*** Moon orbit is wrong according to Cornell University *** PIN

Yes I read the paper, and the reason they ruled out Tyche is because Tyche is supposedly located at least 15,000 AU from the Sun.

And their calculations required that the Jovian mass planet that could cause this anomaly on the Moon's orbital eccentricity should be located only 200 AU.

According to this paper the Moon's and the Earth's internal coditions are not able to explain the anomaly:

The present-day models of the dissipative phenomena occurring in the interiors of both the Earth and the Moon are not able to explain it.

There is no evidence for any anomaly in the tidal acceleration in mean longitude. By contrast, the anomalous lunar eccentricity rate indicates that something is not understood well enough. Though it cannot be said with certainty that the anomaly comes from the Moon, the lunar interior is less well known than the Earth‘s interior. Computation of lunar orbit evolution over long times needs a good understanding of the various contributions to the secular rates. Long-time evolution of the orbit is complex because of evolving lunar thermal conditions and changing ocean tides (Bills and Ray, 1999).

Oh, and the link you provided is not working :(
[link to cddis.gsfc.nasa.gov]

Here is a pic of the Moon I took tonight at 11:34pm cst. The orientation matches up perfectly with what Stellarium shows.

Did you read the paper? They rule out Tyche as an explanation. A paper by the researchers who actually performed the observations and reported the anomalous increase suggests the real reason lies in the constantly changing lunar thermal and internal conditions and in changes to the earth's ocean tides.
[link to cddis.gsfc.nasa.gov]

Yes, and there's a reason for that. Such an object could hypothetically be out that far and remain undetected, which brings me to...
Which is wholly unrealistic, as they themselves admitted, hence they rule it out.
"Actually, the values for its mass and distance
needed to explain the empirically determined increase
of the lunar eccentricity would be highly unrealistic..."

[link to www.scribd.com]

According to him a recent analysis of a Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) data spanning 38.7 yr revealed an anomalous increase of the eccentricity of the Moon's orbit. (Note: you need a special equipment and a long period of observation time to detect this very small anomaly).

This increase of the Moon's eccentricity is a non-vanishing long term variation. A potentially viable solution for this anomaly would be a trans-Plutonian massive object (Planet X/Nemesis/Tyche).

However, the author added that the values for the physical and orbital parameters of such a hypothetical body required to obtain the right order of magnitude for the anomaly are completely unrealistic.

I read page 14 of the paper, and the reason cited why the author does not believe the anomaly is explained by a Planet X, is that their calculations predict that Planet X for a Jovian mass should be only 200 AU away.

And they are expecting that Planet X should at least be 15,000 AU away from the Sun, as concluded by Matese's research.

But, what if a Jovian massed Planet X really is less than 200 AU away and still fast approaching the Sun?

Is it possible for such a massive body located less than 200 AU to remain undetected by astronomers?

What if Nibiru is a dark planet similar to the recently discovered Jupiter sized planet named TrES-2b, which is darker than coal.

[link to www.bbc.co.uk]



And since Nibiru is farther away from our Sun than the dark planet TrES-2b is from its sun, Nibiru is receiving less sunlight than TrES-2b. Therefore, Nibiru is darker and even more difficult to detect than TrES-2b.

Thus for many people, Nibiru will come to them "like a thief in the night".

You have a strange way of interpreting that statement. Equating that statement to saying that the moon and earth's internal conditions are incapable of being responsible is akin to stating that it couldn't be a Jovian mass planet at 200 AUs simply because no such planet exists in our current models of the solar system. Indeed that explanation is unrealistic, but not simply because it doesn't exist in current models per se.

The paper I linked you to explains that our understanding of the moon's internal dynamics is not complete and we need to better understand it in order to know how the orbit should change over time like this.
The arXiv paper looks at the possibility of various external factors and alternative models of gravity for an explanation, but it doesn't attempt to explore differences in the lunar interior from current models as an explanation. That's fine as they aren't actually ruling that out as a possibility, all your bolded statement indicates is that current models of the interior do not explain it. Since a reasonable explanation was not found in external factors it adds weight to the idea that the anomaly is due to an inadequate understanding of internal dissipative phenomena, which is where the original authors were headed anyway.

In other words, the authors are saying that after rejecting the idea that a Jovian mass planet exists less than 200 AU away, they currently do not have an alternate explanation to the anomaly of the Moon's orbital eccentricity; other than a wishful thinking that maybe there is something happening in the interiors of the Moon that is yet undiscovered and can explain away the anomaly.

You are distorting what they're saying, and I suspect deliberately. It's not wishful thinking, it's the most likely scenario. Stop trying to make it seem like it's unlikely.

moon of tonight


[link to www.youtube.com]

Sooner and later you will see great changes made,
dreadful horrors and vengeances.
For as the moon is thus led by its angel
the heavens draw near to the Balance.

I am currently on the moon with a team of international scientists, and t we can tell you that the orbit of the earth has changed. It has increased 3 degrees over the vertex.

I am currently on the moon with a team of international scientists, and t we can tell you that the orbit of the earth has changed. It has increased 3 degrees over the vertex.

I am currently on the moon with a team of international scientists, and t we can tell you that the orbit of the earth has changed. It has increased 3 degrees over the vertex.

And this research was done before they discovered the Jupiter sized planet named TrES-2b, which is darker than coal. Which is why I am saying that a Jovian mass planet similar to TrES-2b located less than 200 AU can explain the anomaly on the Moon's orbital eccentricity.

Wow, Anti-GLP can actually converse with Astromutt! I feel like I am watching a tennis match though I could keep up with a tennis match better.

I can't even figure out what the lunar eccentricity is, and yes, I did try to Goggle it (or Bing it as the case may be).

Can anyone explain it to me in simple terms?

Whenever I calculate for the detectability of any given hypothetical "Nibiru" I've always been generous enough to use an albedo twice as black as coal, and you might be surprised at just how detectable such an object would be even at a couple hundred AUs distance. Oh sure, it would require a powerful telescope, but not one beyond what most serious amateur astronomers use.

The albedo of TrES-2b is less than 1% at a distance of 50 million miles away from its sun. 200 AU away from our Sun is considerably farther than that.

Also, what is the albedo of an object twice as black as coal? Have you actually discovered an object 200 AU away with such low albedo using your telescope? Care to share some pictures with us?

Over the same period of time as this study, a 1 jupiter mass object at 200 AUs would have perturbed Saturn's position with respect to the sun by about 173 arcseconds as seen from earth, almost 3 arc minutes, averaging 4.55 arcseconds per year (using this: [link to orsa.sourceforge.net] ). That's insanely high to astronomers (yes, even amateur astronomers), and it isn't happening ( [link to www.godlikeproductions.com] ). So even if the object were magically so dense that it were a jupiter mass black hole and reflected no light at all, it would still not be able to elude detection by any means. It doesn't exist.

Albedo is independent of distance from the sun.

Albedo is independent of distance from the sun.

No, I haven't discovered a jupiter sized object 200 AUs from the sun with an albedo twice as black as coal, because none exists. Such an object would perturb the positions of the planets by quite a few arcseconds, easily noticeable, but that is not happening. That's why it doesn't even matter that TrES-2b has an albedo <1%, it could be 0% for all I care, the perturbations such an object would induce would be quite noticeable to me.

Have you considered using a very high inclination of the orbital plane of the 1 jupiter mass object with respect to the eccliptic?

Show me where such an object fits the observations re the moon. I've considered it in previous instances, but in this instance the hypothetical object you are claiming actually exists is supposed to affect only the moon's eccentricity, it is not supposed to induce a perturbation from a severely inclined direction.