rpi_logo
Lopsided Milky Way, hint Solar System not from Milky Way originally...
Lopsided Milky Way, hint Solar System not from Milky Way originally...
log in

Advanced search

Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Lopsided Milky Way, hint Solar System not from Milky Way originally...

Author Message
HireMe.geek.nz
Send message
Joined: 12 Jun 09
Posts: 12
Credit: 307,568
RAC: 177

Message 43603 - Posted: 9 Nov 2010, 1:47:34 UTC

The lopsided Milky Way with respect to the Solar System:

From what I understand it is a hint that the Solar System not from Milky Way originally ... possibly the entire system originated in the calmer Sagittarius Galaxy.

Solar systems originating in the Milky Way, if celestial mechanics mean anything should not be lopsided at all.

Where exactly can one get ahold of research relating to this?

Matthew
Volunteer moderator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 6 May 09
Posts: 217
Credit: 6,856,375
RAC: 0

Message 43634 - Posted: 9 Nov 2010, 18:05:05 UTC - in response to Message 43603.

This is a common internet misunderstanding (possibly a hoax?) that was started by some particularly bad journalism.

To see the retort of Dr. Steve Majewsky, the astronomer who's work was distorted to create this idea:

http://www.astro.virginia.edu/~srm4n/

Also, the Bad Astronomy Blog does a good debunking:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/06/27/is-the-sun-from-another-galaxy/

I'm not sure what you mean by 'lopsided'. Our solar system is nice and symmetric, from physical mechanics point-of-view, with all but the most minor of bodies sitting in nice orbital resonances. The Milky Way is little more chaotic, but so are all of the other galaxies out there that are absorbing other galaxies (tends to stir them up a bit).

HireMe.geek.nz
Send message
Joined: 12 Jun 09
Posts: 12
Credit: 307,568
RAC: 177

Message 43720 - Posted: 11 Nov 2010, 3:01:41 UTC - in response to Message 43634.
Last modified: 11 Nov 2010, 3:39:27 UTC

It is my understanding from Classical Mechanics and Relativistic Mechanics that gravity wells or centres (like those created by the galactic core) create a very precisely aligned sheet of stars and solar systems that orbit in sync with the galactic plane.

Yes, the Earth has a 23 degree tilt and that has to be filtered out with respect to all observations (where galactic plane alignment is critical). Yes, orbital resonances with the solar system are an important part of all research into solar system origins. Yes, you need double precision maths to analyse all of this.

Yet, most astronomy (visible or radio) is in the Southern Hemisphere. This placement effect is the sticky point that must be explained somehow with some certainty.

However, proof of the solar system osselating up and down the galactic plane is not easy to obtain due to the very long timeframes involved -- even if statistical mechanics can show the ossalatory effect with great certainty.

One galaxy cannibalising another galaxy is a systemic process that is measured in Gegayears -- and the mechanics of such are still very new to scientific research. The cannibalization of the Solar System could have taken place as far back as 65 millions to 80 millions of years ago -- long enough to have substantial quenching of redshift and other orbital data. The Milky Way has a more powerful gravity centre, so it can quench better than dwarf galaxies.

The stellar "metals" composition argument that is to distinguish star populations from each other (as a way to prove or disprove external origins) is interesting but can't be totally conclusive. The metals composition argument is subject to bell curve star formation probability problems.

I would like to see a secondary or tertiary arguments using other physics to show more conclusively that the Sagittarius Solar System origin is bunk. If this origin idea can be disproven by 3 separate and different scientific methods that would be optimal.

My view is that a second argument might be found in the stability or instability of the Oort Cloud.

-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud

Tertiary arguments are welcome...

Matt Giwer
Send message
Joined: 15 Sep 10
Posts: 22
Credit: 249,595
RAC: 0

Message 43878 - Posted: 16 Nov 2010, 12:43:24 UTC - in response to Message 43720.

It is my understanding from Classical Mechanics and Relativistic Mechanics that gravity wells or centres (like those created by the galactic core) create a very precisely aligned sheet of stars and solar systems that orbit in sync with the galactic plane.

Yes, the Earth has a 23 degree tilt and that has to be filtered out with respect to all observations (where galactic plane alignment is critical). Yes, orbital resonances with the solar system are an important part of all research into solar system origins. Yes, you need double precision maths to analyse all of this.

Yet, most astronomy (visible or radio) is in the Southern Hemisphere. This placement effect is the sticky point that must be explained somehow with some certainty.

However, proof of the solar system osselating up and down the galactic plane is not easy to obtain due to the very long timeframes involved -- even if statistical mechanics can show the ossalatory effect with great certainty.

One galaxy cannibalising another galaxy is a systemic process that is measured in Gegayears -- and the mechanics of such are still very new to scientific research. The cannibalization of the Solar System could have taken place as far back as 65 millions to 80 millions of years ago -- long enough to have substantial quenching of redshift and other orbital data. The Milky Way has a more powerful gravity centre, so it can quench better than dwarf galaxies.

The stellar "metals" composition argument that is to distinguish star populations from each other (as a way to prove or disprove external origins) is interesting but can't be totally conclusive. The metals composition argument is subject to bell curve star formation probability problems.

I would like to see a secondary or tertiary arguments using other physics to show more conclusively that the Sagittarius Solar System origin is bunk. If this origin idea can be disproven by 3 separate and different scientific methods that would be optimal.

My view is that a second argument might be found in the stability or instability of the Oort Cloud.

-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud

Tertiary arguments are welcome...


There is a website something like badastronomy.com that went into the origin of this unsupportable story. Unsupportable in this case means nonsense.

But if classical mechanics did predict what you suggest (I have no idea how relativistic mechanics fits into this) then all galaxies would be like that and they are not. When we look at galaxies like ours we see they have a thickness. Thickness means stars are above and below that rigid center disk you imply should exist. Whatever is above or below moves from above to below that disk as it rotates around the center.

One does not have to invoke anything but observation to see there is nothing unusual about the path of our solar system.

Matthew
Volunteer moderator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 6 May 09
Posts: 217
Credit: 6,856,375
RAC: 0

Message 44428 - Posted: 29 Nov 2010, 23:00:20 UTC - in response to Message 43720.
Last modified: 29 Nov 2010, 23:01:42 UTC

HireMe.geek.nz:

Our solar system is more consistent (in every way) with being native to our galaxy than a merging or merged dwarf galaxy.

The over-abundance of metals in our solar system is only explainable through a VERY metal-rich birth cloud - something that cannot occur in dwarf galaxies because they do not contain enough mass to support multiple generations of many metal-producing stars.

All solar systems in our galaxy are formed with a random orientation of their orbital axis - the axis orientation depends on the dynamics of the collapsing birth cloud, not on the galaxy as a whole. Look into the Kepler Mission and other extrasolar planet-finding missions, if you require experimental evidence of this.

Stars in our galaxy orbit in three dimensions - rotation around the center in the disk and up-and-down oscillations within the disk. This can be shown be shown through 1st year college physics (approximate the vertical disk density using the actual stellar distribution, and run the numbers) or by observing the kinematics of nearby stars.

Collisions between galaxies are well understood - in reality, stars in colliding galaxies tend to act like point particles, which is an easy thing to model. It's the gas and dust that we don't understand completely, but that's not important for figuring out 'where a star came from' during the merger.

Yet, most astronomy (visible or radio) is in the Southern Hemisphere. This placement effect is the sticky point that must be explained somehow with some certainty.


I am not aware of this, and I don't think that it's true. I would need to see some sort of source for this. It is true that many of the newer telescopes are being built in the southern hemisphere, (to avoid man-made lights) but there are still a large number of telescopes in the north and in orbit around the Earth.

You are asking me to disprove your argument, but that is not how science works - if you want to claim something new, then you have the responsibility to provide evidence in favor of the claim.

Since there is little to no evidence for our solar system having originated in the Sagittarius Dwarf, and all data can be explained with a Milky Way galaxy origin, we must conclude that the 'extra-galactic solar system origin' theory contains no substance, and is bunk.

Larry
Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 11
Posts: 5
Credit: 300,312
RAC: 0

Message 47948 - Posted: 17 Apr 2011, 3:07:19 UTC - in response to Message 44428.

The milkyway galaxy is in the process of gobbling up two smaller galaxys at this time the large and small magellic clouds are where they are in the sky. The star streams have many names that escape me now. If you look at the N body plot thread and watch the motion of our galaxy and its intense distribution of scattered stars in steams. We are in the galactic plane so we are not a part of the stars streams that are slowly asorbed or throw out of the galaxys inflence.


Post to thread

Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Lopsided Milky Way, hint Solar System not from Milky Way originally...


Main page · Your account · Message boards


Copyright © 2019 AstroInformatics Group