Is it just me, or is it not fricken’ obvious that any set of bodies in space (within a certain distance) will begin to move towards each other and, because of their other velocity vectors, will ‘miss colliding’ and begin to orbit, maybe eventually collide? Bueller?
No, I think most galaxies are nailed to the sky. It’s just the little ones that are free to revolve.
That’s not what the article is questioning. Maybe read it first.
Fractal universe electrons orbit nucleus; moons orbit planets; Klingons orbit Uranus; planets orbit stars; stars orbit galactic centers; little galaxies orbit big galaxies; galaxies orbit each other;
This is what I thought too, before reading the article. After reading the article, I realized I have NO FUCKING IDEA what they are talking about. But that’s ok.
Help me out here.
This may indicate that planes of co-rotating satellites, similar to those seen around the Andromeda galaxy, are ubiquitous, and their coherent motion suggests that they represent a substantial repository of angular momentum on scales of about 100 kiloparsecs.
The satellite galaxies which orbit their parent galaxy (is ‘orbit’ incorrect?) are rotating around a plane, the orientation of which is matched by other satellite galaxies distributed in the near universe where the orbital plane of the galaxies themselves are not necessarily so co-oriented?
Does this mean that actual galaxies that are entrained and/or falling into one another would exhibit co-rotational behaviour, oriented along the same plane?
If so I may need to sit down for a while. I mean. That can’t be it. Surely. Wow.
Rules of the Universe:
- Be attractive
- Don’t be unattractive.
So, if I understood the article correctly, if one of a pair of these dwarf galaxies ever escapes the larger systems, you might get to say that there was dwarf tossing?
That’s pretty much it in a nutsack.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.