It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sun Alignment - Centre of Galaxy

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Since the first time I heard this mentioned was when Richard Hoagland was interviewed by Project Camelot and they asked him about what a scientist he would know had told them, I've been alarmed by this alignment. I can't prove planet x doesn't exist, or a second sun. But I think cataclysmic events could not possibly happen every 3600 years or life would never have evolved.
So aside from scientists working for the cabal trying to terrify people, what do you think the science is for this. That scientist said there would be a massive cme, then quick magnetic pole shift, then a crustal one.




posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by mystiq

So aside from scientists working for the cabal trying to terrify people, what do you think the science is for this. That scientist said there would be a massive cme, then quick magnetic pole shift, then a crustal one.


All this from "a scientist who was talking to us very briefly for a moment." but can't be named.


What do I think?

I do not think there will be huge CME's. CME's are a fairly regular occurrence. They give us nice auroral displays and can cause problems with power grids and communications but they are not "kill shots". There is no reason to expect an extremely huge one with the upcoming Solar Max. Current predictions are for "normal" sunspot activity through 2012.

I do not think there can be a quick magnetic pole shift. There is evidence that the magnetic poles have reversed in the past, the last time was about 740,000 years ago and they follow no cyclical pattern. All of the past reversals have taken thousands of years, none of them were quick.

I do not think there is any reason to expect a crustal shift. Plate tectonics is a slow process and does not involve a global shift, each plate moves independently. There is no evidence of global crustal shifting, quickly or otherwise. There is no evidence that plate tectonics have any connection to magnetic shifts.

I don't think there is any scientific support for what Hoagland or this "scientist" says. If you want to believe him there is nothing I can do about it. If you must believe that other scientists are hiding information about the End of the World, there is nothing I can do about it.

If you want to know if you should believe Hoagland do some research in places that don't use him as an authority. Then decide if his stories make any sense to you. But please don't buy his books.

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Phage]



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by xbranscombex
 


In Accordance with the Theory that the Universe is a Novelty Conserving Engine; we have currently entered a period of Time/Space where Novelty is presenting at an increased rate according to the predications derived from the Laws of the Inverse Square and Ilya Prigogine's Fractal Universe Theory.

The fact that so many in the Fields of Quantum, Theoretical, Fractal, Novelty, Hyperdimensional, Torsion Field Physics et al are able to coalesce and show quantifiable relationships between these varied fields is proof of a new Period of increased Novelty having been entered. Some sort of Nexus is approaching and the current physics lacks the flexibility to describe even the precursory Affectations.

Corresponding to this is the beginning of our passage through the Photon Belt - Potentially one of the Most Data-rich environs in the Galaxy. One could indeed say that synchronisity and corresponding level of Novelty has undoubtedly begun to Present at a rate predicted by the Fractal Universe Theory and it's adjuncts; Torsion Field, Quantum & Hyperdimensional Physics.

These are the Interesting Times.

[edit on 18-9-2008 by TruthTellist]



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
[In my opinion, the alignment appears every year but NOT at Dec, midvinter solstice on the Northern hemisphere.

Ancient cultures had a cosmological reference line going from the Star Sirius over the North Pole area, further on to Vega in Lurae and eventually pointing at the centre of our Galaxy in the constellation of Sagittarius. In this way the ancient people used this line in their Story of Creation telling. (I can´t give you a similar reference line for the Southern hemisphere, but I´m sure the ancient people there also had one).

This reference line occurs even twice every yearat Jan 4. and July 4. But of course, regarding the larger cycle of the 26.000 year precession, this alignment can have different implications troughout the cycle.

But, in general, I´m also of that opinion that an actual period will be followed by "just" a new period. I mean, this was the essential meaning of all ancient people. The life is a period of physical and spiritual "dead" and rebirth.

In a time, where the modern human beings - and even some of the actual native tribes - have forgotten some details of their traditional tellings, we shal not be to worried over a statement as "what will happend Dec. 21. 2012".

Ivar Nielsen, Denmark
www.native-science.net]



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 02:29 AM
link   
The sun is in permanent alignment with the centre of the galaxy. All 2 points are always in alignment


The Sun and the Earth align with the centre of the galaxy twice every 12 months.

Apparently, on 22nd December 1999 the Sun, Earth and Moon were all in alignment with the centre of the galaxy .... and we all know what happened then


www.gaiamind.org...

The solar system crosses the galactic plane every 26 million years or so and is due to do so again in about 20 million years time.

Nothing special will happen in 2012.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Apparently, astronomy is not your strong suit. The orbital plane of the Earth is not in alignment with the orbital plane of the galaxy. The Sun is only between us and the Galactic Core, which is a super massive Black Hole, once every 26,000 years. Twice a year? Please! You are confusing our crossing of the Galactic Plane with a alignment with the Galactic Core, which are two totally separate events. Crossing the Galactic Plane has no gravitational effects. A Galactic Core alignment however, very well could. Why does the completion of the wobble of Earth's axis and this alignment coincide? Both occur every 26,000 years. I don't know, but it has to be something.

[edit on 19-9-2008 by JaxonRoberts]



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by Essan
 


Apparently, astronomy is not your strong suit. The orbital plane of the Earth is not in alignment with the orbital plane of the galaxy. The Sun is only between us and the Galactic Core, which is a super massive Black Hole, once every 26,000 years. Twice a year? Please! You are confusing our crossing of the Galactic Plane with a alignment with the Galactic Core, which are two totally separate events. Crossing the Galactic Plane has no gravitational effects. A Galactic Core alignment however, very well could. Why does the completion of the wobble of Earth's axis and this alignment coincide? Both occur every 26,000 years. I don't know, but it has to be something.

[edit on 19-9-2008 by JaxonRoberts]


Can you explain exactly what on the Earth aligns with what in the Galactic core. Maybe this is where the confusion lies.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


The Sun will be precisely between the Earth and The Galactic Core, which only occurs once every 26,000 years due to our orbit around the Sun not being on the same plane as the orbital plane of the Galaxy.

[edit on 19-9-2008 by JaxonRoberts]



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

The Sun will be precisely between the Earth and The Galactic Core, which only occurs once every 26,000 years due to our orbit around the Sun not being on the same plane as the orbital plane of the Galaxy.

[edit on 19-9-2008 by JaxonRoberts]


Ok, in that case Essan is correct. The Sun is precisely between the Earth and the Galactic Core once every year. This is because Earth's orbital plane and the orbital plane of The Galaxy are not the same.

Maybe this will help illustrate it:

Notice that at some point in Earth's orbit, the Sun will be directly between the center of The Galaxy and the Earth. It's actually simple geometry.


[edit on 19-9-2008 by Phage]



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


My point here is that you are not thinking three dimensionally. That may be the angle to the Galactic Plane, but from what I've seen online it's more like 62 degrees, but what is the angle to the Galactic Core? I'm not saying that I'm an expert in the field of astronomy. I did find this video that attempts to explain what the Mayan's were predicting.



Regretfully, we won't know what to expect until it actually happens, if anything happens at all, but I feel it's a subject worth exploring.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


I am thinking in three dimensions. It doesn't matter.

That video is blabbering about the vertical oscillation of the Solar System relative to the galactic plane. This cycle does exist but its period is many millions of years, not 26,000. The Maya had no way of knowing about this cycle. We are in the galactic plane right now. The Galaxy is some 3,000 light years thick (in our neighborhood) and you want to believe that the Mayan calendar, much less modern science can predict the year when we will be smack in the middle of it?

The black hole at the center of The Galaxy is far too far away to have any affect on the Solar System or the Earth. The notion that gravity is stronger in the accretion disc is just wrong. I love the title of the movie: Galactic Alignment 2012 Aproved! [sic] 2008 News By Scientists. Approved by whom? What scientists? I keep expecting that guy talking to say "I'm not a scientist, but I play one on TV." But, no, I guess he wouldn't say that would he? I wonder who he is.

[edit on 19-9-2008 by Phage]



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Let's take these one at a time:


Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


That video is blabbering about the vertical oscillation of the Solar System relative to the galactic plane. This cycle does exist but its period is many millions of years, not 26,000. The Maya had no way of knowing about this cycle. We are in the galactic plane right now. The Galaxy is some 3,000 light years thick (in our neighborhood) and you want to believe that the Mayan calendar, much less modern science can predict the year when we will be smack in the middle of it?


If nothing else, you are convincing me more and more that we are up the creek by making me research this even deeper!


The recent findings of nearly matching long-term cyclicity in biological mass extinctions, geomagnetic reversals, impact cratering and other terrestrial processes have evoked a major controversy. We report here a compilation and analysis of major global magmatic episodes showing a significant enhancement of volcanic activity with a periodicity of 33 million years for the last 250 million years. These magmatic episodes match extremely well the best available astronomical estimates of the periodic (31 ± 5 Myr) galactic-disc crossing events during vertical motions of the solar system. These events also have a close linkage with the marine biological mass extinctions and other geological rhythms. It is argued that the prolonged volcanic activity, instead of impact cratering, may have been the more immediate primary cause for profound climatic and other environmental deterioration sufficient to create biological crises on a global scale. The volcanic periodicity scheme is well supported by the evidence of recent increases in volcanic activity.


Geophysical International Journal

And now the second part.


The black hole at the center of The Galaxy is far too far away to have any affect on the Solar System or the Earth. The notion that gravity is stronger in the accretion disc is just wrong.
[edit on 19-9-2008 by Phage]



The structure and the dynamics of the accretion disc remain quite mysterious. The disc is not directly observable because the resolution of current telescopes is still insufficient. It is primarily studied at short wavelengths (UV, X and gamma rays). But short wavelength spectra give information only on the internal regions of the disc (scale of the micro-parsec), very close to the black hole. The external parts of the disc (the milliparsec-scale) are made up of colder gas and radiate in the visible, infra-red, and mm bands. One suspects that at these distances, the mass of the disc (generally regarded as small) starts to play a role on its own dynamics, and thus on its evolution and its structure. At the parsec scale for example, models indicate that the mass of the disc could reach (even exceed) that of the black hole. One then expects very particular effects, like a non-keplerian rotation, and the generation of gravitational instabilities (spiral waves, etc.) who could lead to the formation of compact objects in the disc itself (like stars or planets) (Collin & Zahn, 1999, A & A, 344, 433). A point is that, the accretion disc is made of a certain amount of gas and dust, and thus it inevitably generates a certain gravity field. When this mass exceeds a fraction of the central mass (about 10% typically), then the departure to the keplerian rotation law is significant: the centrifugal force is no more compensated by the central attraction only but by the combined gravitational attraction of the black hole and of the disc.


The outer part of accretion discs unveiled

The gravity of the Galactic Core is sufficient to keep our sun in it's orbit, so stating that it is too weak to affect this solar system is unrealistic.

As to the validity of the video, you have a point. I included it as food for thought, not as a verified scientific viewpoint. I don't know whether he's talking out his rear end or not. I also would like to verify his credentials before deciding the amount of weight I give his opinion.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Good!

I got you to engage in some real research rather than paying attention to the nonsensical raving.


The recent findings of nearly matching long-term cyclicity in biological mass extinctions, geomagnetic reversals, impact cratering and other terrestrial processes have evoked a major controversy


I would say the keywords here are "major controversy". There are a number of theories about the alleged 31 Myr cycle. There isn't really even agreement about the length of the cycle or even if there really is one, much less what its causes might be. Source.




The structure and the dynamics of the accretion disc remain quite mysterious.

The gravitational influence of the accretion disk itself is a separate issue from that of the black hole. There is certainly no "alignment of the Sun and the core of The Galaxy". As the the writer says: "One suspects that at these distances, the mass of the disc (generally regarded as small) starts to play a role on its own dynamics". The distances he is talking about are distances far from the major influence of the central black hole. What it means is that all the mass in our neighborhood exerts an influence on our neighborhood. The effects of that influence are speculative and in any case are very large scale. Not enough to cause earthquakes and volcanoes. If that were the case it would also greatly disrupt the orbits of all the planets on that periodic cycle. We and our sister planets have been playing nice for a lot longer than 60 million years so it's apparent that this probably isn't going to be the source of any problems that spring up.


Bottom line. No doubt there are lots of scary things that can happen at a catastrophic level. I'm not going to list them. There is no way for anyone to nail any of them happening on December 21, 2012 or any other date, or year.

[edit on 20-9-2008 by Phage]



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 11:01 PM
link   
I can see how this is working right now. The really big predictions all seem to be based on a psuedo science, which fooled me, because I am not scientifically oriented. I think you have succeeded very well at debunking this. Thanks.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


My interest in this subject stems from the myriad of things that seem to point to this date. Is something going to happen? I don't know! Are we overdue for a major event? You betcha! I'm looking at this subject with an open mind as well as open eyes. Some of it is just BS, but other aspects seem to justify continued research, such as the 'Web-bot Project'.

Peoplenomics

To just blatenly dismiss all the data as BS is coming at the subject with closed eyes. To immediately dismiss anyone who is curious as to the validity of the data as a crackpot is not a open-minded approach. There is really no way to tell what or when the next extinction event will be, but we do know from fossil record that it has happened before, and science does agree that it's only a matter of time before it happens again. Either way, if something does happen, we're probably screwed, so it won't really matter anyway.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by mystiq
 


Some is psuedo science, but some is not. If you feel by what little debate has been presented on this thread is enough evidence to debunk it, you need to take a better look at it, and from people infinitely more qualified to do so than us.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 12:35 AM
link   
the alignment already happened on dec 23 2007.

there is no alignment in dec 2012.Show me a better one than this
www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join