posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:43 PM
Yes I went to a few physics forums to explore that. I can't remember all the details now, but it was not supported except for one who made some
interesting points. I have never researched those points yet. The main conjecture was that we are iron enriched, as is the milky way. So, if we
were a part of the galaxy being cannabalized, then we would be an anomaly as that system is not iron based. However the points I remember being
brought up that interested me, but no one commented on the implications, was that they used to believe there was one large supernova of an iron based
star that had played a role in forming this solar system. The poster said that it was discovered due to layers in the crust that there was a previous
explosion prior that actually formed it, and that was a non iron based star. Then the second explosion, obviously from the milky way, enriched our
solar system. (I didn't research any of this. It could easily be contested. I may look into it a little later).
The other point was on the front line, where this is happening actively is relatively close to our solar system. A nearby star is Bernard's star, on
our side of the front line in the battle. Apparently it is an anomaly, at least due to its age compared to comparative stars, perhaps composition.
Like I said, I have no idea if what this guy said was true. If there were two supernovas, not just one, that formed our solar system and I don't
know too much about Bernard's star. If those things were misinformation, then its highly unlikely we are a part of the second galaxy. If they're
true, it does create some questions concerning which galaxy we belong to. I've been curious ever since I read that other forum debate.
[edit on 31-10-2008 by mystiq]
Edit to add: I'm just doing a quick search to see if the Bernard's star is in fact older than the others and can't find anything on it.
[edit on 31-10-2008 by mystiq]