Talk:Andromeda-Milky Way collision

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 12/2/2007. The result of the discussion was keep.
WikiProject Astronomy This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to astronomy.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale.

This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents

[edit] Comment on deletion proposal

Where is the information on this speculative theory going to be put? On the Andromeda galaxy page? In general I don't like information to be lost unless it's provably fringe science, but if this theory is moved to the Andromeda Galaxy, and maybe shortened, then everything will be fine with me. Rursus declamavi; 22:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

This sort of thing would fit into a discussion of the dynamics of the Local Group, though Local Group has nothing mentioning dynamics in it presently. Sagittarius_Dwarf_Elliptical_Galaxy necessarily talks about galactic collisions involving the Milky Way, and there is some mention of the process in galaxy formation. My preference would be to have this get included in an article about dynamics of the Local Group; it's probably too large to fit within the Local Group article itself. BSVulturis 16:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. The article was to be kept anyway, which is a good thing. Otherwise, where would the information have been put? In Andromeda (too big already), in Milky Way (too big already), in Local Group maybe. But now it gets an article for future improvements. I'll take a look for missing (?) links from the mentioned places, to assure the article gets its readers. Rursus declamavi; 18:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] some notes

The opening sentence attributes this theory to the toronto and harvard astronomers, however I have not seen anywhere where they claim that they originated the theory. The work takes it for granted that a collision will occur and then they simulate the outcome. The earliest reference to the radial velocity dates to Slipher in 1912 [1] and I suspect that other astronomers have proposed this theory before.

This article seems to imply that the work of Dubinski is a definite prediction of what will happen, however he clearly states that it is speculation.

"The Milky Way and the Andromeda galaxy will likely fall together and merge within a few billion years. In this speculative simulation, the two galaxies..." and "I have set up a model system of colliding galaxies that reflects the current state of our the Milky Way and Andromeda system. There are still some uncertainties about the exact trajectories and masses of the two galaxies but I have set up a plausible case where they fall together and collide..." [2]

--mikeu 15:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Are there any peer reviewed references to this subject?

I am a scientist that would like to learn more about this proposed theory. Does anyone know if there any peer-reviewed references to this topic? Lunokhod 00:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I have been looking, and have not been able to find one.--mikeu 02:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Here's a just-published paper that covers the topic to a nice level of detail: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.1170v1.pdf (T.J. Cox & Abraham Loeb, The Collision Between The Milky Way And Andromeda, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics) — RJH (talk) 16:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Future event?

While it's pretty sure that the collision, if it occurs, will occur in the future, 3 billion years is a long time. The depth of our knowledge concerning the Andromeda-Milky Way collision is not likely to increase very much within the lifetime of the human race, let alone Wikipedia. Therefore, I removed the template saying it was a future event. If I erred, please tell me. DrExtreme 20:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

The event may not happen at all. Hornberry 15:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
It is kinda funny to have a future tag, though, so I'd put it back just for whimsy... Wl219 06:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, I think it would be amusing to label it a future event, too. It's not technically incorrect, either, as even DrExtreme admitted. -Mysterius 22:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I thought we still weren't sure whether it was going to happen? Something about not having an accurate enough measure of Andromeda's lateral velocity? That at least is something our knowledge about may increase. (Also, what exactly is your projected lifespan for the human race? What limits it?) --DocumentN 04:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Viewing

I think the sentence "If the theory is correct, the stars and gas contained in Andromeda will be visible to a naked-eye viewer (if one exists on Earth at the time) in approximately three billion years." is kind of funny, considering that Earth will by that time will have long been incincerated by our dying sun. Just thought I'd point that out, Masterof148

  • It'll actually be about 5 billion years before the sun leaves the main sequence. See sun for more information. WilyD 23:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the image caption "as it might be seen from Earth" subtracts credibility from the article. 86.92.226.147 (talk) 23:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citation not needed for math

I deleted the {fact} tag on this sentence:

... the nearest star to the Sun is in fact almost thirty million solar diameters away from the Earth

This is a simple calculation based on pulling the relevant numbers from those two articles. —johndburger 13:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with Milkomeda

There is no need for a separate article to discuss the proposed name for the new galaxy—Wikipedia is not a dictionary. —johndburger 23:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't even bother with the merge. It was a joke, not an unofficial nickname. Loeb jokingly calls this future galaxy "Milkomeda," but others have also referred to it as "Milkymeda" or the "Andromeda Way." [3] --mikeu (talk) 00:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, at best you could include an offhand comment that he called it as such here. WilyD 13:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Agree with the above comments - at most the name deserves a brief mention in this article. Milkomeda should be redirected here in case someone does look it up. Cosmo0 (talk) 12:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Yah, that's about all I was thinking was merge-worthy—I did the deed, including the redirect, and cleaning up the only link to the other article. —johndburger 01:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] LOL

So, Wikipedia has an article about a certain but future event. The likelyhood of Wikipedia's existence at that time, or at a relevant time, is subjective, but still...

Just think about let's say about The Library from Alexandria... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.137.70.184 (talk) 20:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)