<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Krag</i>
<br />So you are confident it exists and that you have its orbit pretty well figured out? I'm just an interested follower of the story - no ability to search for it myself.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Yes, I'm confident. I can give you here a brief overview of the Barbarossa situation, though technically there is nothing I haven't posted to this thread already.
Before I do that, let's consider what's most important. The pyramid alignments suggest a natural catastrophe in late 2012 or early 2013. The crop circles, the authentic ones that speak the universal language of simple arithmetic and astronomy, are saying Oct. 8, 2012. Maybe the full discovery of this very cold brown dwarf (?) Barbarossa, will have to wait another 6000 yrs. Barbarossa is important in one way though:
The Egyptian record of the destructive "eye of the sun" on the horns of "Hathor" (Crater?) and associated with the deathdealing "uraeus" serpent (Hydra?) suggests the vicinity of the Ptolemaic constellations Crater and Hydra: where not only my Barbarossa, but also the (possibly entirely misinterpreted) "cosmic" microwave background dipole are located now. So, even if all you have is a pair of binoculars or your own eyesight, please scan this region of the sky whenever you can find the time, despite the inconvenient nearness to the sun. You can check out Burnham's guide from a library or get some other good star book. If nothing happens, you still will have become an expert on an interesting but under-appreciated region of the sky, and maybe will get some experience viewing Mercury too! This might be where the first sign of disaster appears - not a planet coming this way, but rather some kind of force, or emanation, we don't know about.
Regarding Barbarossa, there is so much about the orbit and photometric magnitude, that is typical of a brown dwarf, though a very cold one (there is evidence that cold brown dwarfs are the commonest, but hard to detect, and also that brown dwarfs have very low albedos due to their surface chemical composition) that has undergone a moderate, theoretically expected degree of gravitational collapse (not as dense as a white dwarf but denser than, say, Jupiter) and therefore has the magnitude that it does. It appears on all the relevant Red and Infrared sky survey photos I've been able to find online, though none of the Blue, but this is consistent with the well-known redness of most outer solar system objects.
The biggest source of doubt, is a small deviation from perfect Keplerian orbital motion, but this easily could be caused by either a moon of Barbarossa, of Saturn-like planetary mass itself; or else I am seeing a nearby, not necessarily very massive, moon of Barbarossa, not Barbarossa itself. Other searches of the ecliptic have not been complete enough to be expected to find Barbarossa. I found it because I concentrated on the vicinity of the "cosmic" microwave background dipole.
Mainstream astronomers tend to be quick to find some flimsy excuse to dismiss things like this. For example, a top astronomer I talked to personally, clings to the rebuttal that Barbarossa isn't bright enough. Regarding the pyramid alignments, this same astronomer only commented that he didn't think Mayans or their predecessors could have known the proper motion of Arcturus accurately enough to accomplish what I think they accomplished, and beyond that he won't talk about it. I don't want to pick on him because he gave me more of his time than any of the others. He's the best of the bunch so shouldn't be attacked. But I give these examples of how even the best of them typically think.
I did have access to a 14 inch robotic scope affiliated with a major US astronomy dept, but I only got a few photos before it started giving me gibberish photos. I got quite a bit of help from the prof in charge of it, but I finally ran out of time to fiddle with it. Another robotic scope I tried, which I had to pay a few dollars for, never did give me a single photo: they apparently seldom take photos, and don't regularly respond to emails.
I did get two highly competent, world class amateur astronomers, and very nice guys, Steve Riley in Sacramento and Joan Genebriera of Barcelona, to take several photos apiece, but unfortunately these were mostly years ago before I was as confident of the orbit, both these guys are limited in what they can do because they have demanding "day jobs", and I think now that most if not all of these photos did not have Barbarossa in the field of view, though they aimed exactly where I told them to at the time. A photo here, a photo there, is no way to document a magnitude (?) +18 object.
Another thing that is little appreciated, is that electronic photography is not all it is claimed to be. Noise elimination is an inexact science, someone can always claim that the photo was digitally altered, and, as many of us learned in lectures in high school about the scientific method: one must repeat the original experiment. The original experiment was, that Barbarossa appeared on long time exposed photographic plates. It might even be intermittently luminous.
The piece de resistance, is that I have demonstrated a statistically significant moving zone of dimness of background stars, about where Barbarossa is. Furthermore, my review of all the hundreds of so-called "interstellar absorption" measurements I found in the literature, found that the two stars in the whole sky with the greatest "interstellar" absorption, not counting a few stars near nebulas which might explain their absorption, were the two that were nearest Barbarossa.
I repeat: it will be difficult to view this region of the sky between now and Oct. 8, but please do! It might be the earliest visible warning we get.
