins now; the feeding frenzy of fringe Planet X conjecture has
dissipated. In its wake is the possibility of a real scientific debate about
whether our sun became entangled with sizable objects in the dim and distant
past; interstellar passer's by, brown dwarfs and birth cluster companions.

The birth of our sun is no longer being discussed in terms of a
lonely appearance in a quiet, unremarkable backwater of the galaxy. The sun may
have had siblings; possibly a veritable litter of starlets of all shapes and
sizes, whose early presence may not have adversely affected the inner planets
per se, but certainly may have played around with the outer bodies orbiting the
sun.

Until recently, not enough was known about these bodies, and the
assumption was that they would be found to meander around our sun in a more or
less orderly fashion.

However, one of the great things about discovery and science is
that the unexpected is always what one must expect. In this case, the orbital
patterns of some of these outer solar system bodies are quite clearly
anomalous, bringing into question the entire issue of the solar system's
origins. Something has been creating patterns of change out there, creating
bizarre orbits, creating headaches for the boffins. To solve the riddle of
objects like Sedna, the astronomers are forced to be more creative with their
explanations, bringing Science into the territory of the Dark Star.

New Scientist has published a feature outlining the new thinking
being banded about. In July 2004, it reported an "implausible" but
nevertheless "cool" suggestion is that Sedna's controversial orbit
could be the result of the early presence of a brown dwarf interacting with the
sun. The popular science magazine interviewed an astronomer at the Southwest
Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado named Harold Levison.

He pointed out that Sedna's orbit could not have come about by any
mechanism simply involving all the known objects in the solar system. Instead,
the group were speculating that there had been an early passage through the
solar system by a brown dwarf. They wondered whether Sedna was once a planet
associated with that brown dwarf, and had been captured by the sun into an
eccentric orbit, as a result of the fly-by.
²⁴

The group, which included Alessandro Morbidelli from Nice in
France, carried out calculations to test this hypothesis, and there was indeed
a correlation with observed behavior in the outer solar system. The
calculations also showed that about half of the brown dwarf's proto-planetary
disc would have been captured by the sun in this way, and would be orbiting the
sun in a similar fashion to Sedna.
²⁴

The astronomers have a keen interest in the capture process
itself, which is to be the subject of further research. They hope to eventually
explain various anomalies in the solar system, like the origin of the Oort
cloud and how the outer giant planets came to have such peculiar systems of
moons.
²⁵
These are the same kinds of issues we have looked at in
this book, and indicate the importance attached to them by mainstream
astronomers.

But the astronomers fall short of advocating the current presence
of a brown dwarf in our solar system. To do so would appear ludicrous to the
outside world, perhaps. After all, where is the proof? This is a question that
would inevitably be asked by the world's media. It seems highly reasonable from
a scientific perspective, to conclude that there is a massive Planet X on the
basis of indirect evidence. But the rest of the world demands direct proof.

As time goes on, I suspect that more and more evidence will emerge
to bolster their confidence and start open speculation about the existence of a
rogue brown dwarf. Already Alessandro Morbidelli has gone on record in France
speculating about a hidden tenth planet, stirring up some controversy among
some commentators who believe that his arguments reflect even more alternative
ideas.
^26,27
It seems to me that if the sun is capable of capturing
half of a rogue brown dwarf's planetary system, then it is also quite capable
of capturing the brown dwarf itself! I think it quite likely that a Dark Star
awaits discovery, and the minor planet called Sedna has begun the process of
unlocking its secrets.

¹
“NASA Schedules News Briefing about Unusual Solar Object”
http://rense.com/general50/mys.htm

²
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3506329.stm

³
D. Whitehouse "Astronomers Discover new planet" 15th
March 2004
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3511678.stm

⁴
Spitzer Press release, 15th March 2004 http://
www.spitzer.caltech.edu/Media/releases/ssc2004-05/release.shtml

⁵
Brian Marsden, Minor Planet Center, Harvard Smithsonian
Astrophysical Observatory,interviewed by Linda Moulton Howe
http://www.earthfiles.com/news/news.cfm?ID=683&category=Science

⁶
'Sedna'
http://www.rahoorkhuit.net/goddess/goddess_quest/sedna.html

⁷
R. Willis (Ed) "World Mythology" p216-7 Simon &
Schuster 1993

⁸
R. R. Britt "Distant Sedna Raises Possibility of Another
Earth-Sized Planet in Our Solar System" 16th March 2004, with thanks to
David Pearson
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sedna_earth_040316.html

⁹
A. Brunini & M. Melita “The Existence of a Planet beyond 50AU
and the Orbital Distribution of the Classical Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt Objects”
Icarus, 160, pp32-43 (2002)

¹⁰
Correspondence from Dr. Mario Melita, 15th January 2003

¹¹
A. Quillen, D. Trilling & E. Blackman “The Impact of a Close
Stellar Encounter on the Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt” arXiv:astroph/0401372vl, 2004

¹²
A. Lloyd "Planet X: Past and Present" UFO Magazine,
pp32-7, January 2004

¹³
Z. Sitchin "The Twelfth Planet" Avon 1976

¹⁴
J. Davies "Beyond Pluto" pp94-6 Cambridge University
Press 2001

¹⁵
A. Burrows, D. Sudarsky & J. Lunine "Beyond the T
Dwarfs: Theoretical Spectra, Colours, and Detectability of the Coolest Brown
Dwarfs" Jun. 2003 arXiv:astroph/0304226v2

¹⁶
J. Bagby “Evidence for a Tenth Planet or Massive Solar Companion
beyond Uranus” 1982. Many position papers by John P. Bagby were published in
several lesser-known journals, nevertheless standing as a substantive public
record of his cutting-edge work, including Kronos 1984; Cornell Engineer 1980,
v 45, #4, pp32-4; Cycles Journal 1996, and others published as early as 1972

¹⁷
Tim Radford “Evidence of 3,000 BC Calamity” 16th December 2004,
The Guardian

¹⁸
Correspondence from Maurice Cotterell, 13th September 2002

¹⁹
Space Daily “New Found Star May Be Third-Closest”, 26th May 2003
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/stellar-03a.html

²⁰
Correspondence from John Lee, 18th March 2004

²¹
R. Britt "Weird Object Beyond Pluto Gets Stranger" 14th
April 2004
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/hubble_sedna_040414.html
With thanks to David Pearson

²²
"Unique moon may partner Sedna" New Scientist 21 August
2004
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996295

²³
The Western Mail "University team's theory causes stir"
30th August 2004, with thanks to David Pearson
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/tm_objectid=14585326&method=full&sieid=50082&headline=university-team-s-theory-causes-stir-name_page.html

²⁴
Maggie McKee "Stray Star may have jolted Sedna" 27th
July 2004, with thanks to Lee Covino and Brant McLaughlin
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996204

²⁵
A. Morbidelli & H. Levison "Scenarios for the origin of
the Orbits of the Trans-Neptunian Objects 2000 CR105 and 2003 VB12
(Sedna)", submitted to Astronomical Journal 2/4/2004
http://www.boulder.swri.edu/~hal/CR105.html

²⁶
V. Greffos “Planets - But How Many Are There In Our Solar
System?” Science & Vie, Feb. 2003

²⁷
Z. Sitchin "The Case of the French Astronomer",
http://www.sitchin.com
, with reference to the
February 2003 issue of "Science & Vie", featuring Alessandro
Morbidelli ideas about a 'phantom planet'.

16. The Dark Star System

It might be a good idea to pause for breath at this point, and
recap where we have gotten to. We have looked at the history of the search for
a tenth planet in the solar system. That painstaking search initially provided
science with a new planet called Pluto, but seemed to draw a blank with
anything larger, although theoretical work had led scientists to conclude that
something else should be there.

Astronomers, building up their theories about how stars and
planets form, concluded that another massive planet should not still be out
there. They thought this because if it was quite close to Neptune, then it
should have been detected by now; and if it was beyond the limits of detection,
it should not have been able to form in the first place.

The idea then emerged that a hidden Planet X could have an
elliptical orbit. This provided a useful bridge between a previous proximity to
the sun's other planets, in turn helping us to explain how it formed, and its
current great distance, which would explain why it had not yet been detected.
This idea has become the hallmark of Planet X hunters in more recent years, but
was generally held in low regard by most "mainstream" astronomers.
This idea became entwined in the interpretation of ancient myth, and associated
alternative theories, which continue to remain highly controversial to this
day.

More ideas emerged about very massive sub-stellar objects called
black and brown dwarfs occupying orbits in the outer Oort Cloud of comets. An
object at the very great distances involved would be very, very difficult to
detect, but its existence might be implied by the pattern of comets that visit
us, or by the regularity of catastrophic events on this planet.

My own contribution to this field has been to integrate many of
these ideas, to create a coherent whole. Sometimes my efforts in this regard
have fallen on stony ground, and I have been forced to rethink. Other ideas
have moved things forward.

Throughout, I have been open-minded to new possibilities -
particularly when scientific discoveries have created new insights. This
flexibility has its downside, however, because my essays and articles down the
years have tended to shift their ground. This can easily create confusion among
regular readers of the Dark Star material.

It is helpful, then, to present a summary of my current theory
about the Dark Star. We will then consider how this integrates with
catastrophism and myth, and how the concept of the Dark Star might challenge
Science to turn its attention to the peripheries of the outer solar system. As
we have already seen, many scientific anomalies can already be explained in
this way.

What Is the Dark Star?

It seems likely that the sun has a companion. It is not a star in
its own right, but a Jupiter-sized planet. This planet is much heavier, and
therefore denser, than Jupiter, and this creates a certain amount of heat and
light generation. Such a world might be called a sub-brown dwarf, and occupies
a particular category of planet which is not understood particularly well at
the moment.

This Dark Star is not a brilliant object, but it does give out
heat. This, combined with gravitational effects, may allow habitable conditions
to exist on its nearest satellites, or moons. This allows us to negotiate the
problems suffered by Zecharia Sitchin's 12th Planet Theory, through the
creation of warm conditions in an environment well beyond that of the other
planets of our solar system.

Where Is It?

The Dark Star is currently lying somewhere close to the ecliptic,
or plane of the planets. The constellation Sagittarius is a likely place to
search for it. It probably lies in the dense star fields of the Milky Way, an
area not properly searched by IRAS, or, indeed, by astronomers searching for
Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt objects - who tend to limit their searches to dark
regions of the sky.

I think that it is at its furthest point from us, or aphelion. Its
exact distance is unknown, but may be as far away as 1,000AU, or 1,000 times
the distance from the Earth to the sun. Its lateral movement across the sky is very
slow, and this makes it even more difficult to differentiate between an
orbiting planet and a distant star. As a result, it is quite possible that it
has already been detected and catalogued erroneously as a more distant star in
the galaxy.

Can We See it?

The only chance of directly observing the Dark star without the
use of a very powerful telescope is during its perihelion, or its closest
passage to the sun. I originally thought that this would occur within the
planetary zone of the solar system, coming relatively close to the Earth.
However, there are a number of technical reasons why I now consider this to be
highly unlikely. Instead, new scientific evidence about the outer solar system
implies that the Dark Star moves through the Kuiper Gap at about 70AU distance
at perihelion.

There is still a possibility that it would be seen at this
distance, but only if there was a significant interaction with the sun's
extended magnetic field, as the Dark Star crossed through the Heliopause. This
might make the sub-brown dwarf temporarily more active (and the sun, too, might
experiences changes to its energy output). Then there might be a visible
phenomenon associated with its perihelion passage, which was known to the
ancients as Nibiru.

A second, more likely possibility, is that other objects will be
seen as the Dark Star crosses perihelion. These might be comets and minor
planetary bodies locked into an inner LaGrangian point, that sweeps through the
outer solar system. Or, it might be a more substantial planet that orbits the
Dark Star at a significant distance. This planet might enter the planetary
solar system and quickly move across the sky, seeming to head backwards. This
may also be the phenomenon called Nibiru.

If it turns out that the Dark Star does indeed enter the planetary
zone at perihelion, then we could expect a very exciting visual phenomenon
indeed. It would be a quite spectacular event to observe, and would without
doubt become a major religious icon for many of the world's cultures.

When I initially wrote about this subject, I proposed that the
actual Dark Star was none other than the Messianic Star of the Christian
Nativity. This must remain a possibility, but I now consider it to be more
difficult to justify, at least on a scientific level.

How Many Satellites Orbit the
Dark Star?

Astronomers often use the term "satellites" to denote
moons. It's difficult to decide whether to call the satellites of a brown dwarf
system "planets" or "moons" anyway. For instance, if a
brown dwarf was behaving like Jupiter then we would naturally want to call its
satellites "moons". But, if we were looking at a brown dwarf
free-floating in space with its own planetary system, then we would more likely
treat it as a low mass star system. Under those circumstances, we would
certainly call the satellites 'planets'.

Our proposed Dark Star is more like Jupiter than an independent
star, although it may turn out to have been captured by the sun in the distant
past. Its major satellites are likely to be to be substantial planets in their
own right, but it seems sensible to call them "moons", because the
brown dwarf is itself a planet orbiting a star. Another suggestion has been to
call the satellites "planetars", but I think this generally confuses
things further. So we shall stick to "moons".

My thinking about the size and distribution of the Dark Star
system is based largely upon mythical and esoteric symbolism. Some of that work
is derived from Zecharia Sitchin, particularly with respect to his
interpretation of Winged Disc symbolism from ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. But
there are many other sources of useful ideas too.

My current thinking is that there are 7 moons orbiting the Dark
Star. The closest of them may well have habitable environments; certainly, I
think one of them does - with that particular world being of a similar size and
character to our Earth. The furthest planet is in a very wide orbit around the
Dark Star, and is capable of passing through our solar system during the Dark
Star's perihelion. Justification for this interpretation is complex and
unfortunately, beyond the scope of this book; it delves heavily into myth and
symbolism, and is naturally rather more speculative than the scientific work
reviewed in this volume. As such, it would best be looked at in detail in a
future book.

But, there is more to the Dark Star system than its major planets.
It no doubt has a distributed collection of minor planetary bodies, and
probably belts of comets too.

How Long is the Dark Star's
Orbit?

I originally concurred with the general consensus among
alternative theorists, that Nibiru's orbit is about 3,600 years in length. This
was originally derived from Zecharia Sitchin's original 12th Planet theory. He
'applied' the orbital period to the Sumerian value of 1 Sar, which was
equivalent to 3,600 years.
¹
This was justified because of the
centrality of this number within the complex numbering system of the Sumerians,
and it seemed to Sitchin that the chronological returns of Nibiru would be a
good reason for its importance.

Based on this assumption, I argued for many years that the last
visual sighting of Nibiru took place some 2,000 years ago and was in fact the
Messianic Star of Christian tradition. This fairly straightforward assertion
was actually rather more difficult to prove, and I found myself in a veritable
minefield of theological contention. After a great deal of deliberation I
considered it probable that the Star of Bethlehem was simply a mythological
construct.

That made an association with an actual sighting of the Dark Star
problematic. Except, that the Dark Star might not actually be easy to observe
at perihelion anyway...and, it was also possible that the ancient expectation
of the observation of a Star was more important to our story, than whether one
was actually seen at a particular time or not.

You can appreciate the tangle this created in my mind. All that I
could really say with any certainty was that the Dark Star was not about to
become visible anytime soon - or else, it would have been detected by any
number of astronomers, both professional and amateur, studying the stars across
the entire face of the Earth.

If the Dark Star's orbital period is Sitchin's 3,600 years, then I
still contend that it must have passed through perihelion about 2,000 years
ago, because it almost certainly is at its furthest point right now. How else
could one explain away the lack of direct detection of such a massive body? So,
there is still a reasonable possibility that the phenomenon of Nibiru is
closely associated with Messianic prophecy of one form or another.