In spite of all the usual naysayers, Sirius and our solar system are
clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of
physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics.
In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their parrot media
has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the truly
substantial Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a
relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite
possibly contributed from our Milky Way encountering another galaxy),
and most likely especially terrestrial illuminating of the first
200~250 million years worth, and for all we know Sirius C may have
been the most massive and thus the first to burn itself out, or having
imploded itself into a spent star (possibly neutron or black hole
mass of .06 (1.19e29 kg).
First off, it’s not that Sirius is all that extra special, other than
having evolved so recently and nearby, whereas it took a cosmic
molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 1.25e5 solar masses in
order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99%
of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for
itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any
too far away. Others of sufficient cosmology expertise might go so
far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25e6,
while still others yet would prefer having a robust cloud worthy of
1.25e7 solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller
galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. In any case, that must have
been quite an impressive stellar birthing process, especially if the
remains of this terrific cloud having been originally near 100 ly
diameter that is suddenly nowhere to be found.
In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system
wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal
radius interrelated with such a nearby cosmic molecular mass of
1.25e61.25e7, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual
barycenter that's still primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar
system.
Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions
isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and
singular Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest.
Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone)
http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html
The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored)
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html
Local galactic motion simulation:
"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B.
Nordström et al.
http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en
According to several physics and astronomy kinds of peer reviewed and
science journal accepted observationology (deductive interpretation of
eye-candy plus other collaborative peer replicated research), our
Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the
same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely
Andromeda). Seems hardly fair considering that everything was
supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that
hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed
into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or
rebirth.
Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other
archives (including those of what our FAS has compiled) depicting
“colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced
and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital
observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble
plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further
document. It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours
and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown
via mergers.
Where's the all-knowing expertise from our FAS, telling us whatever
they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely, and where
exactly are those public funded supercomputer simulations. Surely
these brown-nosed clowns, faith-based bigots and closed mindsets of
our Usenet/newsgroup proprietors that are continually enforcing their
mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do
by trashing everyone in sight) are hopefully not speaking on behalf of
our FAS or any other professional group that attempting to
constructively contribute on behalf of the greater good.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”