i have hear that somewhere before.. but i am not sure where....

__________________

-work in progress--

but i would think that this is the post Cougar meant to quote:
as the other one was more of a question that was based on the oscillation of the solar system through the galactic plain.





but that is neither here nor there as i am assuming that the alignment that the OP was writhing about and questing is when the suns Ecliptic plane is aligned with the galaxy's ecliptic plain.

grant hutchison was the only one who tried to answer his question in a serious manner,
nobody asserted that there was a solar system oscillation where the ecliptic plain of the sun actually aligns with the ecliptic plain of the galaxy. i wonder why nobody brought up that piece of information.

when i was reading the thread i was confused because there were several people who were seemingly implying that any alignment with the galactic plain is hogwash. which is why i dug up the article about the solar system orbit around the galaxy and how we (the solar system) oscillates up and down through the galactic plain as it orbits.

if i were the original poster, i would have felt like i was being made fun of.
his question was a serious question and was never answered, he was just ridiculed, the second post was a long list of threads that already dealt with end of the world woo woo crap when he in his first post specificaly said that the post was not about the 2012 end of the world woo woo stuff.
i would assume that is the reason why he probably never came back to follow up.
i may be wrong as it is just an assumption.

but nonetheless, there seems to be a plethora of people only reading partial posts and coming to their own conclusions about what the OP knows or more specifically does not know then instantly jumping to conclusions and condemning the poster for not knowing while all the long the real question or proof of knowledge was in the original post.

i am completely guilty of the act i articulate, i just would like to see more people like me actually take time to read thoroughly and completely before condemning and posting information that is already there.

__________________

-work in progress--

I'll be needing some of that foil - I'm about to venture in.

Sabiang,
The article you posted said "The solar system Is currently close to and moving inward toward "perigalacticon," the point in the orbit closest to the galactic center."

This means, the elliptical orbit of the solar system as it takes that long journey around the disk has a perigalacticon which means at some we will reach our closest approach to the center before we whip around and out toward apigalacticon. Much like a comet which circles the sun but much less elliptical. It has nothing to do with crossing the galactic plane.

Read farther and you find: "The Sun and planets passed through the galactic plane about 2-3 million years ago, moving "northward."

In general we have a pretty good idea where we are and how we're moving relative to the galaxy and that's how we know the 2012 woo is - er - woo.

eta: Oh wait! - now I'm confused - I thought you were actually saying we are moving toward the galactic plane before I read your last post - if not, nevermind.

Maybe nobody brought it up because it might not actually happen, ever.

The ecliptic plane is nearly perpendicular to the galactic plane. Do we know of some really long term precession going on where the two planes become parallel?

As noted by Grant Hutchison at http://www.bautforum.com/questions-a...le-galaxy.html the angle is more like sixty degrees, not ninety. There seems to be no precessional force altering this angle at any discernible pace. So the ecliptic disc will keep the same angle relative to the universe as it orbits the galaxy every quarter of a billion years. I think this means that in ~120 million years we will again line up with the galactic plane, at the June solstice.

Not to sound pedantic or anything, but did you actually read what I wrote in post #8 about how they defined "Galactic Alignment"???

Let me repeat it here:

This means that at the winter equinox point the sun is projected on the center of the galaxy.

However, Jean Meeus, in Mathematical Astronomy Morsels (1997 see book review in Sky & Telescope, and see also here) showed that this has already occurred in 1998!!

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

Talking of different things... Post 33,and Quote. "The solar system Is currently close to and moving inward toward "perigalacticon," (what?) the point in the orbit closest to the galactic center." end quote. Has nothing to do with the movement up or down through the galactic plain.. This solar system is along with all the others rotating about the central mass of this galaxy. It bobbles up and down as it does so., and from what you have just told me, that orbital path may not be perfectly round. Some inward / outward movement is also noted. It takes about a quarter of a billion years to complete just one rotation of this galaxy. The gravity of the near to us mass has effected the orbital path. The galactic plain is not like the rings of Saturn. Movement up through it could be undetectable to us. Not for the avid astronomers ability to detect such events for us. Looking up is not enough. Did you notice that in 1998 this actually happened.

Because there is no such thing, as quite a few people have pointed out to you. There is no occasion on which the ecliptic plane aligns with the galactic plane.
There is an occasion on which the winter solstice position of the sun in the sky passes through the equator of the conventional galactic coordinate position: that happened ten years ago.
There is an occasion when the sun drops through the true central plane of the galactic disc: that happens in about thirty sixty million years time, but the ecliptic will not be aligned with the galactic disc or the galactic centre when it happens.

Grant Hutchison

"Are you talking to me?" (DeNiro lke demeanor).
I made post 33 and I know exactly what perigalacticon is, as I explained in my post. Are you saying something different than I? By the way, our orbit around the galaxy is not perfectly round - it is elliptical - but I thought I was explaining it to someone who didn't understand - hence the simpler choice of words.

"Are you talking to me?" (now shaving head).