Wrong galaxy, I am afraid!

Hi there all,

Firstly I want to clarify to all those with a panic head on, this has absolutely nothing to do with 2012 or any other numerology or religious / metaphysical related topics.

Nor I might add is this spectacle unusual as it it conforms to standard cosmological models.

I can assure you that this phenomena is squarely a physics issue and has no mystical properties other than perhaps the mystic of beauty.

In fact in about 4 billion years the milky way is very likely to completely merge with Andromeda (M31) Galaxy... a process that will take about 1 billion years to complete.

Due to the size of M31 it is very likely much of the milky way will be destroyed and re-made.

Not including dark matter calculations Andromeda mass may total around 350 billion Solar masses

Andromeda's core has a supermassive central black hole of around 30 million Solar-masses

The Milky Way’s super massive black hole has and estimated 4 million solar masses, much less than M31’s core.

The resulting gravitational waves that will occur when the two cores meet will be felt across the entire visible universe.

Here is a simulation of the likely merger... Note how violent the event is...


Any questions?

All the best,

NeoN HaZe

As it appears that the EDIT feature has been removed for some uknown reason I can't edit the above post.

I wanted to add this video profile of the Andromeda Galaxy.



Hope you enjoy.

All the best,

NeoN HaZe

Originally posted by zorgon
Here is a little bit from an older source about the position of our solar system and its movement.

I put together a page to answer the question "What is the Speed of Earth" for some students and this data naturally has to be a part of the calculations.

"What is the speed?"

I must ask: relative to what?

Let me pick something...aha..my favorite Great Attractor -Virgo Cluster: around 570 km/s towards the Great Attractor in the Virgo Cluste

....but what if - there is a fixed point in universe?...what if whole universe is rotating? ......

Hmmm . . . lets shoot the messenger on this new theory!

This issue needs to be vetted by the scientific professional community, before any of us amatuer scientist discount the report.

What the report does say is that the solar system is not moving in the same direction as the Milky Way!

IMHO this thing is not settled until proven by others, but it is extremely interesting and a bit un-nerving!

[edit on 6/17/07 by mel1962]

Wow, I'm too stupid to argue over such a big topic. I'm just going to wait until the discussion heats up so that I can get a more concrete answer from someone.

It's very interesting though. I've always wondered why we see Sagittarius A and the Milky Way sideways. If this is true, then I really have something to talk about.

Nice find!

Props to Neo Haze for the information and videos. Really cool!

[edit on 17-6-2007 by ZikhaN]

Theories, theories, theories.

Like the top of the blog says it's a theory. Given the time scale of these galactic collissions who can say that we've always been a part of the milky way? most of our knowledge about our position and our local galactic neighbourhood has come from the last few decades. This discovery regardless of the interpretation is another step, which raises more questions.

That being said, the interpretation is lacking evidence but that doesn't mean it's not so. I don't think there's enough evidence to say for sure one way or the other. Perhaps someone can prove it conclusively, please don't refer to computer models.

As for the mayans, someone mentioned there's no possible way they could have known this. Well that's assumming the mayans looked at the universe the same way many modern scientists perceive it, as a mechanical sterile thing. Which of course they did not. The wisdom of the shamans comes from internal knowledge. (entanglement with the universe?)

Can any scientist point to an example of mysticism in the universe? well yes actually. The free thinking ones who I admire. But most see mysticism as being something seperate from the mechanical physical world. Yet it could be said that mysticism is that which science hasn't discovered yet, it has laws and is the foundation on which the physical universe is built, so there is mysticism in everything. Science is catching up, this is the paradigm shift that is happening now.

Back to the topic - This article has a very plausible "theory" regarding the biodiversity cycle in connection with galactic cycles.

The rise and fall of species on Earth might be driven in part by the undulating motions of our solar system as it travels through the disk of the Milky Way, scientists say.

Full story here

Well, I believe it's relevent, are we due for another mass extinction? See, I don't hate science.

The data comes from the University of Virginia:

www.astro.virginia.edu...

and the interpretation comes from independant researcher Matthew Perkins Erwin.

I wasn't able to find much information in Google about Mr. Erwin.

I imagine that there are certain astronomical models that fairly accurately represent certain features of our motion relative to the center of the Milky Way. I don't know how Mr. Erwin's hypothesis compares mathematically with current astrophysical theory.

That being said, squiz makes a good observation, that, in terms of sheer volume, much of the data informing our current theories derives from a few decades of detailed observation.

An astrophysical observation that indicates our solar system is in the process of being passed from one galaxy to another would likely derive from some minute, observable, and consistent deviation of the data's interpretation from the predictions of accepted theory. For example, these slight variations are how we use the "wobbles" of distant stars to infer the presence of an extrasolar body.

As for how the Mayan calendar might connect with this, it is important to keep in mind that there is much about their civilization that we cannot know. This is pure hypothesis, but I imagine it to be probable that some social class existed which was dedicated to astronomical observation. Probably this class applied various methods of astronomical observation, just as we use optical telescopes and radio telescopes for different types of observations.

In a civilization without an "indexical" picture recording technology (in the way that photography is said to signify indexically), a great deal of observational data would need to be passed from person to person. Perhaps there were people who dedicated their lives to learning about different structures in the sky. Maybe they learned from elders how these patterns changed in time. Maybe these people had highly trained visual memories - not unlike Homeric bards - and could visualize the movements of the stars over centuries or millenia. Maybe some of them took mind-altering substances and made startling inferences.

When I was in the mountains, away from city light, I was not only amazed at how many stars I could see, but that I could actually see the sky turning.

The Mayan calendar was adopted by the Aztecs and the Toltecs. Maybe much of the Mayan astronomical knowledge derived from earlier peoples. According to Wikipedia, the Mayans used "a base 20 (vigesimal) and base 5 numbering system." Maybe their astronomers were more sensitive to different types of mathematical patterns in astronomical observations.

The University of Virginia website says most of the Sagittarius galaxy is obscured from our view by dust, but that if we could see in infrared, it would be a sweeping feature across our night sky. Perhaps the Mayans only needed a relatively few reliable "data points" to see that our planet's movement is more intricate than our current civilization believes it to be. Perhaps some relatively minor astronomical event on 2012 indicated for the Mayans some larger astrophysical event or process. A threshold, a "bifurcation," a tipping point of some sort...

I'm interested to hear more from Mr. Erwin.

Good find!

[edit on 18-6-2007 by America Jones]

So to clarify something here.

We are in an outer region of the milky way.
We are at 90 degrees to the plane of rotation of the milky way.
We are moving out of the plane of rotation at 7 km per second.
And we are moving in the opposite direction to the spin of the milky way?

Which one is not like the other?

How can anyone claim with 100% certainty that we originated in the milky way when we are going the wrong way, facing the wrong direction and traveling out of the plane of rotation?

Some thoughts on being part of the collision:
• Could this explain pole swaps? If the sun is forced to swap poles because we changed angles while spinning around an axis other than that of the spin of the milkway then surely the earth’s poles would swap too. If you consider that a spinning disk with a liquid magnet inside cannot physically do a 180 degree flip (due to the gyroscopic effect) when its poles are challenged by a larger magnet, the liquid core just does a 180 degree flip instead.
• Could our trip around and around have us brush with intelligent life every now and then? Does this explain the men in flying machines from the heavens in 6000 year old scriptures? And does this explain why they are no longer here?

Perhaps I am a little too ignorant on the subject of astronomy, although it does interest me. But it would seem there is quite a case for this ‘belonging to another galaxy’ theory.

After reading through (most of) this, I'm convinced that we are in fact still part of the Milky Way. We are simply moving through the area where a smaller galaxy is intersecting our orbit.

When the Milky Way does merge with Andromeda, that will be pretty amazing, but still there will likely be very few star collisions. Of course non of us will still be around to see it. In fact our sun will probably be dead or at least dying by that time.

you know, i realised something about myself between now and the time i made my last post in this thread:

i DESPERATELY want this to be true.

i have an intrinsic need to be able to explain the "why" of anything that i happen to come across in life.

this is a HUGE deal, if it is true, and i feel an enormous emotional pull toward believing it because it could be the "why" that i have been searching for.

thus far: i have been un-satisfied with the debunkers (including my own debunking mechanism). further, i think that rocksolidbrain's comment on page 2 is terribly insulting. why do you elevate your own ego by means of degrading other's sense of exploration?!

it really is a fascinating suggestion....there is a reason it is at the top spot of the forum!


dkp

Originally posted by tgidkp
you know, i realised something about myself between now and the time i made my last post in this thread:

i DESPERATELY want this to be true.

You know, I have to agree. I want this to be true as well.

Every now and then you come across what I call a ‘click theory.’ That is, a theory that clicks into place in your mind; merging seamlessly with loose ends from other previous understanding. Its like finally scratching that itch which has been bugging you for so long.

There is an intuitive realisation that very few other theories could correctly complete the puzzle so well, and the fact that this one does, and that it didn’t come out of thin air, is compelling evidence that it may be the truth.

Obviously this feeling of it ‘being right’ and the previous theory ‘being wrong’ will put subconscious bias on all of your arguments relating to it. It is our job to be consciously aware of this bias as to argue objectively.

Originally posted by ZikhaN

It's very interesting though. I've always wondered why we see Sagittarius A and the Milky Way sideways. If this is true, then I really have something to talk about.

Most people recognize the Milky Way as a band of light across the night sky, but what is that band of light - where does it come from?


Well it's a bit like looking at a gravel road. Close to you, you can see individual stones, while off in the distance the road merges into a uniform gray. When you look at the Milky Way you are looking at the disk of our galaxy from the inside - the nearby stars you can see individually (most are less than 1,000 light years away), the distant stars merge into a hazy glow. So when you see that band across the sky you are really looking way off into the distance, into the "billions and billions" of stars that make up the disk of our galaxy.

source


...everything you see..every star is Milky way...so, when you look at night sky - you see the center of the galaxy with densely packed stars, nebulae ( it is the thickest part of disc) , dust as a band of diffuse light across the sky.....“Most bright stars in our Milky Way Galaxy reside in a disk. Since our Sun also resides in this disk, these stars appear to us as a diffuse band that circles the sky“..

At night, from a dark location, part of the clear sky looks milky. This unusual swath of dim light is generally visible during any month and from any location. Until the invention of the telescope, nobody really knew what the "Milky Way" was. About 300 years ago telescopes caused a startling revelation: the Milky Way was made of stars. Only 70 years ago, more powerful telescopes brought the further revelation that the Milky Way is only one galaxy among many. Now telescopes in space allow yet deeper understanding. T The thin disk of our home spiral galaxy is clearly apparent, with stars appearing white and interstellar dust appearing red.

nasa

Originally posted by Neon Haze
Firstly I want to clarify to all those with a panic head on, this has absolutely nothing to do with 2012 or any other numerology or religious / metaphysical related topics.

And this is the case because?..

Originally posted by Neon Haze
Nor I might add is this spectacle unusual as it it conforms to standard cosmological models.

Standard cosmological models? Cmon.. half our model is blatently wrong for christ sake! Take the Sun for example. There is great evidence to suggest that it is not a giant nuclear reaction that will burn out eventually, but rather a free floating anode in space, sustaining some arc of potential between itself and the galaxy core, aswell as other galaxies and energy sources.

I am more inclined to believe the Universe is electric and a symphony of vibrational energy than Einsteins conformed view that gravity is the overall driving force of the Universe.

Don't forget that the "Big Bang" is not proven, and in no way explains WHY we are here. Science will not be able to reconcile that theory until it merges with spirituality, which can tell you how the Universe "began", and how it will "end".

Originally posted by Neon Haze
I can assure you that this phenomena is squarely a physics issue and has no mystical properties other than perhaps the mystic of beauty.

Again, your sure of this because?..

Originally posted by Neon Haze
Not including dark matter calculations Andromeda mass may total around 350 billion Solar masses

You so sure of what you stated, yet you believe in dark matter.. Dark matter is just the reconcilation of the errors in our cosmological models, due to the fact that it is STILL based around gravity being the main force of the Universe, when infact it is NOT.

For example, Blackholes have jets at their poles. They are also not destroying matter, but converting it. There is still a ball of mass there, it is not an invisible singularity like we have been led to believe. Its surface layer just behaves in an incredable way that we have yet to fully comprehend.

When it comes to the cosmos, i trust what the shamans and various cultures have forseen over some idiot moron working in a laboratory who knows nothing other than what his confined education has fostered upon him!

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
You so sure of what you stated, yet you believe in dark matter.. Dark matter is just the reconcilation of the errors in our cosmological models

I agree with that dark matter seems to be one of these filler theories that patch up the anomalous regions of an incomplete, incorrect or broken theory. Another being the missing link.

But you also state that you do not believe gravity is the main force which drives the universe. I am interested to hear what you do believe makes the universe tick, because there is a good deal of evidence to suggest that it is indeed gravity with a lesser influence by magnetism.

Is it not possible that gravity has attributes and properties which change not just with relation to mass but also with relation to other factors? Could this help explain why the calculations are off?

We do not understand any of the four fundamental forces, nor do we understand inertia. These are the things which make up and drive much of the reality in which we live, and yet very little attention seems to be given to them. Most would consider being able to predict them to be ‘good enough’ but I sincerely disagree.

I believe physicists need to backtrack and reread Einstein and Tesla’s work to try to understand where they were going with their respective unified theories.


[edit on 18-6-2007 by Yandros]

Originally posted by Yandros
Every now and then you come across what I call a ‘click theory.’ ...Its like finally scratching that itch

this is the first time in all of my lurking and posting on ATS, that i have actually been willing to say...."SCRATCH THE ITCH!"


dkp

Originally posted by rocksolidbrain
Sometimes I'm surprised with the amount of ignorance around here and uncritical acceptance of everything thats spouted on the internet.

Thats why we're discussing it, take a look around at other forums on this site to see examples. I'm not sure how long you've been visiting this site as you've only been a member since the end of April? Just because you don't agree with some thing doesn't mean it's ignorance, that in it self is ignorance in my opinion.

But back to the topic, I always wondered why we saw the Milky way at in odd angle in the sky, perhaps in the future when we have advanced spacecraft we'll be able to explore this in fuller detail. What I would like to see some time, would be a video recorder sitting still in space, not orbiting anything, looking at the stars. Have it record for about a thousand years, then watch it at hyper speed. You know those videos where it shows plants growing real fast? Yeah kinda like that, just to see where the stars move over a period of time. But I don't think I'll live that long to witness such a grand thing.

[edit on 18-6-2007 by Slash]

Originally posted by Yandros
But you also state that you do not believe gravity is the main force which drives the universe. I am interested to hear what you do believe makes the universe tick, because there is a good deal of evidence to suggest that it is indeed gravity with a lesser influence by magnetism.

I do not think one or the other "forces" are the driving force behind the whole universe. I think there is another unseen, yet to be (re)discovered field of energy, also known as the cosmic ether, which is far more important than physical forces. A field of energies that is both infinite in time and space, pervading all matter of our universe, and those maybe beyond our own. Nonlocal communication is real and proven, but mainstream science has yet to entertain the idea, let alone accept it, because in order for it to be accepted our entire paradigm needs to shift..

And for that to happen, science needs to detach itself from the corporate world, and get back to just being about helping humankind progress itself in harmony with nature. It needs more people like Nikola Tesla, dreamers who can guide humanity back to what it should be, and has been in the past.

As for gravity itself, i think it will be known soon that it is not all that different to magnetism itself, in a special way. I think the answer to the problem lies with blackholes, and how they attract matter, convert it into the ether if you like, then spit it back out at the poles of the blackhole as plasma.

Originally posted by Yandros
Is it not possible that gravity has attributes and properties which change not just with relation to mass but also with relation to other factors? Could this help explain why the calculations are off?

I would say yes. I just think that our models of how reality work have been conformed to this E=mc2 and Einsteins work, which i think he would personally be very ashamed of. I don't think he intended for his work to be used in such a way that it would force people to consider only what we see infront of us, and not whats on the inside.

I think the electric universe model explains things alot better than combining observation of the universe with einsteins work..

Also, when you consider what Tesla himself said, it should be apparent that Tesla obviously knew more about the cosmos, and indeed reality itself than Einstein did. Not because he was necessarily the smarter man, but because he understood the foundation of reality.... vibration/resonance.

"Throughout space there is energy.. It is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature." - Nikola Tesla

Originally posted by Yandros
We do not understand any of the four fundamental forces, nor do we understand inertia. These are the things which make up and drive much of the reality in which we live, and yet very little attention seems to be given to them. Most would consider being able to predict them to be ‘good enough’ but I sincerely disagree.

I agree totally. Prediction is not good enough. It does not explain why the objects choose to make the movements etc they did, what set the whole scene in motion so you could even make your predictions in the first place.

A simple way of putting it; We know the "hows" reasonably well, but the "whys"..thats a different story.

Originally posted by Yandros
I believe physicists need to backtrack and reread Einstein and Tesla’s work to try to understand where they were going with their respective unified theories.

Agreed. Nothing happens by coincidence, and Teslas work was buried and forgotten from our textbooks for a very good reason. I have every right to believe that he was on the verge of taking humanity back into the Golden age, but was shut down by the final stepping stone in humanities collective lesson... the hierarchy of power/money.

In My Humble Opinion:

PLEASE!, everyone, be consise with your explanations! dont distract the "want to believe-ers".

this topic ties together NIBURU, 2012, Global Warming...

...Global Cooling, end-times...

...UFOs from another galaxy...

...it ties together so many ideas that, I, personally, would like to hear the very highest authority on the topic...


can ANYONE point this discussion in a conclusive direction?!?! Please?!?!


dkp

Interesting you mention that tgidkp. I don't have an educated answer, but my suspicions are telling me that some thing is going to happen in 2012. Can't say for sure what, it could be as simple as stars lining up, or some thing that blows us out of the water like Planet X uncloaking it's self days before it kills us all.

My conclusion, which may change as this discussion continues, is that we'll just have to wait and see.

Originally posted by Donoso
Terence McKenna's mathematical novelty theory suggests a point of singularity in which a great number of things could happen, including "hyperspatial breakthrough", planetesimal impact, alien contact, historical metamorphosis, metamorphosis of natural law, solar explosion, quasar ignition at the galactic core, or nothing.

Wow!

McKenna's Timewave Zero theory has been 'off the ball' in the past decade. It is also important to note that McKenna aligned his 'Novelty Wave' with 2012, then justified other events in history (such as the resonance to the rise of the third reich and roman architecture). I just find it difficult to believe that I-Ching is the basis of these assumptions when in fact it seems to be just an ancient hexgramical system, only with MODERN interpretation does one create new vigor to this archaic theory.