For Late Breaking Developments: Read the 2012 and Planet X News Blog
If You Get It and Want to Get Through It: Join Planetxforecast.info

First Planet X / Nibiru Images Leaked by an Anonymous South Pole Telescope (SPT) Informant

Part 4 — Satellite Orbits

Jacco van der Worp, MSc
YOWUSA.COM
02-March-2008

Table of Contents

• Part 1 — Intro and Findings
  
  
• Part 2 — Hoax Claim Rebuttal
  
  
• Part 3 — Human Intelligence
  
  
• Part 4 — Satellite Orbits
  
  
• Part 5 — Object Cluster

PUBLIC NOTICE: We are unable to contact the any of the informants and cannot cannot independently confirm this report. As compelling as these images are, any conclusions drawn from them must be viewed as speculative at this time.

The goal of this analysis was to determine the stability (or instability) of this system. We did this by reconstructing the orbits of the 4 brightest satellites (shown below) in the Planet X / Nibiru Shock 2012 video as well as possible, given the limited data.

The author enhanced inverse variants of the four pictures from January 1, 10, 15 and 20 and laid them one upon the other to reconstruct the orbits with the center object as point of reference.

\

In this layered reconstruction, we used a working assumption, in which the respective image scales were treated as identical.

Object A —Orbital Period of 22 to 25 Days

The brightest satellite, labeled a1 through a4 for its four positions in the picture above, can be traced along an ellipse around the center object.

However, looking at the dates, there is a catch. From position 1 to position 2 is nearly halfway around the ellipse, meaning that the object moves around the center of the system in approximately 20 days. This assumes, of course, that this object traveled from point 1 to 2 without completing a full orbit in between.

Between positions a3 and a4, there should then be roughly a quarter of the orbit. There isn't. This simple orbit solution, therefore, appears to be incorrect. There is, however, one possible explanation for this elliptical orbit solution that could hold for these four positions.

This possibility, be it remote, is that position a2 is 1 to 3 days past the pericenter of object a, because in that case, the orbital velocity between a1 and a2 would logically be much higher than between point a3 and a4.

Our field of view would then be at a shallow angle to the plane of this orbit. In that case, the orbit would have a period of 22 to 25 days.

Object B — Unstable Orbit

Object b cannot be fitted into an elliptical orbit at all; its orbit must therefore be an unstable orbit.

Object C — Orbital Period of 21 to 22 Days

Object c can again be fitted into an ellipse. It travels only roughly a fifth of that elliptical path between the first two dates. Its orbit seems more circular than orbit a, which would mean object c has an orbital period of 45 days, which is around 2 times that of object a.

The size of the orbit of object c does not appear much larger than the orbit solution for object a. This would mean a contradiction between the two. The answer could be similar to the answer for object a, a shallow angle of view at the orbit plane.

The angle along the path between position c3 and c4 is larger than that between position c1 and c2 for the orbit. The time between c3 and c4 is, however, only half that between c1 and c2.

The only possibility for that appears to be that position c3 is 1 to 2 days before pericenter of the orbit. Even with this pericenter position this orbit solution is probably not correct, though, given the relative distance to the center object along the path, even at this shallow angle of view. If it is correct, this object has an estimated orbital period of 21 or 22 days.

Object D — Unstable Orbit

Object d again cannot be fitted along any elliptical path around the center object. It must also have an unstable orbit.

Conclusion

The conclusion on the analysis of the orbits is that they may in fact be actual orbits of satellites around the bigger center object. Two of the four do not have stable orbits, in that case.

This could be due to instability of the center object or to the Kozai mechanism, which destabilizes an orbit if it is at a steep angle to the rest of the system.

The planes of the two orbits that seem to match elliptical solutions are at roughly a 40-60 degree angle towards each other. As a result, this entire system is not likely to be stable any more.

The effects of the Kozai mechanism are notable; two of the four objects have destabilizing orbits that will probably not exist much longer before they break away, while the other two seem to be starting to destabilize, as well. Approaching this system, therefore, is likely to be dangerous.

Using Déjà vu as a Catastrophe Survival Skill — Author Marie D. Jones

Is Déjà vu one of those surreal human perceptions that is best ignored?

Or is it a brief peek through an opaque interdimensional doorway, into knowledge that could save your life?

The difference could mean all the difference to you and your loved ones during a catastrophe. GO

Announcements

Yowusa.com Subscriber Alert: Thanks to our recent sever upgrade, the Subscriber HD Theater is streaming DivX files much faster than before. Be sure to check it out.

New Viral Video Channel: We have created a new YouTube channel for viral re-posting of videos we believe to be of importance to our ongoing research efforts at: YouTube.com/YourOwnWorldUSA. For those of you with a YouTube account, please be sure to subscribe to this channel for notices of new videos as they become available.

Surviving 2012 and Planet X

New to the topic? This 5-part video series, will get you quickly immersed in the key concepts. From there, you'll be able to connect the dots for yourself very quickly.

Please feel free to share complete and unedited copies of these programs with others. All other rights reserved.

YOWUSA.COM Announcements

Cut to the Chase Internet Radio with Marshall Masters cttcRadio.com STREAM FOR FREE (Cable/DSL/56K Dial-up)