'Ultracool subdwarf' stars speeding through Milky Way

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   
To those members who are interested in reading and researching more on this topic, instead of trying to dismiss this out of hand for whatever personal motives, here are some peer-reviewed scientific articles discussing this very same topic.


SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)
Title: The location of Planet X
Authors: Harrington, R. S.
Journal: Astronomical Journal (ISSN 0004-6256), vol. 96, Oct. 1988, p. 1476-1478.
Bibliographic Code: 1988AJ.....96.1476H


articles.adsabs.harvard.edu



Arguments for the presence of a distant large undiscovered Solar system planet

Murray, J. B.
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 309, Issue 1, pp. 31-34.

Aphelion distances of long-period comets show a slight excess around 30000 to 50000au from the Sun. Positions of cometary aphelia within these distance limits are aligned along a great circle inclined to both the ecliptic and the Galactic plane. This paper examines one of the possible explanations for this non-random clustering: that it is due to orbital perturbations by an undiscovered object orbiting within the above-mentioned distances. A model consistent with the observations gives a retrograde orbit (inclination 120 deg) for the object with a longitude of the ascending node at 77 deg+/-13 deg, a period of 5.8x10^6 yr and a radius of 32000au. The same model gives a present position for the undiscovered object of RA 20^h 35^m, Dec.+5 deg, with an error ellipse semimajor axis of 14 deg and a semiminor axis of 7 deg. The magnitude is likely to be fainter than 23. Such a distant object would almost certainly not remain bound for the age of the Solar system, and recent capture into the present orbit, although also of low probability, remains the least unlikely origin for this hypothetical planet.
Keywords: COMETS: GENERAL: PLANETS AND SATELLITES: GENERAL
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02806.x

adsabs.harvard.edu...

[edit on 14-6-2009 by ElectricUniverse]




posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   
The fact that scientists discovered recently this unexpected increase in the Astronomical Units, or the distance between the Sun and the planets, and they are calling this increase in distance as "unexplained phenomenon" would point out two facts.

First, there is much we still need to learn about our own Solar System. Two there must be something, either very large planet, dwarf star, or something else causing this increase in gravitational attraction of the planets away from the Sun, and whatever that is must be getting closer to the Solar System to have increased the distance between the planets and the Sun enough for scientists to state this is unexplained.




[edit on 14-6-2009 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
How does anybody really know definitively if our sun is not part of a binary star system?? We haven't had the technology long enough to detect this. Perhaps the gravitational pull from the other dim star we cannot see is why the sun takes a bobbing motion up and down as it travels around the Milky Way?? Aren't 70 percent of the stars in the univers part of a binary system? Only seems logical to me that our own familiar Sun isn't as familiar as we thought and that perhaps the ancient cultures we're all referring to something very credible. I'm not saying Nuburi or whatever the ppl call it. Nothing to do with aliens or anything of that nature, but this could be a very real possibilty if in fact these objects move at that speed. We could never detect an object at such diatance with such a dim glow. Right?? Feedback would rock



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by spinalremain
 



Perhaps the gravitational pull from the other dim star we cannot see is why the sun takes a bobbing motion up and down as it travels around the Milky Way??



Whilst you are indeed putting a lot of thought on the matter, I pulled that sentence out to indicate a point.

The Sun, by itself, does not make a 'bobbing motion' as it orbits the Galaxy. The entire Solar System is along for the 'ride'. THIS would include (if it existed) any sort of Binary companion to our Sun.

When the Solar System was coalescing, obviously a large amount of matter was 'clumping' out where the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn currently reside. Under the right circumstances, and if there had been a great deal more matter there could have formed another larger body, to later be called a 'dim Sun' (couldn't resist that little joke, sorry).

Back to the Galaxy. As it all rotates, it consists of billions upon billions upon billions of individual pieces. Stars, planets, gas clouds.....you name it. ALL of this has a gravitational attraction of some sort on the rest. It is all governed by the inverse/square law of gravitational attraction.

Finally....binary Star Systems. We don't know how they form....a chance encounter between two previously single stars???

In most modern models of star system formation, for a star to ignite it must be MASSIVE! This usually doesn't seem to leave much extra matter to form another star, in the vicinity.

BTW....let's be really clear about terminology.

We call our 'system' the "Solar" system, named after our home star, the 'Sun', or more correctly, "Sol"

IF there be a system of planets around another star, say one we named "Alpha"....then it would be called the 'Alphan System', or some such...

"Star System" is a generic term, just as "country" is generic.

OK...well, as to the possibility of some unseen, as yet, large body that is perturbing our Solar System??? Sorry, centuries of observations would seem to discount that notion.

Oh, I know...'scholarly research' showing the outer planets possibly moving outward at the astonishing rate of 10 meters every 100 years? Well, I'm not worried too much about it.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
You seem to know an awful lot about cellestial movements and astronomy. My question to you is... What exactly causes the Sun to bob up and down as it travels around the galaxy? I understand that the entire solar system follows suit as the Sun is our main governing body concerning motion, but what forces are at work making the system do that? If it's gravity, then why such a peculiar pattern? And finally, do all star systems move throughout the galaxy in such "bobbing fashion"; above then back down again? I'm really interested and would like to know. Thanx man

[edit on 14-6-2009 by spinalremain]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
BTW, you keep reciting this as if it was enough proof to dismiss theories and findings given by astronomers and other scientists. One thing you obviously don't understand is the fact that "we think" the Sun contains 98.99% of all matter, We do not know it for certain as we haven't been able to find every object which exists in our Solar System.

There have been scientists saying that there could very well be another object the size of Jupiter, or even bigger that we haven't been able to detect yet.

Our current understanding of our Solar System is not "obsolete and written in stone", if it was then there would have never been the need to downsize Pluto from being a planet to being a dwarf planet.


You keep switching back and forth to the same disproved theories. I disprove one, and then you go back to another.

I said before there could be "other" planets and such out there that we do not know about. However, once again it takes it right back to Keplers laws. If there is a planet "out there", then the speeds in which it moves would be really really slow. Which, if given the distances we are talking about wouldn't be coming close to us anytime soon.



It's really not that hard to understand.

Lets take a funnel, the center of the funnel will be the sun. Now, take a marble, and shoot it across the edge of the funnel.

If the speed of that marble is too great, then the marble will simple roll back out of the funnel and then head off somewhere. Thus, the speeds in which the marbles can roll is directly dependent on how close to the center of the funnel it is, and it's speeds.



Put the coin in at too fast of a speed, and it will simply roll out of the funnel, and thus not be in orbit of the sun.

You are completely ignoring basic physics. Again, I have to wonder exactly what kind of "research" you have put into this topic. Have you actually researched it, or have you just been listening to videos of peoples claims?

[edit on 14-6-2009 by badmedia]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by spinalremain
 


Well....as I've said, there is no clear-cut simple answer. There IS the influence of all the other masses....and, consider that it takes about 200~220 million years for our Solar System, at the distance we reside from the center (about 26,000 ~ 28,000 light years. The entire Galaxy is about 100,000 LY in diameter) to complete one 'orbit'.

NONE of this is fixed....well, to us it seems so, because of our short lifespans.

If you step back, and consider that there was a time when the Sun and the Solar System didn't yet exist. The Galaxy, as we see it today, may or may not have been there...may have been forming, coalescing....there is no distinct 'timetable'. It is all chaos.

I'd say, a great analogy is the ocean. A stop-motion picture of the ocean, and the currents and forces that are constantly at work....it is too much to grasp.

EDIT: badmedia, right above me, has good stuff!!!

EDIT part 2: However, the second vid....please remember that it is a representation of the "gravity well" produced by a larger body, that smaller bodies orbit about. (Actually, not to get too technical, EVERY body acts upon every OTHER body, in orbital mechanics. It's just, the BIGGER guy wins!!)

But, the vid of the ball into the vortex....what is not mentioned is the friction --- of the ball, as it rolls. Friction from the surface it is rolling on, and friction from the air is is travelling through. Result is similar to objects like the old USSR Space Station MIR, in LEO. Eventually, friction slowed its velocity, and its orbit began to decay. Or, the US Skylab. Same principle.

In order to remain in a stable orbit, the less friction, the better. Add friction, and the change in velocity, or "Delta V", will allow the object to spiral in closer. ADD velocity, and the orbiting object will spiral farther....

That is an overly simplistic description.

Here, if you have some time, explains it better:




(Give yourself about a half-hour to watch!!!)

Please Note: While this video describes artificial satellites in Earth orbit, it applies to ALL objects as they orbit something else. The principles remain the same!!!



[edit on 6/14/0909 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Here are the speeds of the planets.

Mercury 107132 mph
Venus 78364 mph
Earth 66641 mph
Mars 53980 mph
Jupiter 29216 mph
Saturn 21565 mph
Uranus 15234 mph
Neptune 12147 mph
Pluto 10604 mph

See the pattern? It's because of the above. If they were going faster than this, then they wouldn't maintain an orbit.

These are the average speeds of the planets. As they get closer to the sun in their elliptical orbits, they speed up. Further away and the slower they get.

Thus, if there is another planet out there, then it will be moving at a slow speed.

So, when you suggest that this other planet is in orbit of the sun, then it has to follow these laws and this pattern. At which point the object would have no chance of being in the inner solar system anytime in the near future. For example, if Jupiter were to suddenly head straight for the sun, it would still take it like 3+ years to reach the sun. Simply because of the huge distances we are talking about here.

You can't have it both ways. You can't have a "fast moving" planet like you showed in the OP, and then at the same time say it is in orbit around the sun. If there is another planet out there that orbits the sun, then it is not possible for it to move at those speeds.

So once again, if there is a nibiru out there, then it won't be here in 2012. The 2012 date isn't even a part of the nibiru stuff to begin with. 2012 comes from south america, nibiru comes from modern day Iraq. People have just been combining these things. Every single theory out there has been tied to 2012 etc. 2nd coming of christ, nibiru, and so on. They did the same thing in 2000 and other points in time. Heck, some places like "saint briggitta(sp?) combine all of them in their theories.

Just can't have it both ways. Can't have the object moving at those speeds, and then have it be part of the solar system. You can have more objects out there, but then in order for it to be in the solar system, it must have a much lower speed.

Thus, the theory as far as 2012 goes is bunk. Is it possible in 2150 or some other later date? I think so according to the math and such presented so far.

And btw, as for binary stars and planets you might find this interesting:

imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov...



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I think it would be gravity wells inside gravity wells. And as the gravity well of the smaller object will follow the contour of the gravity well of the bigger object, the gravity well from the smaller object ends up affecting the side of the bigger objects gravity well, expanding it a bit, thus causing the wobble.

Like take the coin video that simulates the gravity well. Now add a 2nd gravity well on the side of it, down towards the part that is at a somewhat steep angle. As you add that to the side, it ends up widening the bottom of the main gravity well at the position/direction of the smaller object, giving it a big of a pull from the smaller object.

I just completely imagined this and thought of it, no idea if it's correct so please correct me if I'm wrong. Or maybe seen it in a movie and can't remember the source. But it makes sense to me. Wish I could draw it.


[edit on 15-6-2009 by badmedia]



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
.................
OK...well, as to the possibility of some unseen, as yet, large body that is perturbing our Solar System??? Sorry, centuries of observations would seem to discount that notion.

Oh, I know...'scholarly research' showing the outer planets possibly moving outward at the astonishing rate of 10 meters every 100 years? Well, I'm not worried too much about it.


Oh boy, here we go.... I guess the "centuries of observations" in which scientists have found anomalies in the orbital motion of several planets, which astronomers, and other scientists have attributed to the possibility of a dwarf star in our Solar System is discounted by someone like you...

Sorry but your claims do not give any evidence against the discoveries made by scientists, and if they are calling this sudden increase in the distance between planets unexplained, they are not talking about the speed of the planets btw..., then it must be for a reason.

Would you like to tell us what is your expertise that you would discount so easily what "scientists" have to say, without giving any evidence to back your statements, except "CLAIMS"?...

One more thing, if something caused this sudden increase in distance between the planets, including Earth, and the Sun, and this just started happening recently, apparently since 2004, then reason would dictate it is very possible that this something is getting closer to the Solar system, which could very well continue to increase the distance between the planets and the Sun, and what would that mean?... Well life on planet Earth depends on the distance between Earth and the Sun, so if there is more of an increase between the distance of Earth and the Sun, and with the sudden slowdown of the Sun's activity we will find ourselves in a very cold planet... This discovery is very important, and it is more important to find out exactly what is causing this increase in the distance between the planets and the Sun.




[edit on 15-6-2009 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
BTW, I found some more information about this.


Secular increase of the astronomical unit and perihelion precessions as tests of the Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati multi-dimensional braneworld scenario
Lorenzo Iorio JCAP09(2005)006 doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2005/09/006


PDF (313 KB) | HTML | References | Articles citing this article



Lorenzo Iorio
Viale Unità di Italia 68, 70125, Bari, Italy
E-mail: lorenzo.iorio@libero.it
Abstract. An unexpected secular increase of the astronomical unit, the length scale of the Solar System, has recently been reported by three different research groups (Krasinsky and Brumberg, Pitjeva, Standish). The latest JPL measurements amount to 7 ± 2 m cy−1. At present, there are no explanations able to accommodate such an observed phenomenon, either in the realm of classical physics or in the usual four-dimensional framework of the Einsteinian general relativity. The Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati braneworld scenario, which is a multi-dimensional model of gravity aimed at providing an explanation of the observed cosmic acceleration without dark energy, predicts, among other things, a perihelion secular shift, due to Lue and Starkman, of 5 × 10−4 arcsec cy−1 for all the planets of the Solar System. It yields a variation of about 6 m cy−1 for the Earth–Sun distance which is compatible with the observed rate of change for the astronomical unit. The recently measured corrections to the secular motions of the perihelia of the inner planets of the Solar System are in agreement with the predicted value of the Lue–Starkman effect for Mercury, Mars and, at a slightly worse level, the Earth.

www.iop.org...


I will continue researching this, and will see what else I can dig up. Something is causing this increase in the Astronomical Units between the Sun, and the planets, which of course includes Earth.

[edit on 15-6-2009 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   
The more i search into this, the more questions that arise. These are not the only anomalies being reported.


6 The increase of the Astronomical Unit

6.1 The observation

From the analysis of radiometric measurements of distances between the Earth and the major planets including observations from Martian orbiters and landers from 1961 to 2003 a secular increase of the Astronomical Unit of approximately 10 m/cy has been reported (36) (see also the article (37) and the discussion therein).

6.2 Search for explanation

Time–dependent gravitational constant and velocity of light This increase cannot be explained by a time–dependent gravitational constant G because the ˙ G/G needed is larger than the restrictions obtained from LLR.

It has also been speculated that a time–dependent change in the velocity of light can be responsible for this effect. Indeed, if the speed of light becomes smaller, than ranging will simulate a drift of distances. However, a inspection of Kepler’s third law
T2 4π2
a3 = GM⊙

(17)
12

shows that, if one replaces the distance a by a ranging time a = ct, then effectively the quotient G/c3 appears. Only this combination of the gravitational constant and the speed of light governs the ratio between the orbit time, in our case the orbit time of the Earth. Consequently, a time–dependent speed of light is equivalent to a time–dependent gravitational constant. Since the latter has been ruled out to be possibly responsible for an increase of the Astronomical Unit, also a time–dependent speed of light has to be ruled out.

Cosmic expansion The influence of cosmic expansion by many orders of magnitude too small, see Sec.9.2. Neither the modification of the gravitational field of the Sun nor the drag of the planetary orbits due to the expansion is big enough to explain this drift.

Clock drift An increase of ranged distances might also be due to a drift of the time scale of the form t → t + αt2 for α > 0. This is of the same form as the time drift needed to account for the Pioneer anomaly. From Kepler’s third law one may ask which α is suitable in order to simulate the increase of the Astronomical Unit. One obtains α ≈ 3 · 10−20 s−1 what is astonishing close to the clock drift needed for a clock drift simulation of the pioneer anomaly, see Eq.(16) and below.
7 The quadrupole and octupule anomaly Recently an anomalous behavior of the low–l contributions to the cosmic microwave background has been reported. It has been shown that (i) there exists an alignment between the quadrupole and octupole with > 99.87% C.L. [38], and (ii) that the quadrupole and octupole are aligned to Solar system ecliptic to > 99% C.L. [39]. No correlation with the galactic plane has been found.

The reason for this is totally unclear. One may speculate that an unknown gravitational field within the Solar system slightly redirects the incoming cosmic microwave radiation (in the similar way as a motion with a certain velocity with respect to the rest frame of the cosmological background redirects the cosmic background radiation and leads to modifications of the dipole and quadrupole parts). Such a redirection should be more pronounced for low–l components of the radiation. It should be possible to calculate the gravitational field needed for such a redirection and then to compare that with the observational data of the Solar system and the other observed anomalies.

..........................
8.2 Other anomalies?
There is one further observation which status is rather unclear bit which perhaps may fit into the other observations. This is the observation of the return time of comets: Comets usually come back a few days before they are expected when applying ordinary equations of motion. The delay usually is assigned to the outgassing of these objects. In fact, the delay is used for an estimate of the strength of this outgassing. On the other hand, it has been calculated in (44) that the assumption that starting with 20 AU there is an additional acceleration of the order of the Pioneer anomaly also leads to the effect that comets come back a few days earlier. It is not clear whether this is a serious indications but a further study of the trajectories of comets certainly is worthwhile.

arxiv.org...

So, even comets are being affected by something which is accelerating them, which is "believed" to be at around 20 AU. This is not happening just to satellites, but it is the first time that i read it is also happening to comets, and now even the planets in the Solar system are being affected, and their distance between them and the Sun is increasing.

This is very interesting indeed.




[edit on 15-6-2009 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Been learning about everything you guys have been posting and I'm much clearer about a lot of things, but still; I'd like to know if all stars and star systems move throughout the galaxy in an oscillating "bobbing" motion? Are some stars and star systems soley above the galactic plane and vice versa below? Or do all systems cross from the top through to the bottom in the way that our solar system does? Throw away all the mathematics and theoretical gravity stuff for a moment. I merely want to know if all cellestial objects in our galaxy revolve around the galaxy in the same manner. The bobbing motion is what really confuses me and leads me to believe that there are forces at work which we do not understand.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by spinalremain
 



Some do, others don't. All galaxies, and Solar Systems are not being affected the same way as others, there is chaos within the order in the Universe. Galaxies can be above, below, or in the galactic plane. our Solar System is about 28,000 light-years from the Galactic center, and about 5 light years above it.

We have detected that beyond what we think is the limits of the Universe there are other forces working beyond what we call the known Universe. We don't know for certain what is beyond the Universe, but there is something there so it could keep expanding, or there could be multiple Universes.

Here is a good representation, and some of the galaxies, and some Solar Systems we have been able to detect in the known universe. You can also see some planets of those Solar Systems including ours.

planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov...

You might have to download a plugin but the link is safe, it is from NASA.

You can click and drag to turn around the Universe, or you can click on any star, or system to look at it.

Of course, there are a lot more stars, and galaxies than those you can see in that 3D view of the Universe, but those are the ones NASA put in the program.





[edit on 16-6-2009 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by spinalremain
Been learning about everything you guys have been posting and I'm much clearer about a lot of things, but still; I'd like to know if all stars and star systems move throughout the galaxy in an oscillating "bobbing" motion? Are some stars and star systems soley above the galactic plane and vice versa below? Or do all systems cross from the top through to the bottom in the way that our solar system does? Throw away all the mathematics and theoretical gravity stuff for a moment. I merely want to know if all cellestial objects in our galaxy revolve around the galaxy in the same manner. The bobbing motion is what really confuses me and leads me to believe that there are forces at work which we do not understand.


I'm not sure about all the stars, but the reason our sun goes above and below the galactic plane is due to the way we orbit around the black hole.

As I understand it, it spends part of it's orbit above the plane, and the other part below it. It takes our sun over 200 million years to complete a single orbit. Thus the sun crosses that galactic plane twice per orbit.

videos.howstuffworks.com...

See how pluto does in this orbit? It doesn't stay on the solar plane, it goes above and below the solar plane. That is what our star does around the black hole. Notice pluto crosses the plane twice per orbit.

So it's not that the sun bobbles up and down across the galactic plane, it's just the angle of the orbit.

I would imagine it would be a variety among the other stars out there, same as with our solar system.

Also, it's not a very steep orbit change like pluto has. It's relatively "flat" overall, but due to the long periods of time etc, we stay above and below it also for long periods of time.

Now, in 2012 we are NOT crossing the galactic plane. It is talking about an alignment, which is only based on the perspective from earth. The alignment is purely visual and based on perspective. From our perspective of the earth, you can draw a straight line from the earth, through the sun and hit galactic center. This actually happens all the time, but due to the way the earth wobbles on it's axis, it gets more and more close every 25000 years.



So the wobble in that video takes 25000 years about to do. And that is what is aligning and restarting in 2012. When it gets in that spot, it aligns with the center of the galaxy etc.

So when you hear of the "ages" and like we are currently in the age of Pisces etc, it's all based on this precession.

I know it's confusing, I started researching this stuff over a year ago. It seems the majority of videos making claims about 2012 haven't researched it. They think we are crossing the galactic plane and all sorts of things. But at the moment, we are actually in the part of the orbit where we are moving away from it. And it will probably be millions of years before we go across it again. It think it happens again in like 80 million years. So yeah, no time soon.


[edit on 16-6-2009 by badmedia]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


Oh OK. Thanks for clearing that up. Yeah that makes perfect sense to me. In essence its not bobbing at all. The orbit is merely offset from the plane, therefore crosses it twice. From what I had read previously, I had the understanding that our system kept crossing the plane every 26,000 years. Subsequently it crossed the plane many times throughout 1 full gallactic revolution. What you are saying makes more sense whether it's correct or not. My brain can't handle things too complicated so I'm inclined to stick with what you said. It's simple and makes sense. Thank you for clearing that up



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


yeah I totally understand the procession cycle of the axis and how it relates to where we visibly are in respect to the constellations. I kinda thought I had it all figured out until that scientist lady started confusing me with the bobbing explanation. I really didnt know what the hell that was all about. From the research I did, I discovered that we were exactly alligned with the gallactic plane in 1998 and have been since rising above the plane. If we arent going to be truly alligned with the gallactic plane in 2012 then why are ppl making such a fuss. Twice a year on each equinox we are alligned with the center and the sun from our perspective. Therefore 2012 will be the same allignment we have twice every year correct?

[edit on 16-6-2009 by spinalremain]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by spinalremain
 


All that stuff is based on the precession of the equinox. If people start throwing galactic plane and stuff into it, then you know they don't know what they are talking about.

It's basically a way of keeping time over long periods of time. As if you know the position of the stars and how these things work, you could tell where you were and what time it was etc. This is the "ages" and so forth. It's interesting topic in itself, especially if we take into account if "they" and powers that be actually use it for things etc. We see it with rituals and such all the time on certain dates etc. As well as how to know and measuring all that stuff is also a wonder in itself according to modern assumptions on the past.

The ancients did talk about a 2nd sun. But that 2nd sun is IMO the black hole, the black sun that all things in the galaxy revolve around. It's the visual alignment of the 2 etc.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by spinalremain
reply to post by badmedia
 


yeah I totally understand the procession cycle of the axis and how it relates to where we visibly are in respect to the constellations. I kinda thought I had it all figured out until that scientist lady started confusing me with the bobbing explanation. I really didnt know what the hell that was all about. From the research I did, I discovered that we were exactly alligned with the gallactic plane in 1998 and have been since rising above the plane. If we arent going to be truly alligned with the gallactic plane in 2012 then why are ppl making such a fuss. Twice a year on each equinox we are alligned with the center and the sun from our perspective. Therefore 2012 will be the same allignment we have twice every year correct?


We haven't crossed the physical galactic plane in quite awhile, the video you seen is a previous alignment.

Yes, the alignment happens over and over, there is other stuff about it like what day it happens on etc. It's mostly astrology in terms of ages, what "house" the sun is in and so forth.

I'm no expert on this stuff, I just seen a ton of videos and claims and decided to research it as best I could. I pretty much just quit worry about it altogether. I basically found that when you ask people and depend on people for such things, you will basically hear just about everything that is possible to hear. Add a thread about a topic that people have an opinion on, and you will likely see just about every position imaginable presented in 1 form or another. Which do you believe? I just go by my own understanding. I figure I'd get better odds a roulette table if I tried to pick among what other people say.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:07 PM
link   
It wasnt a video I watched. It was a scientific website that explained that the sun was exactly in the true center of the gallactic plane in the year 1998 and has been slowly moving above it. From what I can tell; there are 2 school's of thought on this. Some state that we are going to be alligned with the sun and the center in 2012 not only from our perspective but in reality on the same plane. And there are those that state we have already done so and that were currently above the plane. Rather still in the plane but slightly above center. I'm not scientist with diagnostic hardware to do the calculations so I'm basically confused. Im going to do some more reasearch and see if I can find some definitive answers. Have we crossed the gallactic plane yet? Shouldnt be so many conflicting theories on something that can be measured.





top topics
 
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join