|
That site you posted Suzy, take no notice of it. It's just another one of those "new age" sites purporting to know the answer to everything. There are so many reasons as to why we're not an ex-member of the Sagittarius Dwarf it's not funny, but the main reasons are the dynamics of our orbit about the galaxy and the physical composition of the Sun. For a start, the Sun doesn't have the same metallicity as any of the stars of the Sagittarius Dwarf. The stars in and from the dwarf have considerably less elements other than hydrogen and helium in their makeup as the Sun does. They couldn't have been born in the same cloud of dust and gas to begin with. Secondly the orbital dynamics are all wrong. This is something like the dwarf's second passage through the Galaxy. Even if we were detached from it in the first passage, our star would still have a very highly inclined and strongly elliptical orbit about the Galaxy's centre. Does it??....NO. The Sun orbits about the plane of the Galaxy in a moderately elliptical orbit which only varies above and below the plane of the Galaxy by about 30-50 parsecs. It's very much a member of the thin disk population of the Galaxy, not some interloper from outside. The reason for our orientation you see when compared to the Galaxy is that all the stars within the Galaxy, despite the fact they orbit it, have random orientation of their rotational axes i.e. their axes of rotation point in all directions. For instance, the star Vega. It's axis of rotation points directly at us, so you see it pole on. Some stars have the same orientation as we do, others don't. Our solar system just happens to be tilted at 55 degrees to the plane of the Galaxy. It was how it formed. Even the stars of the Sagittarius Dwarf have their own unique orientations, depending on how and where they formed in that galaxy.
These guys who come up with this nonsense don't understand even the basics of the science. The problem is, they read something about the subject they become interested in and then try to reconcile their own ideas with what they read. They take real science and twist it to suit their own agenda, which is usually to spread their particular ideas about how things are and what is going to happen. Just a quick and cursory look at their site will show you what they're on about and who they associate with. To say to take their site with a grain of salt would be adding insult to the grain of salt. Nothing of what they say has any basis in reality.
|