Solar System 'traverses all of the spiral arms of the Milky Way during 225my orbit ?!

So...still no real proper scientific "evidence" to "support" the 'claim' :
paddoboy said:
That orbital period is about 225 million years.
During that orbital period, our solar system traverses all of the spiral arms, and also has an osscillation above and below the equatorial plain of the Milky Way.
Click to expand...

...alas...
 
origin said:
Unfortunately he won't move on for he is dumbest man on earth.
Click to expand...

To bad he doesn't get moved along. All this is 'IS' an incessant whine. Wine and stalk. Still can't figure out the difference between an abstract and the abstracts pdf.. Probably a 'big whine coming on'.

wine = whine. LOL. and vice versa. Had to read Russ's post to realize I got 1 right. 1 out of 3. To bad this isn't hitting a baseball where no one is standing.
 
Sorry...but as of yet no actual real true scientific evidence has been presented, in any of the previous 127 Posts in this thread, that supports the 'claim' our Solar System "traverses all of the spiral arms... of the Milky Way" in either "225 Million Years", or "during" one single "orbital period".

If any Member thinks that it has - please be so kind as to "quote" where "it's accepted by mainstream as evidenced".

That should be easy to do.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" can be preached by quite a few Members - but some Members seem to prefer to "Waffle" extensively when asked to "practice" what they continuously "preach".

"Ad Hominem" attacks are not a substitute for proper supporting evidence to back up the 'claim' :
paddoboy said:
That orbital period is about 225 million years.
During that orbital period, our solar system traverses all of the spiral arms, and also has an osscillation above and below the equatorial plain of the Milky Way.
Click to expand...

To "quote" the "words" of a couple of the Members that have Posted in this Thread :

"Live with it."
 
dumbest man on earth said:
Sorry...but as of yet no actual real true scientific evidence has been presented, in any of the previous 127 Posts in this thread, that supports the 'claim' our Solar System "traverses all of the spiral arms... of the Milky Way" in either "225 Million Years", or "during" one single "orbital period".
Click to expand...



Sure it has old fella....It just doesn't fit with your usual contorted creationists views.
And as I have repeatedly said...Live with it. [and me :)]
 
Sorry...but as of yet no actual real true scientific evidence has been presented
Click to expand...

BS. You are resorting to childish tactics and tantrums to make a point that actually really truly isn't that relevant to a practical discussion.
 
Dr_Toad said:
BS. You are resorting to childish tactics and tantrums to make a point that actually really truly isn't that relevant to a practical discussion.
Click to expand...

:)
It's called a grudge. :) He's had a couple of threads closed in the past that I have participated in, and pointed out his contorted errors, and one banished to cesspool after similar contorted errors, pedantic red herrings, and the same old tantrums.

It matters not to me... :shrug: And certainly does nothing to support the erronious claim of his in post 1

dumbest man on earth said:
I was taught and learned that our Solar System resides in one of the lesser arms of the Milky Way, commonly referred to as "Orion's Arm" or "Orion's Spur".
From what I understand, our Solar System maintains its position in that lesser arm during it's 'orbit' of the Milky Way Galaxy.
Click to expand...

Density wave theory and the following premise that our solar system moves through all arms in its revolution about the galaxy is supported by more then a dozen papers in this thread, and it is the incumbent model, and which my friend dmoe has never as yet been able to invalidate and show to be in error.

In fact the similarity and style by dmoe and our other lets say eccentric? poster chinglu is extraordinary!
 
Dr_Toad said:
BS. You are resorting to childish tactics and tantrums to make a point that actually really truly isn't that relevant to a practical discussion.
Click to expand...

Congratulations, DR_Toad, you have been a Member of SciForums for one whole month now.

If the 'BS' means what it usually means, then that is tantamount to calling me a liar...is it not?

Can you back that up?

Can you "quote" any of the previous 130 Posts in this Thread that clearly provides supporting evidence of the 'claim' :
paddoboy said:
That orbital period is about 225 million years.
During that orbital period, our solar system traverses all of the spiral arms, and also has an osscillation above and below the equatorial plain of the Milky Way.
Click to expand...

Dr_Toad, can you, and will you "back up" anything that you stated in your Post #130?
 
@paddoboy:

That name rings a distant bell. Hmm.

Maybe you should let him rant the last word? Start another topic if needed? Crazies need some strokes, you know.

No implicit accusations there, just saying..

@DMOE: No. I won't.
 
Dr_Toad said:
@paddoboy:

That name rings a distant bell. Hmm.

Maybe you should let him rant the last word? Start another topic if needed? Crazies need some strokes, you know.

No implicit accusations there, just saying..

@DMOE: No. I won't.
Click to expand...

:)

The question I raised earlier in the thread, has not as yet been answered.
With the Sun's passage through the galactic arms, and the oscillations above and below the galactic equatorial plane, and the large number of extra-solar Hot Jupiters that have been found, I wonder if the gravitational Interactions and perturbations are responsible for planetary migration?
 
Well, seriously, nice.

I wonder if there are datasets we could get at to try to analyze the question?

I'm stupid at this hour, so please link me to some of the current understanding of why planets migrate in their orbits?
 
Last edited:
Dr_Toad said:
Well, seriously, nice.

I wonder if there are datasets we could get at to try to analyze the question?

I'm stupid at this hour, so please link me to some of the current understanding of why planets migrate in their orbits?
Click to expand...

While we are able to explain the planetary orbital distances with physics logic within our own solar system, some explanation is necessary for the extra-solar "hot Jupiters" discovered at close quarters to their respective stars...some with orbital periods of 3 or 4 days.

Just my own thoughts, but I thought maybe it could be explained by the traversing of any stellar system around the MW and through spiral arms....
Gravity, as usual, weaving its magic so to speak.
I'll see what I can find though Dr Toad.
 
OK, I have a bit to digest here.......
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.eos.ubc.ca/~mjelline/453...ewfer010/chambers_planetarymigration_AR09.pdf

Abstract:
Gravitational interactions between a planet and its protoplanetary disk
change the planet’s orbit, causing the planet to migrate toward or away
from its star. Migration rates are poorly constrained for low-mass bodies
but reasonably well understood for giant planets. . In both cases, significant
migration will affect the details and efficiency of planet formation. If the disk
is turbulent, density fluctuations will excite orbital eccentricities and cause
orbits to undergo a random walk. Both processes are probably detrimental
to planet formation. Planets that form early in the lifetime of a disk are likely
to be lost, whereas late-forming planets will survive and may undergo little
migration. Migration can explain the observed orbits and masses of extra-solar planets, if giants form at different times, and over a range of distances.
Migration can also explain the existence of planets orbiting close to their star
and of resonant pairs of planets.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 
Yeah! That's the ticket! Here's the plan, see: In and out, nobody gets hurt..

Thank you. I'll read when I'm more competent. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top