Shiva and Shakti': The ancient star streams that helped weave the Milky Way

So, do we know whether or not these Shakti and Shiva stars have planets orbiting them?

if they really formed when there was not much but hydrogen available in the universe, then they should be expected to not have any planets. But, are any close enough to Earth for us to verify that?
From the CNN article Shiva and Shakti lies in the 1/3 Milky Way disk slice surrounding Sun, the stars that Gaia can observe best. There is no reason why we shouldn't see a hand full of similar streams when we get observatories that can do similar studies for all Milky Way stars.

Most interesting and both comments ask good questions. One would think they should be naked. And I'm sure the map of these objects will continue. And might eventually provide a different pattern.....and motion.

I find it interesting that a ball of pure H can fuse so long and remain clean. Isn't that against fusion theory? And that stars here in our MW between 11 and 12 billion years old. There's another kink. But many are steadfast and all these recent measurements.......are truly not kinks. The BB lives. And the associated theories.

Can they really plot those orbits? I bet they can not. Can they plot those velocities or any velocities of stars? I bet not. They proclaim they can with shift. But are they using the right proportions of that shift? I bet they are not. IF we could watch and plot a 1000 year orbit of a center located you think we could determine it's velocity? Do you believe that observed and measured circumference is true? Do you believe that 1000 year observation and measurement gave you the true displacement of that star? We measure X and Y displacement. What about Z displacement? What if we did have a way to accurately measure the Z displacement.......then could we measure V displacement.

No.....we could not. Because we would give that Z displacement a linear fudge factor or proportion. But that Z motion is just the same as the X and Y motions.......angular......not linear.

And this doesn't even consider our velocity, which includes relative speed and relative angle.....of measurement.

A lot of that shift we instrument shift and distortion.......due to inertia reacting to fast rates. Not to mention the present narratives of light and the assumptions with it. We've never measured light velocity. Light is a flux, the measurement will always be an average. Only with one emitter can c be measured. And then.......only one photon at a time. Or a numbered sequential stream of them.

Latest posts