Have you made any calculations on that ?
If we are a binary system ( which is extremely possible ) and you have spotted the freakin " planet X " where is the response on that from scientist ? It is freakin visible, or is it not ? Do you think that suspicious governments are shut up all enthusiasts, scientists, observers ? Their only hope is the few hoax sites made to create mass hysteria amongst the non educated ? Planet of the crossing my ass.
50 years ago we taught that binary systems are rare, now even NASA admits more than 70% of observed solar systems are multi star systems.
And yes, probably ours as well. But not the way you believe. Why NASA don't say anything about Planet X ? Because it's bullshit, total and so huge, even NASA bullshits are much smaller in scale.
Or maybe there is another reason, they want to watch, that every person will die on Earth, or because NASA is the Devil, and Planet X is Hell ?
No, the reason is a lot more boring.
4 letters VLBI.
VLBI (Very Long Baseline Interferometry), the process of using extragalactic radio sources, such as quasars, to pinpoint changes in the Earth's orientation to inertial space is a tremendously helpful tool.
However, as precise as VLBI is in recording and documenting the Earth's orientation to points far outside the solar system, VLBI does not account for motion of the solar system frame nor does it determine the "causes" for the change in orientation. Rather the official NASA VLBI website recognizes two historically accepted categories of causes for such a change and then relies on the geoscientists to model the data.
Here is a quote from the NASA VLBI website:
"Changes in the Earth's orientation in inertial space have two causes: the gravitational forces of the Sun and Moon and the redistribution of total angular momentum among the solid Earth, ocean, and atmosphere. VLBI makes a direct measurement of the Earth's orientation in space from which geoscientists then model such phenomena as atmospheric angular momentum, ocean tides and currents, and the elastic response of the solid Earth."
Essentially, VLBI makes the measurements and geoscientists build the model. The problem with this methodology is that all the focus is on local dynamical causes (the work of the geoscientists) and none on reference frame or measurement issues (nobody's job). It is assumed that the earth's changing orientation to points "inside" the solar system (local measurements) must be the same as changes in the earth's orientation to points "outside" the moving solar system - but there is no evidence of this. In a circular argument: the static SS model constrains geoscientists to explain all changes in earth orientation through local dynamics, and because all changes in earth orientation are explained through local dynamics, the SS is constrained to zero motion (for EOP purposes).
The IAU adopted a new reference frame that uses a set of 295 quasars to define celestial positions (effective 1-1-2010, IAU News), meaning astronomers can now even more accurately determine the positions and motions of objects in the sky. However no amount of interferometry can tell us how much the SS curves through space unless measurements from "inside" the moving frame (where our radio telescopes are located) to points "outside" the moving frame (where the reference points are located) account for the motion of the SS. Present VLBI methodology does not account for the differing frame.
So NASA simple has no capacity to calculate the Solar System's " orbit ".
Ppl don't understand science generally, so they create answers, what they actually can understand. These created answers are what we call bullshit.
One more thing on the topic, that you have spotted the Sun's twin star.
Probably the companion star lies within the invariable plane (the angular momentum plane of the solar system) inclined to the ecliptic by 1.5 degrees. This would provide the most stability for the planetary orbits.
And stability is damn critical in this case, because we talking about a star, which is orbits with the Sun around some mysterious central mass. Forever.
There are good reasons why we do not see our dual star. It must be very faint in all ranges of electromagnetic emission and located in an area of the sky that “camouflages” it.
This basically rules out all types of stars except a black hole giving off only small amounts of radiation or a brown dwarf. The area toward the center of the galaxy is full of radiation, dust clouds, and background noise, making it difficult to track a faint object moving at an angular velocity around 50 arcsec per year.
So, please tell me, what did you see ?
!
