G2 Cloud Predicted to Approach Twice as Close to GC

Update to the Story on the G2 Cloud’s
Approach to the Galactic Core

Paul LaViolette

Recent observations of the G2 cloud made in the near infrared at the Keck Observatory indicate that the G2 cloud will reach its closest approach to the Galactic center around mid March of 2014 instead of June of this year.  In their paper preprint, astronomers Phifer, et al. place the date of the G2 cloud’s closest encounter with the Galactic core at somewhere between the end of January 2014 and the beginning of May 2014 with a median date of mid March.  Moreover they estimate that G2’s orbit will take the cloud twice as close to the GC than previously thought.  The distance of closest approach is now predicted to be 130 astronomical units (AU) rather than 266 AU, as previously thought. See Astrobites Synopsis

The revised trajectory for the G2 cloud dramatically increases the chances that a star hidden within the cloud might have companion stars or planets ripped from it by tidal forces and ultimately consumed by the core.  Since tidal force varies as the inverse cube of distance from a massive celestial body, this means that the G2 cloud will be subjected to tidal forces 8.5 times greater than previously estimated.  Also since the radiation flux from the Galactic core varies as the inverse square of radial distance, the G2 cloud and its hidden star will be subject to a cosmic ray energy flux and galactic wind energy flux 4 times greater than previously supposed.  Another factor disrupting an embedded star or planet is the celestial body’s internal genic energy flux which depends on the value of the ambient gravity potential.  If the G2 cloud is to approach twice as close to our Galaxy’s supermassive core as had been previously thought, this will cause the genic energy output of embedded planets or stars at pericenter to be twice as large as had previously been estimated.   (More will be said about these mechanisms below.)

In a Starburst Foundation forum posting made last October, I had presented the possibility that the G2 cloud may harbor a jovian planet or brown dwarf, an idea that had also been suggested by Murray-Clay and Loeb.  They proposed that the G2 cloud may contain  an unseen low-mass star that is surrounded by a dust and debris accretion disc and that the material in this accretion disc has been evaporated to produce the enveloping G2 cloud as a result of exposure to ionizing radiation or because the accretion disc had been tidally disrupted by previous orbital encounters with the Galactic core.  The idea I proposed agrees with their idea of a low mass star or brown dwarf being present.  But I believe that the G2 cloud was generated because the contained star or planet has been expelling its atmosphere due to an enormous amount of internal heating it is currently undergoing.  Although some of the generated G2 nebula could have come from evaporation of a disc of material orbiting the star, I believe that the main contributor is the atmosphere of the embedded star or planet.

Currently, the idea that the G2 cloud may have an embedded mass has gained more widespread acceptance following the discovery that the cloud is very compact, only about 100 AU in length.  In fact this past March, astronomers Scoville and Burkert posted a paper in which they suggest that the G2 cloud may contain a 2 solar mass T Tauri star that is undergoing rapid mass loss, thereby generating the surrounding cloud.  T Tauri stars have inflated photospheres typically 2 to 4 times the size of our sun and can be up to an order of magnitude overly luminous.  Standard astronomical theory considers a T Tauri star to be an early type star that is accreting gas from its immediate environment to become a main sequence star.  But, it is generally recognized that the region within a few light years of the Galactic core is too disruptive to allow star formation and growth through gas accretion.  Scoville and Burkert do not address this problem.  They do not explain how in such a turbulent environment  a star could be surrounded by an accretion disc for long enough to allow it to develop into a T Tauri star.  In my opinion, their suggestion is correct that the embedded star could resemble a T Tauri star whose photosphere is very expanded, overly luminous and in the process of discharging a large quantity of gas.  However their suggestion that this process is fueled by matter accretion from a protoplanetary accretion disc, I believe, is off the mark.  The real cause of the generation of the G2 cloud is the star’s entry into the unique Galactic core environment and the consequent stellar heating that occurs there.  It has nothing to do with the star accreting a disc of debris that it may have transported with it on its inward journey.

The T Tauri star idea that these astronomers have proposed in many respects resembles what I had suggested in my forum posting last October.  I had proposed that the G2 cloud may contain a brown dwarf having a mass of 50 Jupiter masses which has inflated to as much as 3 times the diameter of the Sun and is undergoing a high rate of mass loss as a result of the internal heating.  As I explained in my earlier posting, a star approaching the Galactic core would behave as a T Tauri star (would be radially expanded, overluminous, and outgassing its atmosphere to generate the surrounding G2 cloud) because of the enormous amount of genic energy it would be producing internally and because of the large cosmic ray flux it would be intercepting from the GC.  In fact, in my opinion, any star approaching close to the GC would be expected to outgas and generate a compact ionized gas cloud similar to the G2 cloud.  Of course, the genic energy concept is not widely known in mainstream science in spite of its predictive success.  But, knowledge of this mechanism makes all the difference in being able to understand what is currently transpiring within the G2 cloud, and what will continue to transpire as the G2 cloud approaches pericenter in March 2014.

Scoville and Burkert also suggest that the ion wind that is continuously emitted from the Galactic core impacts the G2 cloud and compresses it inward on this upwind side to form a bow shock around the star, the front of this shock reaching inward to as close as 13 AU from the embedded stellar mass.  They estimate the entire G2 cloud to have a length of 100 AU and to reside mostly on the downwind side of the star.  It should look similar to the cloud shown in this video below.


Animation showing a star with accretion disc embedded inside a knot of dust.

(courtesy of NASA and the James Webb Space Telescope)


Now, with the recent prediction that the G2 cloud should actually approach to within 130 AU of the core, we see that the cloud’s diameter is about as large as its closest distance of approach to the core.  In the model of Scoville and Burkert, there is a 100% certainty that the cloud will become accreted onto the Galactic core.  They find that all gas in the G2 cloud that is lies more than 1 to 3 AU from the star will be tidally stripped away, resulting in an accretion of up to 0.1 earth masses onto the Galactic core.

I predict that the energy output and mass loss rate of the embedded star will rise substantially in the next 10 months as the G2 cloud approaches its orbital pericenter and will result in far greater accretion onto the core than predicted by Skoville and Burkert.  The total gas accretion onto the core may perhaps be as great as half an earth mass.  However, this alone would produce at most a 50% average rise in the energy output from the core (Sgr A*) over perhaps several months time.  As mentioned in my earlier posting, in 2001 the core was observed to produce a much larger magnitude increase in energy flux of about 3 fold over a period of one hour without any serious consequence to the Earth. 
[April 16, 2014 update: No rise in X-ray emission from the core has been detected as of now.  This implies that the cosmic ray and gas wind from the core is so intense that it prevents any of gas stripped away from the G2 cloud from falling into the core.]

The real danger is if the G2 cloud contains not one star, but two.  That is, there is the possibility that the cloud may harbor a close binary star system consisting of a primary star orbited by a lesser massive companion star or of a star orbitted by one or more jovian planets.  Current observations cannot exclude this possibility since dust obscuration prevents us from peering very deep into the G2 cloud.  This binary star/planetary system scenario would look something like that seen in the video below.  The dust and gas being dispersed to form the G2 cloud would be coming not only from a possible planetary disc around the star, but also from the central star itself and from any planets that may be orbiting it since planets would be actively expelling their atmospheres as well.


Animation showing a photo-evaporating debris-laden planetary disc that surrounds a star and generates its circumstellar nebula.  (courtesy of ESA and M. Kornmesser)


It is known that a very high percentage of stars in our Galaxy are either binary star systems or are single stars orbited by jovian planets.  Hence there is a high probability that the G2 cloud may harbor such a multi-body system.  If this is the case, there is the danger that the Galactic core may tidally strip away and consume the system’s lower-mass companion star or one or more of the star’s planets at the time of pericenter passage of the core.  For example, a one solar mass star similar to the Sun would have a tidal radius of 0.5  to 1 AU at its orbital pericenter which means that any stellar companions, planets, or debris orbiting at radii greater than this could be tidally stripped away from their orbit about the primary star and ultimately be pulled into the galactic core.

In the case where an entire 100 jupiter mass brown dwarf were to plunge into the Galactic core in one discrete event, the energy release would be equivalent to that released in a hypernova, the most powerful of known supernova exposions (~1053 ergs).  This could be enough to jump-start the Galactic core into a Seyfert state and generate a potentially lethal superwave.  If this amount of energy were delivered within the space of one day, this would release energy at the rate of 1048 erg per second, giving a luminosity one hundred thousand times greater than the cosmic ray luminosity estimated to currently be coming from Sgr A* (based on my estimate of 1043 ergs/s — see Subquantum Kinetics), and equivalent to the luminosity radiated by the active core in a Seyfert galaxy.

We will know if such a scenario is going to occur by closely monitoring the G2 cloud.  As the cloud nears pericenter, if we see it appear to divide and spawn off a subcloud that begins rapidly accelerating directly toward the Galactic core, we will know this worst case scenario is about to occur.  This subcloud will contain within it the binary companion star or jovian planet that has been tidally stripped off from the parent star.  At this point  we will have about four to five months two months before its possible impact on the core, at which point an exceedingly bright gamma ray burst and cosmic ray spike will be detected on Earth, far greater than any we have seen until now.   The superwave will have arrived at our doorstep, possibly heralded by earthquakes occurring a few days before.
[April 16, 2014 update: The estimate previously given here of there being a two month delay from the date of cloud splitting until possible core impact was in error.  The best current estimate without doing actual simulations is 4.5 months.]


Stellar Heating Effects in the Vicinity of the Galactic Core

A one solar mass star that approaches to within 130 AU of the Milky Way’s supermassive galactic core will be subject to a gravity potential field that is 1485 times the surface gravity potential that such a star would generate due to its own mass,  and about 186 times the average value of the gravity potential in its interior.  In a one solar mass star that is distant from the Galactic center, I have estimated that about 12% of its total energy output is in the form of genic energy, the remaining 88% arising from nuclear fusion.  When that same star is brought to within 130 AU of the Galactic core, its genic energy output will rise 186 fold causing it to exceed its former luminosity by 23 fold!   Due to this rise in luminosity, the star’s diameter would expand until it reached perhaps 4 times its former size.

Figure 1 shows how the luminosity of a one solar mass star embedded within the G2 cloud would increase as it progressively approached its orbital pericenter.  The red curve is the star’s excess luminosity due to its increase in genic energy output and the blue curve is the star’s total excess luminosity where we add in also energy the star receives due to heating of its interior by incident Galactic core cosmic rays.


 If the embedded star were a 100 Jupiter mass red dwarf, its luminosity which normally would be about 0.09% of the sun’s luminosity would soar 2,500 times to 2.3 solar luminosities.  So in this close vicinity to the Galactic core, stars would be rapidly losing their atmospheres, even if they were below their Eddington Limit.  In a forum posting made last October, I had warned of this stellar mass loss effect which could generate  large quantities of gas which could ultimately fall into the Galactic core.  The new orbital trajectory for the G2 cloud substantially enhances this danger.

63 Responses to G2 Cloud Predicted to Approach Twice as Close to GC

  1. jerry johnson says:

    I’m a science fiction writer and am very interested in this type of cosmic explosion, and am very interested in the connection to Revelations.

  2. Gary Raymer says:

    Hello Paul.

    My question is in regards to our own local star, the Sun.

    Is it feasible that a Superwave could trigger a chain reaction within our star resulting in an unstable Nova?

    I ask this with reference to your own work and the observation made some time ago of a blue star type object spotted in the vicinity of another Star just prior to it going into the Nova stage!

    Shortly after this event, which recently took place in own galaxy I believe the blue object had totally disappeared from view!

    As it has been noted that the appearance of the Superwave as it speeds towards us would indeed look like a blue star, could the probable cause of this event be one of the same object?

    Many thanks in advance for your response and keep up the good work!

    • Paul LaViolette says:

      I think it highly unlikely that our Sun would go nova by a passing superwave. I don’t know of any evidence that it has done so in the past 10 billion plus years of its existence during which it has encountered many superwaves. It certainly has produced super solar proton events and coronal mass ejections which have had a major impact on the Earth in the past. But these were likely due to increased solar activity aggravated by the incursion of cosmic dust, not by the instantaneous passage of a superwave. The example you bring up of a star going nova doesn’t provide any convincing evidence of an associated superwave. Star’s can become unusually hot and hence blue in color prior to going nova. So this may explain it.

      • Michelle says:

        Thanks so much for all your information. Do you have a update on G2?
        Do we have any eyes on the interior? Has it crossed the event horizon?

        If there are updates that I have missed, I apologize and please direct me to that location. But, if not….I’m on pins and needles…

        Thank you so very much.

  3. simon macdonald says:

    what would be the first planet in our system to feel the first effect of this wave. but my real question I am concerned on what it would to do Jupiter as Jupiter could igite and produce a second sun scenario? am I wrong or right on this?
    all the best sir

    • Paul LaViolette says:

      No, definitely not. Jupiter would not “ignite” into a Sun. It requires another several billion years or so of growth in size until it reaches near the critical mass (0.45 solar masses) for fusion ignition. Even then I doubt if a superwave would be the determining factor.

      • irene vollenhoven says:

        hypergiant star HR 5171, just saw a video


        is this related tp your G2 cloud?

        thank you for all the info you give..
        irene from amsterdam

        • Paul LaViolette says:

          No this is a contact binary which is very rare to see. I doubt that the G2 cloud has a contact binary within it. If it did, the companion would be difficult to separate from its parent star. It would be too closely bound by the parent’s gravity pull.

  4. I now cannot decide if this is coming or not, i know it is coming soon. Is this it or is it something to advise the scientists to be prepared for when it comes a few years from now, thank you Paul I do appreciate your work. Thank you.

  5. Larry G says:

    Dr. LaViolette, how does the galactic core incursion, and superwave production scenario, and probability, stand currently? 02/23/14. Thanks!

    • Paul LaViolette says:

      You can check this recent posting of the Swift telescope data, and previous news postings on the G2 cloud. In an earlier posting I give a 3 to 7 percent chance of a superwave creation in this coming encounter. But this is a very rough estimate.

  6. Chris Sherman says:

    Thank you for watching and alerting us

  7. cristian says:

    On the date January 21st, a bright supernova was seen in the vicinity of M2. I wonder if this is related to their predictions. ………….

    el dia 21 de Enero la zona m82 se produjo una brillante supernova, quisiera saber si este esta relacionado con sus predicciones

  8. David says:

    Thank you for your answer Dr. LaViiloette, I was wondering what had occured in the last couple of hundred years, and could only think of the Krakatoa eruption, and that perhaps some gravity wave had accompanied the Luminosity spike.

    However, if their information could be as old as 1265 AD, I give up.

    You think a flaring of the magnitude reported by Clavel et al.
    should have produced an Ionized Neon bubble and the event would have had a Carrington effect here on Earth?

    • Paul LaViolette says:

      I don’t know if their more recent event could have produced a neon bubble. They should undertake a renewed search for GC neon bubbles to see if one can be found that is only a few hundred years old.

  9. David says:

    Dear Dr. LaViolette,

    I was reading this article:

    and came across a paper by:
    Maïca Clavel (1 and 2), R. Terrier (1), A. Goldwurm (1 and 2), M. R. Morris (3), G. Ponti (4), S. Soldi (1), G. Trap (1 and 2) ((1) APC – Paris, (2) CEA – Saclay, (3) UCLA, (4) MPE – Garching)
    (Submitted on 15 Jul 2013)

    whom apparently investigated several years of Chandra Observatory to examine the region around Sagittarius A* for subtle X-ray flickers. If the black hole flared up in the distant past, the radiation from that blast would move out through space like a ripple on a pond. As the radiation ripple hit nearby clouds of gas and dust it would illuminate them, creating a “light echo” of the original flare. Those echoes could in turn be visible from Earth today, long after the instigating event took place.

    Apparently they found 2 events in the last few hundred years that they believe increased the Luminosity of Sagittarius A by up to at least 10^39 erg/s.

    Can these events be timed anymore closely and what would be the significance of a 10^39 erg/s increase?

    Link to their paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.3954.

    Thank you for attention, and your work.

  10. ale says:

    Dear Dr LaViolette, are you aware of Northwestern University’s Farhad Zadeh works? I found this: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-01/nu-ddc010713.php

    Any idea if he has reached confirmation of a star embedded?

    Thank you

  11. This is extremely valuable information.

    Am I permitted to share this information?

    Thank you for your response in advance.

    Rose Van Guilder

    • Paul LaViolette says:

      Please don’t circulate the original inferences about a grid black out. My most recent informed conclusion, now posted, is that this is just a procedural test that will not have any physical effect on the power grid.

  12. Pingback: Forbidden News » COBRA Update: Good News

  13. Pingback: NUEVAS VENTANAS DE OPORTUNIDAD | Curación del Alma- Emisaria del Amor y la Paz.

  14. Pingback: COBRA UPDATE : New Windows of Opportunity | Mission Galactic Freedom

  15. Bob says:

    Dear Dr LaViolette,
    In a paper submitted on June 6, 2013, the authors concluded:

    The constant luminosity and the increasingly stretched appearance of the head of G2 in the position-velocity plane, without a central peak, is not consistent with several proposed models with continuous gas release from an initially bound zone around a faint star on the same orbit as G2.

    Does this mean the G2 cloud may be just gas, with no embedded solar object? So, therefore would it be unlikely the G2 cloud will generate a super wave, or is it still to early to tell?

    • admin-plv says:

      I am aware of this recent paper. It shows that there are differences of opinion as to whether a star is embedded in the G2 cloud. Some believe that the evidence indicates there is and others think not. I think it is difficult to make any predictions of the probability of a superwave occurrence. The best thing is to watch what unfolds with this encounter in the next year.

      • Louis says:

        In reference to the posting at: http://starburstfound.org/superwaveblog/?p=311

        Tonight, I saw for the first time the Farsight Institute remote viewings, specifically the files meteor2, 5, 6, 8, and 11 (Figures 2, 5, 6, 8, and 1?) drawn by remote viewer Dick in May 2008. Let it be said that I have very strong para-normal abilities as well as a complete understanding of Dr. LaViolette’s books, having read these books, as well as every book in the public libraries on cosmology and sub-atomic physics, and having studied differential equations in college, and having independently taken on such tasks as using differential equations to solve Einstein’s relativity theory on my own. Having had successes in remote viewing myself in the past, I have studied the drawings meteor2, 5, 6 8, and 11 for any indication of the “date” of the event which is nearly impossible to ascertain during remote viewing but would be known at a “sub-conscious” level in the remote viewer’s mind and sub-consciously annotated on his drawings. I saw several instances of “14” in the drawings. This remote viewing coincides with the March 2014 super-wave. I am sure of it. There are no “13s” in the drawings, nor are there “12s” or “11s” or “10s.” The super-wave from a red dwarf being sucked into hte galactic core will hit the earth in March, 2014, starting with earthquakes from the gravity pulse. They will be magnitude 10, 11 and will decimate Russia as well as the rest of the earth. The events seen by Dick in May 2008 were on June, 1, 2014, two to three months later.

  16. Jim says:

    Hi Dr LaViolette
    I was looking at this G2 article and wondering if there would be any effect regarding a superwave creation.

    “After noting its projected path, the researchers at Columbia have found that it will likely pass through a region of space that is thought to harbor as many as 20,000 small black holes (a single massive black hole is believed to exist at the center of our galaxy.) They suggest that researchers here on Earth might be able to actually see the interaction between the gas cloud and any black holes that are encountered. As the gas cloud comes near a black hole, they believe some of the gas will begin to spiral as it’s pulled in by its gravity. That, they say, should cause a lot of heat to be expelled and x-ray light to be emitted—enough to be observable using x-ray telescopes. They go so far as to estimate that researchers might be able to see evidence of as many as 16 interactions.”


    • admin-plv says:

      As you may know, I don’t believe in the existence of black holes (e.g., see http://etheric.com/the-nonexistence-of-black-holes/). What contemporary astronomy commonly refers to as a “black hole” or “supermassive black hole”, I term a “stellar core”, a “supermassive galactic core”, or a “mother star”. Any such compact core should be emitting energy and hence should be visible in the X-ray or gamma ray part of the spectrum, similar to the magnetar that was recently discovered near the Galactic core. So if there were 20,000 stellar cores or mother stars orbiting our supermassive galactic core, we would see them. They would not be currently invisible to us as the Columbia researchers naively suggest. The region wthat the G2 cloud currently is traveling through appears to be devoid of any stellar objects. One must go almost a light year away from the core before one encounters a ring of high mass stars orbiting the GC. So if there are any X-ray outbursts from the G2 cloud, they most certainly will not be due to its collision with hypothetical black holes. If the G2 cloud contains an embedded stellar object, there is a possibility that this object could produce X-ray flares if it becomes sufficiently energized during its journey toward perigee. Otherwise, any visible X-ray activity would most likely originate from the GC itself as material from G2 accretes on its surface in the future.

      Paul LaViolette

  17. Charlie says:

    Paul, does the recent discovery of the near by magnetar SGR J1745-2900 support your theory of interstellar communication? Could it be a warning?

    • admin-plv says:

      Unlike radio pulsars, this magnetar does not exhibit any degree of precision in its radio emissions. So it is most likely a naturally occurring radio emitting neutron star and hence best treated with the standard interpretation. So I don’t see it as any attempt of ET communication to us.
      Paul LaViolette

  18. J.Bach says:

    This is correct. When you see a supernova on the sky, it’s more valid to say “it’s happening now” than to keep refering to a past event. Its consequences are following and they are events of your future, not of your past as you imply as you are reffering to a past event.
    It is very interesting to note that time in large distances works very differently than our everyday experiences.

    • etodis@hotmail.com says:

      wonderful article and comments. Thank you. The Dalai lama recently made reference to this event and said we didn’t have control of it. I totally disagree, having recently worked with the federation to protect reality thru consciousness. I suspect that we will pass thru this event without problems. There are too many high level ETs present who have a more profound grasp on gravity and time than even a galactic core.

  19. Curious says:

    If you read his papers or book about the superwave phenomenon, you will see that Dr. LaViolette quotes the distance between Earth and the GC as being around 23,000 light years (~7.1 kpc), not 24,000. There are a number of astronomers who support this lower distance estimate and Dr. LaViolette apparently has his reasons for preferring it. Regardless of whether the light we are seeing left the GC 23,000 or 24,000 years ago, the cosmic rays from a superwave would be delayed by the same amount since they travel essentially at the speed of light. So in the Earth time frame, if astronomers see a very large X-ray or radio outburst from the GC, the co-produced GC cosmic rays will be less than a day behind it in time. It is this lack of advance warning of the hazardous cosmic ray component that makes superwaves so dangerous.

  20. Vernon Kerr says:

    You are talking about something that happened over 24,000 years ago. Earth to Galactic core = 7.611 kilo parsecs or >24,000 lightyears.

    • Louis says:

      With a galactic core explosion moving at slightly less than the speed of light, distance is irrelevant.

      Thanks to Dr. LaViolette, we have an accurate perspective and more importantly, the ability to monitor this situation. I am not an astrophysisist, but have read all his books from cover to cover, and it seems that other questions present themsves, and these quesitons could be researched/answered to shed more light on this situation. Such as; (1) how often does a stellar-mass object get sucked into the galactic center (which is NOT a black hole); e.g., from the ice core samples; (2) when this happens, would the resulting hyper-nova-strength galactic core explosion propagate in our direction, and (3) for what duration (remember the recent hyper-nova explosion 3 billion light years away that was as bright as the full moon)?

      Also, can we use infrared telescopes to look into the dust cloud (it seems a red dwarf could be visible in infrared or radio frequencies) to see what lies inside before the Webb space telescope is deployed in 2018 (four years too late)?

      • Louis says:

        Ooops sorry, I meant Dr. LaViolette, not Kurzweil

      • Louis I. says:

        I was compelled to get out of bed and add a couple of points – purely from memory – I had read the books years ago:
        1. First, the Hyper-Nova explosion I mentioned was preceded by a 9.3 Magnitude earthquake in Indonesia that resulted in a Tsunami and over a quarter-million deaths (Just as predicted by “Subquantum Kinetics,” “Earth Under Fire” and “Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion).” We can expect the same O/A March, 2014, if a Red Dwarf is pulled into the Galactic Center.
        2. Dr. LaViolette’s theory of genic energy is fully researched and fully supported mathematically and otherwise- and although mainstream physics does not include this – in my mind it is a proven fact. So is Dr. LaViolette’s theory of “tired light” accounting for the Hubble red-shift, which makes our universe look like it is expanding and much bigger than it really is.
        3. Almost all prophesises fortell of three days of darkness, resulting in the death of 1/3 of the world’s inhabitants, turning the sun turning black and the moon turning red (This is from Revelations) which further indicates that Dr. LaViolette’s scientific observations and predictions have a good probability of actually happening.
        4. I would appreciate some intelligent dialogue on these points. Exasperating on the distance to the galactic center is a waste of time, as it is totally irrelevant.
        Thank you, Sincerely, Louis I.,

        • Richard says:

          How do you connect the 3 days of darkness to the binary system or brown dwarf closing in on the GC?


          • Paul LaViolette says:

            The 3 days of darkness would occur after the G2 cloud triggered the Galactic core to explode and produce a superwave, if a superwave were produced. The cosmic rays striking the earth’s stratosphere and atmosphere would nucleate high altitude clouds which would have the effect of screening out sunlight. The cosmic ray volley would likely be most intense for the first three days (judging from what has been observed to happen in a distant exploding galaxy). So this twilight could be most noticeable during the first three days.

Leave a Reply to Paul LaViolette Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.