So what's the deal with the "Galactic Alignment"?

[garbonzo607]

I’ve always believed the Galactic Alignment was fact, but it seems there is conflicting views on the matter on the internet.

This site deems it as fact:

It is important to define what the Galactic Alignment is in precise astronomical terms. (See the Glossary below for terms.)

The Galactic Alignment is the alignment of the December solstice sun with the Galactic equator. This alignment occurs as a result of the precession of the equinoxes.

Precession is caused by the earth wobbling very slowly on its axis and shifts the position of the equinoxes and solstices one degree every 71.5 years. Because the sun is one-half of a degree wide, it will take the December solstice sun 36 years to precess through the Galactic equator (see diagram below).

The precise alignment of the solstice point (the precise center-point of the body of the sun as viewed from earth) with the Galactic equator was calculated to occur in 1998 (Jean Meeus, Mathematical Astronomy Morsels, 1997).

Thus, the Galactic Alignment “zone” is 1998 +/- 18 years = 1980 - 2016. This is “era-2012.”

This Galactic Alignment occurs only once every 26,000 years…

While a 2009 NASA webpage says it is junk: http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012-guest.html

In fact, astronomy cannot pinpoint such a “galactic alignment” to within a year, much less a day. The alignment depends on the rather arbitrary modern definition of the galactic equator, and/or the visual appearance of the Milky Way. There is no precise definition of the Milky Way’s edges – they are very vague and depend on the clarity of your view.

Real astronomy does not support any match between the Baktun-13 end date and a galactic alignment.

So which is it? Can Cecil clarify this matter once and for all?

[Duckster]

@garbonzo607

So which is it?

Galactic Alignment?
[ul]
[li]Short answer - Astrological bullshit.[/li][li]Long answer - The NASA link you cited.[/li][/ul]

[garbonzo607]

@Duckster

Galactic Alignment?
[ul]
[li]Short answer - Astrological bullshit.[/li][li]Long answer - The NASA link you cited.[/li][/ul]

How do you know? Are you an astronomer? We are always appealing to authority or reading things other people say. I want the source. This is why I hope Cecil will really look into this matter. It seems to me that NASA doesn’t even know, as they profess themselves.

[Andy_L]

@garbonzo607

How do you know? Are you an astronomer? We are always appealing to authority or reading things other people say. I want the source. This is why I hope Cecil will really look into this matter. It seems to me that NASA doesn’t even know, as they profess themselves.

NASA doesn’t say that NASA doesn’t know. NASA says that no one knows, because the concept isn’t well defined.

[garbonzo607]

@Andy_L

NASA doesn’t say that NASA doesn’t know. NASA says that no one knows, because the concept isn’t well defined.

Exactly. But the Mayans may have known. =)

[Andy_L]

@garbonzo607

Exactly. But the Mayans may have known. =)

Known something that’s not well-defined?

[garbonzo607]

@Andy_L

Known something that’s not well-defined?

Yes. They may have defined it.

[Andy_L]

@garbonzo607

Yes. They may have defined it.

“Not well-defined” in this context means that any one of a variety of definitions would be equally valid, and thus meaningless.

[Patty_O_Furniture]

@garbonzo607

Yes. They may have defined it.

So I can know something simply by defining it?

[GIGObuster]

The reality is that the source of the ideas that 2012 and the Galactic Alignment are big deals came from book authors that at best are philosophers with no experience in astronomy.

2012: The End of the World? — Information is Beautiful

The most trusted sources on the right side of the graphic tell you how inadequate the theories from those philosophers are.

[GIGObuster]

More detailed explanations on why this “Galactic Alignment” is just woo woo can be found in this Google Doc from the makers of that graph:

2012

[PacifistPorcupine]

Thus, the Galactic Alignment “zone” is 1998 +/- 18 years = 1980 - 2016. This is “era-2012.”

Just what exactly do they mean by “era-2012?” 2012 is just one of 37 years in that interval, why is it more meaningful than 1984 or 1998? Because somebody is trying to fit a “meaningful” date to another “meaningful” date?

[Exapno_Mapcase]

Just so everybody knows, the nutcase being quoted by the OP is John Major Jenkins, whose Alignment2012 site is a focal point for those spouting gibberish about this non-event.

I doubt that the OP has “always believed” in the Galactic Alignment, because Jenkins just invented it a few years ago.

[Alan_Smithee]

@Patty O'Furniture

So I can know something simply by defining it?

Well, you can if you define that as knowing.

[BigT]

The problem with the logic here is that not being well-defined doesn’t mean there’s not a definition that is true. Having multiple definitions does not preclude one from aligning with reality.

The real problem is trying to assert that any of this can have any effect on Earth itself. The question is not whether there is Galactic Alignment, but whether the concept in that definition is useful. As far as we can tell, even that is when there is perfect alignment, there would be no effect.

[garbonzo607]

@BigT

The problem with the logic here is that not being well-defined doesn’t mean there’s not a definition that is true. Having multiple definitions does not preclude one from aligning with reality.

The real problem is trying to assert that any of this can have any effect on Earth itself. The question is not whether there is Galactic Alignment, but whether the concept in that definition is useful. As far as we can tell, even that is when there is perfect alignment, there would be no effect.

Maybe their “Gods” need a Galactic Alignment to reach Earth with the space-travel technology they currently have?

[panache45]

@garbonzo607

I’ve always believed the Galactic Alignment was fact . . .

@garbonzo607

We are always appealing to authority or reading things other people say.

Sounds like your problem is more epistemological than astronomical.

At some point you have to look at the evidence with your own eyes, even the evidence of authorities, and take responsibility for your own rational judgment.

[Absolute]

@garbonzo607

Maybe their “Gods” need a Galactic Alignment to reach Earth with the space-travel technology they currently have?

There is no conceivable means of space travel in which this could matter. The earth is just a spinning rock in space. The exact direction in which the earth is currently spinning has fuck-all to do with anything reaching earth.

I’m not sure what kind of cite you want, if you won’t accept a NASA website written by an actual astronomer. Cecil is not an astronomer, he’s just going to call NASA himself and report what they say.

[Rhythmdvl]

Shouldn’t this be in Cafe Society?

[gunnergoz]

Seems to me that astronomers have yet to define the boundaries and content of our galaxy in complete, verifiable detail, let alone such refinements as an actual “galactic equator.” Perhaps we never will, given the scale and distances involved. So we can never be completely sure of what or where we are “in alignment” with or to. We can approximate all sorts of things, but is that sufficient data to determine something as definite as “the end” that some claim to be able to predict? I don’t think so. I think they are blowing galactic smoke out their equatorial @ss.