From: Sam Wormley on

Familiar comets may have distant roots
More than 90 percent of objects found in the vast outer�solar system
reservoir may have been born around other stars, new computer
simulations suggest.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/60148/title/Familiar_comets_may_have_distant_roots

From: Brad Guth on
On Jun 11, 7:06 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Familiar comets may have distant roots
> More than 90 percent of objects found in the vast outer solar system
> reservoir may have been born around other stars, new computer
> simulations suggest.http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/60148/title/Familiar_comet...

Such as from nearby Sirius.

~ BG
From: palsing on
On Jun 11, 9:04 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 11, 7:06 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Familiar comets may have distant roots
> > More than 90 percent of objects found in the vast outer solar system
> > reservoir may have been born around other stars, new computer
> > simulations suggest.http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/60148/title/Familiar_comet...
>
> Such as from nearby Sirius.
>
>  ~ BG

There are at least 8 stars closer to us than Sirius right now. Why
this unusual obsession with Sirius? After all, it is only temporarily
close to the sun, for most of its existence it has been far, far away,
and is only just now passing through our neighborhood.

Sirius is a complete non-factor in our solar system's history, and in
all probability has nothing to do with any comets currently in the
Oort Cloud. The simulations on the page that Sam refers to show what
might have happened within the cluster in which the Sun was born, and
Sirius was definitely NOT part of that cluster.

You need to get over this thing you have about Sirius, it has nothing
to do with anything local.

\Paul A
From: Brad Guth on
On Jun 11, 9:20 am, palsing <pnals...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 11, 9:04 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 11, 7:06 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Familiar comets may have distant roots
> > > More than 90 percent of objects found in the vast outer solar system
> > > reservoir may have been born around other stars, new computer
> > > simulations suggest.http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/60148/title/Familiar_comet...
>
> > Such as from nearby Sirius.
>
> >  ~ BG
>
> There are at least 8 stars closer to us than Sirius right now. Why
> this unusual obsession with Sirius? After all, it is only temporarily
> close to the sun, for most of its existence it has been far, far away,
> and is only just now passing through our neighborhood.
>
> Sirius is a complete non-factor in our solar system's history, and in
> all probability has nothing to do with any comets currently in the
> Oort Cloud. The simulations on the page that Sam refers to show what
> might have happened within the cluster in which the Sun was born, and
> Sirius was definitely NOT part of that cluster.
>
> You need to get over this thing you have about Sirius, it has nothing
> to do with anything local.
>
> \Paul A

Sirius(B) is the only seriously big one of up to 9 solar mass that
went nova(helium flashover), as well as having lost its tidal radii
grip on its planets and their moons upon collapsing from its red
supergiant phase as of a little more than 65 million years BP.

The original Sirius star/solar system was extremely nearby and likely
worth <12.5 Ms, and once again we're closing back in on the remainders
that includes its complex Oort cloud.

~ BG

From: Yousuf Khan on
On 6/11/2010 10:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> On Jun 11, 7:06 am, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Familiar comets may have distant roots
>> More than 90 percent of objects found in the vast outer solar system
>> reservoir may have been born around other stars, new computer
>> simulations suggest.http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/60148/title/Familiar_comet...
>
> Such as from nearby Sirius.
>
> ~ BG

Considerably older than that. Try something that's 4.6 billion years
old, rather than something that's only 250 million years old.

Yousuf Khan