Requiem for Relativity

Arnold's (1988) object: evidence for an unknown optical surface surrounding Earth

HJP Arnold (Hampshire, England), Astrophotography, 2003 (foreword by Prof. David Malin, Anglo-Australian Observatory) Fig. 12.7, p. 163, shows an unidentified object (near Omega Tauri; more exactly, between 51 & 53 Tauri) which is at only, as well as I could measure, ecliptic lat. +0 deg 1.5' (Arnold's text doesn't remark this). Jupiter at the same time was nearby, but at about ecliptic lat. -1.0 deg. Such bodies, lacking any special relationship to Earth, would at best be distributed around Jupiter's orbit. With Jupiter in this position, the chance of being so close to the ecliptic would be less than (1.5'*2)/(60'*2)=2.5% (much less, for any mathematically or empirically likely distribution of inclinations)(Saturn's orbit, and the principal plane of the solar system, are even farther from the ecliptic here.) So, this object is so close to the ecliptic, that likely it is proprietary to the sun-Earth system. It is about the color of Aldebaran. Its magnitude is about midway between Aldebaran's (+0.9) and that of Epsilon Tauri (~ +4.0), thus about +2.5.

Arnold found this object on four successive photos reqiring at least four minutes of time total. The date was Nov. 2, 1988 (presumably evening, not morning, because of moonrise).

A mirror-like phenomenon arising on a perfect sphere of influence around Earth, would make images of the sun, on the ecliptic opposite the sun. A distorted sphere retaining symmetry about the ecliptic, could produce an image almost 30 deg displaced from opposition (as this is) yet still on the ecliptic. Presumably such an object wouldn't be much farther from the sun than Earth is, so a 100% albedo patch of this apparent magnitude would have small enough angular size to seem starlike in Arnold's photo. Also, the image would shift relative to the stars, only 1 deg/day = 1' / 24 minutes = 10" / four minutes. If Arnold delayed a few minutes between these frames, the movement might be barely discernible.

The scarcity of stars and galaxies near the (+) CMB dipole (i.e., near my computed position for Barbarossa) is further evidence that a mini-solar system is there, with concomitant dust, extinction and reddening. (This also helps explain the unexpected faintness of the objects of the Barbarossa system itself.)

The Millenium Star Atlas says that its smallest number of cataloged stars (these go down to 11th mag) per square degree, average for any constellation, is 10; this is for Coma Berenices, which is, basically, the neighborhood of the N Galactic pole. Barbarossa's recent track (since 1954)(average galactic colatitude almost 45 deg from the N galactic pole) contains only slightly more stars than Coma Berenices, per square degree, averaging fewer than expected (expected would be 40% more than Coma). Few pages of the Millenium Catalog are as sparse in stars as the bottom half of p. 801, vol. 2 (the neighborhood of Barbarossa's track). So, Barbarossa's track is sparser in bright (mag < +11.5) stars than expected for its galactic latitude.

Despite its favorable position, far from the galactic equator, Barbarossa's track doesn't exceed the average, for cataloged galaxies. The aforesaid half-page contains four small galaxies, all near the margin of the page in cut-off degree squares that also are found on neighboring pages; so maybe they should be counted half, i.e., as two. The Millenium Catalog contains over 8000 galaxies and has 1548 chart pages, for an average of over five galaxies per page, or 2.5 per half-page.

With such small numbers, it would be better to compare parallax distances to spectroscopic distances, that is, to estimate absolute magnitude spectroscopically, and distance, from Hipparcos, then check for extinction that is unusual in amount or kind. A named 6th mag star, SV Crateris (HD 98088), a triple star with a 5.9-day eclipsing binary component, has been within 35' (2.0 AU) of Barbarossa's heliocentric track during recent decades. Study of this star might reveal the amount of extinction and reddening in that direction, and whether those are changing due to Barbarossa's motion.

Hi Nemesis, if you download those images and open them as separate layers in photoshop, you can reduce the transparency of the top one and then slide the layer upwards until the stars line up. You'll find that they don't exactly. You'll have something that looks like a double exposure. Now this has to be down to the lens effect of the Earths atmosphere, these images are taken a year apart.

There should be a central point, so add a layer and then draw some lines between close pairs of stars and extend them. That should give you that central point. The only trouble is, it's the devil to find. I can only conclude that some of these stars have high proper motions. Could it be that there's another lens effect here, due to a "dimple" caused by a mini solar system way out there in the boonies?

You asked why is that green dot so dim? First, we have to say that it could simply be an artefact of the electronic camera on the telescope. it could be a variable star that was very dim on the first image but brighter on the second. So look at the channels. Nothing at all on the red, a bright dot on the green and an almost none existent tonal change on the blue. I would say that it's an object, as it does show on two colour channels.

Remember that the object of the game is to get an image of a planet, that's more massive than jupiter but of a smaller radius. We don't know its intrinsic brightness, and whether or not it's surrounded by a dust halo. Plus it's at about 180 AU. It's going to be at about the best resolution of the Bradford telescope, or even dimmer still.

To Joe, the top clearer image is the most recently taken, with the fits files I sent you, it's called nem4b. Remember that a robotic telescope can have problems with gimbal lock. One of the images put up here had to be flipped vertically. To line them up on a skyview plate, you may have to flip them both vertically back and also flip them horizontally as well.

If anyone is a dab hand at bringing out the best of fits files, pm me and I'll send them to you

In Barbarossa's Cavern There Are No Stars

Gross dimming of the stars occurs between 1954 and 1987 (basically, the R1 & R2 mags) according to the USNO-B catalog. I considered three regions with 2 deg radii: centered at the 1954 & 1987 Barbarossa geocentric coordinates, and another centered about 5 deg N of Barbarossa's track. The effect is unmistakable for magnitudes +15.00-17.99. More to follow (school's out and I have to get off the public library computer).

In Barbarossa's Cavern There Are No Stars (Part II)

Now I've automatically searched six regions of the USNO-B1 catalog. All have radius 2.00 degrees.

Region 1. Centered on the geocentric position of Barbarossa in 1954.
Region 2. ", 1987.
Region 3. Centered on RA11:10:00, Decl -2:30:00 (approx. 4.5deg N of the midpt. of Regions 1&2).
Region 4. ", RA11:10:00, Decl -12:30:00 (approx. 5.5deg S of the midpt. of Regions 1&2).
Region 5. ", RA11:34:00, Decl -12:00:00 (approx. 5deg prograde along Barbarossa's orbit and 2 deg to the S).
Region 6. ", RA10:46:00, Decl -3:00:00 (approx. 5deg retrograde along Barbarossa's orbit and 1 deg to the N).

Let n = 15, 16, or 17. Using the online VizieR service, automatically search the USNO-B catalog, for stars whose R1 lies within the interval [n,n+0.49] but R2 within the interval [n+0.50,n+0.99], for some n. Repeat with R1 & R2 switched. (A completely different but comparably big sample would be got by investigating instead the intervals [n-0.50,n-0.01] and [n,n+0.49].) This finds the numbers of stars whose R1 & R2 differ by very roughly +/- 0.5 mag.

According to the online documentation I've found for the USNO-B catalog, and the DSS "plate finder":

R1 was found from either the POSS-I survey (1949-1965; three relevant plates: 1954x2, 1956);
or, the ESO-R survey (Decl < -5 only; no plates intersect region).

R2 was found from either the POSS-II survey (irrelevant; Decl > 0 only);
or, the SERC-ER survey (1978-2002; five relevant plates: 1985, 1986, 1987, 1991, 1992).

So, the R1 magnitudes are from 1954 or 1956, and the R2 magnitudes from 1985, 1986, 1987, 1991 or 1992. For each of the six regions, I found the number of stars in the above magnitude ranges, for which R1 was dimmer and for which R2 was dimmer. For mag +15.0 to +18.0:

Region 1: R1 dimmer 445, R2 dimmer 3229, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 7.26.
Region 2: R1 dimmer 503, R2 dimmer 2299, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 4.57.
Region 3: R1 dimmer 916, R2 dimmer 864, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 0.94.
Region 4: R1 dimmer 1119, R2 dimmer 1759, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 1.57.
Region 5: R1 dimmer 1137, R2 dimmer 1488, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 1.31.
Region 6: R1 dimmer 1300, R2 dimmer 804, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 0.62.

As Barbarossa moved from its 1954 to roughly its 1987 position, the background stars near the first end of that track dimmed most consistently, and near the second end of the track somewhat less consistently. Much less consistently, but still with high statistical significance, stars 5deg retrograde of the track brightened, stars 5deg S the track dimmed, and stars 5deg prograde of the track dimmed. Stars 5deg N of the track brightened insignificantly.

A tabulation of Regions 1,2, and 3, for n = 13 or 14, confirms the above. For mag +13.0 to +15.0:

Region 1: R1 dimmer 45, R2 dimmer 845, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 18.78.
Region 2: R1 dimmer 100, R2 dimmer 611, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 6.11.
Region 3: R1 dimmer 244, R2 dimmer 128, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 0.52.

Either the stars really dimmed in Regions 1 & 2, or they didn't. If they didn't, it must be that despite calibrations made, a large error overestimating R2, or underestimating R1, at least for magnitudes +13 to +18, was made for Regions 1 & 2 (Barbarossa's hypothetical track) but not for the four surrounding Regions. Barbarossa's track does intersect the boundaries of all eight relevant plates, so, often, different plates must have been used for different regions.

In Barbarossa's Cavern There Are No Stars (Part III)

Transient dimming of background stars near the location of Barbarossa, also occurs for the Blue magnitudes. These magnitudes derive from completely different plates than the Red magnitudes. The POSS-I Blue plates have the same dates as the corresponding Red plates; for the somewhat expanded area considered below, the average date of the relevant POSS-I Blue plates is within a year of that of the POSS-I Red plates considered above; none of them differ from that date by more than 2 yr. The relevant SERC-J Blue plates all are from about 5 yr earlier than the average date of the SERC-ER Red plates.

I've added more (circular, 2 degree radius) Regions, 7 through 9. Listed from retrograde to prograde, the Regions now are:

Region 9. RA 10:30 Decl -2:00
Region 6. RA 10:46 Decl -3:00
Region 1. RA 11:02:25.26, Decl -5:56:11.3 (Barbarossa 1954 pos.)
Region 2. RA 11:18:03.18, Decl -7:58:46.1 (Barbarossa 1987 pos.)
Region 5. RA 11:34 Decl -12:00
Region 7. RA 11:50 Decl -12:00
Region 8. RA 12:06 Decl -14:00

Also there are the regions displaced laterally,

Region 3. RA 11:10 Decl -2:30
Region 4. RA 11:10 Decl -12:30

Blue magnitudes often are missing from the USNO-B catalog. I searched for stars whose B1 mag was 12.00-13.99 and B2 mag 14.00-15.99 (or vice versa). There averaged fewer than a dozen of these in each Region, so I also searched for stars whose B1 mag was 16.00-17.99 and B2 mag 18.00-19.99 (or vice versa). The totals were:

(prograde on Barbarossa's track)
Region 9: B1 dimmer 73, B2 dimmer 1, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 73.0
Region 6: B1 dimmer 77, B2 dimmer 5, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 15.4
Region 1: B1 dimmer 44, B2 dimmer 8, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 5.50
Region 2: B1 dimmer 38, B2 dimmer 14, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 2.72
Region 5: B1 dimmer 120, B2 dimmer 45, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 2.67
Region 7: B1 dimmer 103, B2 dimmer 18, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer=5.72
Region 8: B1 dimmer 118, B2 dimmer 3, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 39.3

(lateral regions)
Region 3: B1 dimmer 66, B2 dimmer 3, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 22.0
Region 4: B1 dimmer 44, B2 dimmer 28, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 1.57
(The position of Region 3, projected onto Barbarossa's track, is approx. Region 1; the projected position of Region 4, is approx. Region 2.)

So, the Red and the Blue plates together, prove that transient, generalized dimming of background stars recently has occurred in the vicinity of the positive "CMB" dipole. This is the position of the "disappearing dots", which because of their orbital regularity, I believe to be Barbarossa and its satellite(s).